Open Chat... All Day, Every Day! Express Your Views, Debate, and Challenge the Views of Others!

In order to keep up with the nature of free, spirited debate, I wanted to place the chat feature at the top of the homepage. This ensures people can come here and share their views on anything they wish and not have it be related to any specific discussion. Here, people can share ideas, links, and views "unmoderated" and an their own pace. To me, this makes The Elephant in the Room blog truly a place for debate.

Monday, October 8, 2012

October 8, 2012 - Morning Headlines

- Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez was elected to another six-year term as he defeated a strong challenge from Henrique Capriles Radonski (CNN): http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/08/world/americas/venezuela-elections/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

- Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney will give a foreign policy speech at the Virginia Military institute today (Fox News): http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/08/romney-to-deliver-foreign-policy-speech-amid-big-questions-on-libya-global/

- According to the a special forces head of a "site security team," Lt. Col. Andy Wood said he and other officials in Libya pleaded with the State Department for more security at the US consulate in Benghazi only to see the security at the US outpost downgraded (CBS News): http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57527659/ex-u.s-security-team-leader-in-libya-we-needed-more-not-less-security-staff/?tag=MidDeep;leadHed

*** Be sure to check the un-skewed polls database at the top of the blog - Updated 10/3/2012 ***

14 comments:

  1. Obama taking campaign contributions from foreign nationals? Yes, because we do want random non-Americans supporting our democratic process: http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/08/claim-obama-campaign-illegally-solicited-foreign-donors-via-social-media-website/

    ReplyDelete
  2. One of the reasons I follow this blog is because it speaks the truth no matter how unfriendly it may seem. ONe of the positions this blog puts out is that democrats get elected by running on a "vote for me and I will give you stuff" platform. The blog says that this is a perversion of democracy that gets democrats elected.

    Take a look at this http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/06/health/republicans-conflicted-obamacare/index.html?hpt=hp_c3

    Jill Thacker was dying for a cup of coffee when she recently ran into a 7-Eleven convenience store. To her pleasant surprise, the coffee was free -- as long as she would commit to drinking it in either a red Mitt Romney cup or a blue Barack Obama cup.
    "Which are you going to choose, Mom?" her son asked.

    Which, indeed. A gun-owning, big-government-hating Republican, Thacker's every instinct told her to buy a Romney cup. But Thacker, 56, and her daughter have asthma -- a pre-existing condition -- and with Obama as president they'll be guaranteed the ability to buy insurance.

    Thacker stood in the 7-Eleven and stared at the red and blue cups, stymied by the choice they represented.


    For those that like to say this blog's theories are not true, how do you deny this one out of many, many examples? They are voting for Obama because he/the democrats are giving them stuff. I'd love to hear your shootdown of this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm unsure how people (some Tea Party people, too) call themselves conservative - and then add 'but' to some expensive, big government goodie that 'applies to them' and they 'like.'

      Maybe I'm weird (just ask my husband) but, I'd even forgo the SS I have paid in, if I'd be allowed to keep my OWN insurance - as opposed to going on Medicare (which I've also paid into my entire life)

      Preexisting condition is DESIGNED to bankrupt the health insurance companies. It equates to me driving around in my car until I total it - and then running to Allstate, paying a month's premium and getting myself a new car. We've paid premiums to health insurance for 40+ years... up until the last year we've had VERY little use for it - aside from checkups and a few broken bones (strangely they were mine, more often than the kids'...lol).

      We're 58 and 60 respectively, and my husband has just developed OCPD... under the current definition of Obamacare, we could have saved those 100's of thousands of dollars in insurance premiums and just had Obamacare take care of it... oops! He's 60! He's now on 24/7 O2; - our co-pay for his equipment is $50-100 a month...co-pay on his meds are another $200 a month.

      Exactly what kind of 'care' could/would/should a 60 yr. old, former smoker, with OCPD 'expect' from 'free' health care?

      I'm pretty sure I DO NOT want to find out.

      Delete
    2. I'm a little confused with the implication here. Is Obamacare a 'handout', or is it 'the largest tax increase on the middle class in the history of the United States'? Because I've heard both argued passionately from the conservative side, and it really can only be one or the other.

      I don't really see this falling in line with the ‘giving people free stuff’ argument either, as much as it's simply not ignoring problems that need to be addressed. I mean, what would you do in Jill Thacker's situation? Suck it up and choose political allegiance over the health and well-being of your child?

      The GOP has had every opportunity to tell people what their solution is to the pre-existing condition problem, and there lack of an answer or even concern for it isn't a matter of 'not wanting to give out freebies' as much as it's not wanting to address a tough question. Or do you honestly believe there isn’t a problem to begin with?

      Delete
    3. Dara, I'm not sure you're painting a fair picture of how Obamcare works.

      By your example here:
      "We're 58 and 60 respectively, and my husband has just developed OCPD... under the current definition of Obamacare, we could have saved those 100's of thousands of dollars in insurance premiums and just had Obamacare take care of it... oops! He's 60! He's now on 24/7 O2; - our co-pay for his equipment is $50-100 a month...co-pay on his meds are another $200 a month.

      Exactly what kind of 'care' could/would/should a 60 yr. old, former smoker, with OCPD 'expect' from 'free' health care? "

      First, I would like to say I'm sorry to hear about your situation, and wish you and your husband the best of luck in dealing with the condition.

      That aside, under the current definition of Obamacare you couldn't have 'saved those 100's of thousands of dollars in premiums.' Obamcare _mandates_ you buy healthcare coverage; which is the biggest part of the bill. I'm not sure how you missed that aspect? If you and your husband decided to skip out on insurance 40 years ago, and Obamacare was in effect, then you would've had to pay a tax penalty to make up for your lack of insurance. It forces you to pay into the system one way or another, in order to help counter/prevent your aforementioned situation of exploitation.

      This is exactly how it works in MA with 'Romneycare', and is why MA has the highest insurance coverage rate of any state in the nation with 98.1% of the population of the state covered by some type of insurance. Let me repeat that, ***98.1%***. Your example of people deciding to simply skip out on insurance, doesn’t represent any definition of the reality of the situation as perfectly exemplified by again, 98.1% of people opting for healthcare coverage after the same bill was passed in MA.

      What Obamacare does prevent though Dara, is if 6 months before your husband was diagnosed with COPD you lost your health insurance coverage due to economic hardship/job change/whatever, and you couldn’t afford the $600/month of COBRA… You and your husband would still be able to get back onto a health insurance plan of some sort when it was more feasible for your budget. As opposed to how it would work now, where no insurance company would so much as touch your husband until you went through all your assets/income and qualified for Medicaid.

      I’m sure you wouldn’t be quite so happy with paying thousands of dollars in premium and never having a serious claim, if when the time you truly needed it, you couldn’t get it due to a bad luck of the draw.

      Delete
    4. Rken get off your liberal high horse, your Obama can do no wrong, soapbox for just a second.
      "
      I don't really see this falling in line with the ‘giving people free stuff’ argument either, as much as it's simply not ignoring problems that need to be addressed. I mean, what would you do in Jill Thacker's situation? Suck it up and choose political allegiance over the health and well-being of your child?"

      Seriously? Vote for me and I will give you stuff you want and need. Via Obamacare, these people are doing just that. The article says it itself. Just because you don't like the truth, doesn't mean you can distort it. How can you not see this. They even said they will vote for Obama bcause they get the medical services provided by Obamacare. How is it not the case that they are voting for a guy based on the politically granted Freebie he provides. You can possibly tell me they are going to vote for him because of some other reason not already stated, even though they've made it very, very clear in the article. Do you seriously defend Obama to no end?

      Why should people have to work hard to pay taxes into this system where a politician can just get a bunch of people to vote for him by providing free stuff to those people? I am just in awe that some how you say "it's not the way it is." What would I do if I was in her situation? I would vote for Obama, duh! Give me free shit, and I'll vote for you any day of the week. You are only proving me right here, Rken.

      Delete
    5. Anna, off to a bad day are we? That was pretty offensive and crass for no good reason. :)

      And in the end all you did awesome job at doing everything (including ad hominem!) but answering the actual questions I asked you.

      I'll simplify it:

      1. Is Obamacare a handout, or the largest tax on the middle class ever? It can't be both.

      2. What would you do in Jill Thacker's situation? (without the sarcasm this round... or is that truly your answer?)

      3. Do you believe there is a problem with the way the current system addresses the pre-existing condition situation? (if you don't have insurance, are booted off your insurance, or hit a lifetime coverage limit on your insurance, the current system says you either only get emergency services, spend yourself into poverty to get Medicaid, or die... two of which we're already subsidizing)

      4. If you believe it's a problem, how do you believe it would best be solved?

      #1 of which being the most important, because frankly it doesn’t make sense to call a program a gigantic tax on the middle class while at the same time saying it’s a freebee/handout.

      Delete
    6. Good morning RKen.

      As far as your question about 0bamacare (#1); considering that nothing is free (as it costs someone something) and the governments only source of revenue is bilking the taxpayers, couldn't it be said that the 53% that already pay taxes will pay MORE while those that already pay no income taxes will be getting a handout?

      That is how it will work. Those that PAY, will pay MORE. Those that don't pay will get more.

      So it looks like to me that 0bamacare IS both, the largest tax increase and the largest handout.

      Delete
    7. Good morning Slim,

      I'm not sure I understand how anyone is getting anything for free with Obamacare?

      My understanding of the reason that Obamacare is called a large middle class tax increase, is because it essentially forces people to pay into a system by the power of the government (just as it does with taxes). Which is why the Supreme Court upheld the mandate, because it essentially viewed it as a tax.

      By this mandate, under Obamacare you either have to pay for health insurance or pay a penalty.

      Key word though, being you have to pay into it either way.

      Regardless if the avenue you choose, you have to pay. Aside from falling below the poverty threshold that exempts you from this statute and puts you onto Medicaid (which was the case before Obamcare), I again am unsure as to where people would be getting anything for free here?

      Delete
    8. What about all the people, 46mil of them who have done shit for themselves, who don't get educations and get fat and unhealthy? They now get free healthcare via Medicare. I'm tired of working 14 hour days to support lazy fat unhealthy people who just want to get something for nothing. There's your handout. How can you possibly support this redistribution system?

      Delete
    9. Anon: I'm assuming you meant Medicaid? And that always applied; people below a certain income/asset threshold qualified for Medicaid (both before and after Obamacare).

      Delete
    10. RKen, if my memory serves me correct, 0bamacare increases the financial threshold allowing more people to qualify for subsidies for health insurance. Which, would have them the recipient of a handout.

      As far as taxes go, there is a medical device manufacturer tax, the white woman tax (the tanning bed tax), increases in medicare taxes, and then that tax or penalty (all dependent upon 0bama's audience) for not having the insurance. I am pretty sure there are others but just off the top off my head I recall those taxes.

      Delete
    11. Ha, I had to laugh at the 'white woman tax.' :) First I heard of that term lol.

      Sounds like you nailed most of it though. And yes, I believe the Medicaid minimum threshold was also raised, which is a fair point.

      Delete
  3. Current, significantly large headline on CBS right now: "Which Mitt Romney do you trust the most?"

    Nope, the media isn't bias at all. No way.

    ReplyDelete