Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 8, 2024 22:24:51 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2014 22:41:28 GMT
Krazy, I only have a minute here..... Sigh. You.just.refuse.to.get.it. You are completely and utterly in the dark. The President has not applied his laws evenly to everyone. Those who have supported him the most have received benefits those who have not didn't get. That's what I said. That's what I meant. It's really annoying to have you constantly twist what is said to meet your agenda of what you think I *should* mean to fit into a stereotype you think I fit. I don't fit it. My children have lifelong serious illnesses. If you ever actually listened to what I've said, you would know that. And working for minimum wage? That has absolutely nothing to do with my post. This is why I get so damned annoyed reading your posts. No matter how good your points may be, your complete refusal to see the person on the other side of the computer is something I don't have the patience to get through right now. Maybe later, I'll have the patience to get through your condescension and finish reading your post. IDK. I wouldn't count on it. I do get it. Go back and read what you wrote. When you say something like "endless tweaking that lopsidedly benefits his supporters" I assume you are talking about the folks that support him. Does that not mean the folks who voted for him? And now can get health care insurance? Does that not include the folks who he is fighting to get an increase in the minimum wage for? If not, who are these supporters you are talking about? I support him so would I not be called one of his supporters? If you mean someone else then you need to be clear as to who you mean.
Then you talk about his goals which brings up back to my statements about health care insurance access and minimum wages which benefits his supporters well actually all Americans. Which I thought were his goals. But it seems you may not see it that way. How would I know what you think his goals are based on your comments?
"He does not apply his laws evenly to everyone". What does that mean? Who received more benefits then others?
My problem with you and others is you throw these comments out there with very little information. Like everyone should know what supporters you are talking about etc. Then you get snitty because someone has to assume what YOU ARE SAYING and either ends up asking questions or has to make assumptions which you don't like.
You think I'm twisting what you are saying when what I'm doing is just trying to understand what you are saying and comment on it.
|
|
|
Post by *KatyCupcake* on Aug 6, 2014 22:43:44 GMT
The ones that paid for his campaign... like unions... Not simply moral support and a vote. We're talking bigger and more influential than you and me.
|
|
|
Post by Skypea on Aug 7, 2014 0:10:53 GMT
folks that support him - he doesn't care about the little people - unless he's up for a vote. Then that is the ONLY reason he'd care - just to get that vote. So, how are people doing with that HC? Do you ever watch/read some news that isn't BO approved? Any business news? It sure doesn't 'sound' like it. Or you wouldn't be asking these questions. insurance - how many who didn't have it before now have it? Couldn't that have been done without taking away the insurance 80% had and were happy with? How much more are they paying now? Can they even afford to get it now? How about that credit some were to get from the gov? It doesn't seem to be so legal. (not that that would stop him) Many will most likely not get it. If they already did I hear the IRS will make them pay it back. It will end up in court (nothing new there). Ins companies say premiums will be going up this fall... and I think it's next yr (?) that the employer mandate kicks in and many more will lose their insurance. Hannity has a special on Friday (I think) about NH and their take on the OC.
You DO realize who will be paying for all of this insurance, right? taxpayers. If ins companies lose money the tps will have to bail them out...
minimum wage - what do you know about bz costs to operate vs profit? Do you realize that the cost of higher wages will increase the cost of the product? they make 5.00 more an hr at their job and businesses all over will be raising their prices on their products. even if they only raise product price by 1.00, how many items does this worker need to buy to eat up his/her 5.00 increase? So that burger that now cost 1.50 will end up costing 2.00 (or more) by the time that worker feeds his family of 4 the cost of the burgers has gone up by 2.00 (if each only eats 1), plus increase on soda, fries, dessert... X how many meals a day, a week plus increase in cost at all other stores for all other items.
If the lowest level of workers pay goes up that much that means ALL of those higher up will also have to be paid more!! Don't be posting here upset when your favorite eating place closes, or your nail salon or dog groomer etc.
Add in the upcharge in gas to get to work an restaurant since this admin wants to up the gas tx. (who said they wouldn't raise tx on MC one dime? well, I guess it isn't 1 dime - it's a boat load of dimes!)
and these entry jobs (not mngmt) were not meant to support a family! Entry for young people into job mrkt, part time job for mom prior to Christmas, etc.
congress, staffers, unions and probably a whole bunch more. we ASSUME if you are posting on here with such opinions that you have some reason to have them. Obviously not. There isn't anything in this post of yours that would lead me to believe that you listen to anything that isn't BO approved media. And yes, his admin does have to approve most of it. Guess one good reason he hates Fox?
Why should we have to explain all of this to you? Pull your head out of the sand and open your eyes and ears!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 8, 2024 22:24:51 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2014 0:30:03 GMT
Well skypea you are assuming an awful lot. Where is your proof or facts? Remember that old commercial? Where is the beef? So far all you are doing is showing a big old bun. Come back when you have the beef.
|
|
|
Post by Skypea on Aug 7, 2014 0:44:35 GMT
Well skypea you are assuming an awful lot. Where is your proof or facts? Remember that old commercial? Where is the beef? So far all you are doing is showing a big old bun. Come back when you have the beef. no I'm not. Go find your own facts. I do my own 'homework'. I'm not doing yours too! btw, I added to my post. go reread it.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 8, 2024 22:24:51 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2014 0:50:13 GMT
Well skypea you are assuming an awful lot. Where is your proof or facts? Remember that old commercial? Where is the beef? So far all you are doing is showing a big old bun. Come back when you have the beef. no I'm not. Go find your own facts. I do my own 'homework'. I'm not doing yours too! btw, I added to my post. go reread it.
Of course you're not. Didn't think that you would.
|
|
|
Post by gardengoddess on Aug 7, 2014 1:07:37 GMT
Conservatives need to get over Benghazi. The House Intelligence Committee LED by your own party has finished it's investigation and just last week the committee voted to declassify the final report. NO SMOKING GUN. After two years, MILLIONS of taxpayer dollars, it turns out that there was no evidence of deliberate wrong doing by the Obama administration. You can take that off your list of "impeachable offenses" and you might want to write your elected officials that spending their time trying to sue or impeach the President isn't going to do them any favors and it's just making them look like fools.
|
|
AmeliaBloomer
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,842
Location: USA
Jun 26, 2014 5:01:45 GMT
|
Post by AmeliaBloomer on Aug 7, 2014 1:56:34 GMT
I think it would have been better if Hilary Clinton had been elected President with Obama as Vice President. I've been thinking lately about my decision - right before my state primary election in 2008 - to switch my vote from Mrs. Clinton to Mr. Obama. My reasoning? There was too much bad blood between the Clintons and the Republican leadership, and Mr. Obama might have a better chance of breaking the stalemates. Ha. I agree and disagree with lucyg. I think a political decision WAS made by the Republicans, but not on Inauguration Day. It was sparked on election night, when we all watched the victory celebration. I know people who were in Grant Park and still talk wistfully about the the sense of joy, hope, unity. The whole world sat up and paid attention. I think Mr. Obama was thrust into a lose-lose situation from that night forward - from both the politically targeting of his detractors (who I think were scared witless by the raw emotion of that night) AND the increasing disillusionment from his supporters when he couldn't (possibly!) live up to the "Yes, We Can" fervor. I don't think he's fixated on his legacy, but he's probably pretty damn rueful about lost opportunities. Just like any president, in fact. Me - I can't decide whether to be rueful about changing my vote six years ago.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Aug 7, 2014 2:25:53 GMT
AmeliaBloomer, don't worry, I voted for Hillary on your behalf AND I sent her money ... a first. Skypea, that is Republican spin about raising the minimum wage, not fact. There is no actual evidence that raising the minimum wage hurts people or economies. Both San Francisco and Seattle have raised their minimum wage far above the national level, and both cities are thriving.
|
|
AmeliaBloomer
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,842
Location: USA
Jun 26, 2014 5:01:45 GMT
|
Post by AmeliaBloomer on Aug 7, 2014 2:35:29 GMT
AmeliaBloomer, don't worry, I voted for Hillary on your behalf... ...as did a bunch of Republicans in the later primaries - but that was at Rush Limbaugh's behest, and I kinda' doubt they sent along any money.
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Aug 7, 2014 5:47:40 GMT
Krazy, I only have a minute here..... Sigh. You.just.refuse.to.get.it. You are completely and utterly in the dark. The President has not applied his laws evenly to everyone. Those who have supported him the most have received benefits those who have not didn't get. That's what I said. That's what I meant. It's really annoying to have you constantly twist what is said to meet your agenda of what you think I *should* mean to fit into a stereotype you think I fit. I don't fit it. My children have lifelong serious illnesses. If you ever actually listened to what I've said, you would know that. And working for minimum wage? That has absolutely nothing to do with my post. This is why I get so damned annoyed reading your posts. No matter how good your points may be, your complete refusal to see the person on the other side of the computer is something I don't have the patience to get through right now. Maybe later, I'll have the patience to get through your condescension and finish reading your post. IDK. I wouldn't count on it. I do get it. Go back and read what you wrote. When you say something like "endless tweaking that lopsidedly benefits his supporters" I assume you are talking about the folks that support him. Does that not mean the folks who voted for him? And now can get health care insurance? Does that not include the folks who he is fighting to get an increase in the minimum wage for? If not, who are these supporters you are talking about? I support him so would I not be called one of his supporters? If you mean someone else then you need to be clear as to who you mean.
Then you talk about his goals which brings up back to my statements about health care insurance access and minimum wages which benefits his supporters well actually all Americans. Which I thought were his goals. But it seems you may not see it that way. How would I know what you think his goals are based on your comments?
"He does not apply his laws evenly to everyone". What does that mean? Who received more benefits then others?
My problem with you and others is you throw these comments out there with very little information. Like everyone should know what supporters you are talking about etc. Then you get snitty because someone has to assume what YOU ARE SAYING and either ends up asking questions or has to make assumptions which you don't like.
You think I'm twisting what you are saying when what I'm doing is just trying to understand what you are saying and comment on it.
You assume ridiculous things. You are condescending in stating your assumptions. I just told you that my children have lifelong medical conditions in response to your accusation that I neither understood nor cared about the cost of lifelong medical conditions, and your immediate response is to ignore what I said and continue on with your extrapolative assumptions that have nothing to do with my simple comments. And so it goes with you. Contrary to what you may believe, I do not find that kind of exchange to be enlightening, entertaining, or beneficial in any way whatsoever.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 8, 2024 22:24:51 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2014 14:36:05 GMT
You assume ridiculous things. You are condescending in stating your assumptions.
I just told you that my children have lifelong medical conditions in response to your accusation that I neither understood nor cared about the cost of lifelong medical conditions, and your immediate response is to ignore what I said and continue on with your extrapolative assumptions that have nothing to do with my simple comments.
And so it goes with you.
Contrary to what you may believe, I do not find that kind of exchange to be enlightening, entertaining, or beneficial in any way whatsoever.
[/quote]
If I remember correctly I was making a comment that a bill as complex as the ACA would need to be tweaked so it would work as it was intended. Which to give all Americans access to health care insurance. You responded about lopsided benefits for supporters. Since my original comment was aimed at the individuals who the bill would help I assumed you were talking about his supporters that voted for him and who the ACA would benefit. It is clear now you were talking about different supporters. How would I or anyone else know that based on your original comment?
You are upset because I didn't seem to know about your children medical needs or because I didn't comment on it. I'm not sure what you are upset about.
I didn't know your kids have medical problems. I get the impression you have commented on it and I may have even read about it. But to be honest I don't remember it if I did. But I guess in your mind I should have.
I said this before and I'll say it again. You assume everyone is going to understand what you mean with very little information. Then when people don't understand you get testy.
So how about instead pointing out what you think others short comings are you take a look at your own. Just a thought.
|
|
back to *pea*ality
Pearl Clutcher
Not my circus, not my monkeys ~refugee pea #59
Posts: 3,149
Jun 25, 2014 19:51:11 GMT
|
Post by back to *pea*ality on Aug 7, 2014 15:49:50 GMT
Interesting article from a left leaning newspaper- Frustration over stalled immigration action doesn’t mean Obama can act unilaterallyObstinate, hopelessly partisan and incapable of problem-solving, Congress is a mess. But that doesn’t grant the president license to tear up the Constitution. As Mr. Obama himself said last fall: “If, in fact, I could solve all these problems without passing laws in Congress, then I would do so. But we’re also a nation of laws.” To act on his own, the president said, would violate those laws. Mr. Obama now seems to be jettisoning that stance in the name of rallying his political base. He is considering extending temporary protection from deportation to millions of illegal immigrants, including the parents of U.S.-born children and others who have lived in the United States for years. Conceivably, this would give Democrats a political boost in 2016. Just as conceivably, it would trigger a constitutional showdown with congressional Republicans, who could make a cogent argument that Mr. Obama had overstepped his authority. The president should think twice. Some of the same Democrats and pro-immigrant advocates urging him to protect millions of undocumented immigrants from deportation would be outraged if a Republican president took a similarly selective approach to enforcing the laws — say, those that guarantee voting rights or prohibit employment discrimination. Mr. Obama’s instincts — “we’re also a nation of laws” — were and remain correct.
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Aug 7, 2014 16:36:28 GMT
I am not upset. You didn't need to remember; I gave you the information in my post.
I focused on one small point - your assumption that I neither understood nor cared what burdens are created by long term medical conditions - and told you that you are wrong. My children fall into this category.
Instead of taking a moment and thinking about how incorrect your assumption was, you continued making other assumptions.
No, I am not going to give you in-depth, detailed answers. What's the point?
|
|
back to *pea*ality
Pearl Clutcher
Not my circus, not my monkeys ~refugee pea #59
Posts: 3,149
Jun 25, 2014 19:51:11 GMT
|
Post by back to *pea*ality on Aug 7, 2014 17:02:40 GMT
leftturnonly this is how krazyscrapper works - She demands "links" to references but often gives her account without any links She will accuse you of getting your news/information from only Fox News or because she thinks she is funny "Faux News" She will put words in your mouth to make her point It is intellectually disingenuous but this is how she rolls. I don't even read her posts anymore because there is no point.
|
|
|
Post by gardengoddess on Aug 7, 2014 21:35:48 GMT
leftturnonly this is how krazyscrapper works - She demands "links" to references but often gives her account without any links She will accuse you of getting your news/information from only Fox News or because she thinks she is funny "Faux News" She will put words in your mouth to make her point It is intellectually disingenuous but this is how she rolls. I don't even read her posts anymore because there is no point. Interesting.....because in the little bit of time that I spend here and read, it's seems as though quite a few of you do the same thing to her.
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Aug 7, 2014 22:25:25 GMT
Interesting.....because in the little bit of time that I spend here and read, it's seems as though quite a few of you do the same thing to her. Gardengoddess, this may be a new board, but there have been years of discussions with Krazy where very detailed responses were made to her questions. Many, many, many hours have been spent documenting other points of view and backing them up with sources by quite a few people. When she is shown to be wrong, she ignores it and moves on to another point. And as you can see, she's very quick to "forget" the specific people she has discussed things with thread after thread after thread. Truly, I have lost count how many times I have discussed the effects of Obamacare on my family, what I thought were worthy goals and how those goals were not being effectively realized. We've discussed where she lives, some of what her job encompasses and why she feels the way she does about a number of political ideals. You can tell that by her thoughtful responses, no? "Oh, Lefty. I didn't know/didn't remember/had no idea/couldn't have cared enough to have remembered but now that you point it out I really should acknowledge that you actually do have some concerns about this." There's nothing to build on here. Gardengoddess, I hope you enjoy this board. There are a lot of good people here - even Krazy seems like a good person at heart.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 8, 2024 22:24:51 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2014 2:46:53 GMT
leftturnonly this is how krazyscrapper works - She demands "links" to references but often gives her account without any links She will accuse you of getting your news/information from only Fox News or because she thinks she is funny "Faux News" She will put words in your mouth to make her point It is intellectually disingenuous but this is how she rolls. I don't even read her posts anymore because there is no point. As I have always said one is certainly entitled to their opinion . What is so funny, this may be a tit for a tat, but I quite reading your posts a long time ago. After reading them for a while it came to me you really didn't have anything to offer so I just go by them. I only read this one because it was about me and I thought it would be the polite thing to do. But it seems we agree on something.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 8, 2024 22:24:51 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2014 4:06:21 GMT
Gardengoddess, this may be a new board, but there have been years of discussions with Krazy where very detailed responses were made to her questions. Many, many, many hours have been spent documenting other points of view and backing them up with sources by quite a few people. When she is shown to be wrong, she ignores it and moves on to another point. And as you can see, she's very quick to "forget" the specific people she has discussed things with thread after thread after thread. Truly, I have lost count how many times I have discussed the effects of Obamacare on my family, what I thought were worthy goals and how those goals were not being effectively realized. We've discussed where she lives, some of what her job encompasses and why she feels the way she does about a number of political ideals. You can tell that by her thoughtful responses, no? "Oh, Lefty. I didn't know/didn't remember/had no idea/couldn't have cared enough to have remembered but now that you point it out I really should acknowledge that you actually do have some concerns about this." There's nothing to build on here. Gardengoddess, I hope you enjoy this board. There are a lot of good people here - even Krazy seems like a good person at heart. I'm not sure who you had these discussions with but I'm pretty sure it wasn't directly with me. I know I'm getting old and tend to forget things now and then but you make it sound like we, meaning you and me, have these deep discussions about whatever. I certainly don't want to be mean but you are guilty of the very arrogance you accuse the President of if you assume that everyone is going to remember every discussion that you are involved in. Or anyone else for that matter. This board is where one comes to voice their opinions. There are a lot of opinions and a lot of information on this board and to expect one to remember it all is unrealistic. What is important to you may not be important to someone else.
Sorry you really don't know much about my political beliefs.. Other than guns. Yes I'm very outspoken about that. However you know very little how I feel on other "hot political topics". Yes I freely admit I'm a Democrat but do you know what specifically I do I support and do not support on the left? I don't think you do. If one did I think one would be surprised. No, other than when we discuss guns and I do not get that opinionated. I seem to spend my time on this board trying to find out what the proof is the President is doing all those things he is accused of doing. Not been very successful. I started to ask all the questions I ask because I got tired of being told I was in denial because I don't see the President the way some of you do. So I ask questions about one's proof so I can see the President the same way some of you do. I ask specific questions and I ask question like is this what you mean if I don't quite get what you are trying to say. And I get grief for it. But that is ok. Its bound to happen on a place like this. Its what makes this place interesting. And who knows maybe someday someone will actually provide the proof I have been asking for. Stranger things have been known to happen.
Edited to add. I forgot yes I am opinionated when it comes to the Republicans not doing their job in. DC. Almost as much as I am about guns.
|
|
|
Post by megop on Aug 8, 2014 5:52:26 GMT
I'm just going to say this coming from the health care industry who in the trenches, has to make this all work and survive to continue to provide care to communities.
There is validity to this lawsuit.
Take the politics out of it. When SCOTUS made the medicaid expansion exception, and then the President by executive order, delayed employer coverage, it further put pressure on access providing entities.
Are both sides at fault? Absolutely. But if you bring "politics" into it, then please, don't be obtuse in denying that the executive order wasn't also politically motivated to maintain business support for the Democratic side of it.
|
|
|
Post by megop on Aug 8, 2014 5:55:27 GMT
I am opinionated when it comes to the Republicans not doing their job in.
------
They are all doing their political jobs in my mind over health care right now, and ALL of their jobs are to get re-elected. Don't for one second think this is one sided. It's not by any stretch of the imagination.
|
|
|
Post by Skypea on Aug 8, 2014 5:58:21 GMT
Conservatives need to get over Benghazi. The House Intelligence Committee LED by your own party has finished it's investigation and just last week the committee voted to declassify the final report. NO SMOKING GUN. After two years, MILLIONS of taxpayer dollars, it turns out that there was no evidence of deliberate wrong doing by the Obama administration. You can take that off your list of "impeachable offenses" and you might want to write your elected officials that spending their time trying to sue or impeach the President isn't going to do them any favors and it's just making them look like fools. no evidence of wrong doing? It's just recently come out that those terrorists moved into the building next to (across from?) our building. Stevens and others contacted the SD to step up security and were told 'NO'.
FYI, the only people talking impeachment are the dems. Again they lie... but they are using it to raise funds. I guess there aren't enough things up in the air in this country (and around the world) so they need to make some more up. no, I won't be contacting my reps regarding that - there is no need
|
|
|
Post by megop on Aug 8, 2014 6:01:04 GMT
Both San Francisco and Seattle have raised their minimum wage far above the national level, and both cities are thriving ----------
That's the key though for me. The best government is the most local. Federal blanket legislation? Works there....Raising federal minimum wage in say, small-town USA, probably not so much.
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Aug 8, 2014 6:36:06 GMT
This country is doomed to fail by those who refuse to see the damage being done by the current administration. Keep chipping away at our freedoms. By the time you see the damage (it will be in your face and you will have no choice but to see it) it will be too late. I'm so sad. Really, really sad. If we ever go to a one party situation I hope I'm dead by then because I refuse to live like that. Live free or die.
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Aug 8, 2014 7:45:19 GMT
Krazy, second verse, third verse, fourth verse... same as the first.
You make some good points. I've said that directly to you, by name, many, many, many times.
You also make some very wrong assumptions. Whenever you are proved wrong, you ignore it.
How many times on just this thread have I told you that an important assumption you have made is incorrect and how many times have you refused to acknowledge that you are wrong?
You've blocked out so much, remembered so little, and refused to acknowledge so many valid points made by a number of different people over a great number of threads that I just don't believe that you want answers to your questions at all.
You'll either ignore what I've just said, or come back telling me how little you think what I say is worth remembering or something equally as dismissive.
I've no patience for that.
I hope you have a nice summer. Shalom.
|
|
|
Post by Skypea on Aug 10, 2014 1:52:10 GMT
Krazy, second verse, third verse, fourth verse... same as the first. You make some good points. I've said that directly to you, by name, many, many, many times. You also make some very wrong assumptions. Whenever you are proved wrong, you ignore it. How many times on just this thread have I told you that an important assumption you have made is incorrect and how many times have you refused to acknowledge that you are wrong? You've blocked out so much, remembered so little, and refused to acknowledge so many valid points made by a number of different people over a great number of threads that I just don't believe that you want answers to your questions at all. You'll either ignore what I've just said, or come back telling me how little you think what I say is worth remembering or something equally as dismissive. I've no patience for that. I hope you have a nice summer. Shalom. nothing in your post to disagree with...
|
|
|
Post by katieanna on Aug 12, 2014 13:13:03 GMT
This strikes at the very heart of our President.
I'm way behind in keeping up with the threads, as usual. Just want to say that I appreciate the thoughtful (for the most part) discussion. I have a difficult time weeding through all the political flotsam. Thanks to you ladies, I've learned a lot over the years of reading these political threads.
|
|