[cowboymom]

Romney was protesting the war at the same stage of his life that Obama was coming out of his pot fog and starting to become interested in the world around him!

If we get to forgive Obama his wild and crazy days I think I can get past a young Mitt Romney doing war protests!

[fish]

Why do you Obama supporters have such a hard time understanding that he has added over $6 trillion to the US DEBT by 4 years of annual DEFICITS?? Two concepts that are interrelated.

And why do you Obama attackers have such a hard time understanding that congressional republicans are AT LEAST, and probably more, responsible for the continuing deficits than the President? Have you even noticed, for example, that republicans have wasted ca. $50million of taxpayer money on knowingly abortive attempts to repeal the Affordable Health Care Act, not to mention blocking every attempt to return taxation of the rich to Clinton era levels which would reduce the deficit considerably? Meantime, after generations of Republicans hollering about reducing expenses by combating fraud, Obama has actually done so, recouping billions from Drs., pharmacies, etc. while the Republicans manage to get a guy involved in such fraud elected governor of Florida.

Whatever happens this election, I hope with all my heart that something is done to reverse Citizens United and establish meaningful campaign finance reform so free speech, and not money, can = free speech. The extent to which this election has become a matter of money vs. money while the rich continue to get richer, the middle class shrinks, and the poor get poorer, makes me embarrassed for my country.

[hosspuller]

Let's put the discussion in other terms ... personal

Are you better off today vs four years ago ???

My savings are decreased via inflation & low yield.

My health care costs have increased from from $600/ month to $1,333

Next year my taxes will increase. Instead of 7.5 percent of income the med deduction threshold is 10%

A president has 4 years to lead the country with 2 equal branches of gov't. Starting Jan 21 he/she leads with the country as is. There are no do-overs, excuses or blame others. If the country does well, we should give him/her another 4 years to lead. The last 4 years have not been good for me. We need a change in leadership.

[skyon]

He is the man you are discribing, but you didn't vote for him.
Instead you voted for the Democrat guy because, well he is a Democrat. Just like some people vote for the Republican guy because he is a Republican.
Your problem with Romney isn't his lack of military service or really anything else. You have one and only one problem with Romney - he is a Republican.

Actually, you are wrong. Plus I did not know the CCR anti-corruption song until now, lol. Swear to GOD. I recognize CCR, recognize the song, but never knew the words. I was too young.

The man you are describing in McCain, though, that in a weird way I can say I've known. If you want ironic, it would be that my opinion that parallells the song came from my dad, relatives and their friends that all served in WW2, and I think maybe Korean also. One of the guys had shrapnel still coming through his legs the 60s and early 70s. He would have to explain the blood spots that would sometimes emerge on his pants.

I got a small inheritance (like a couple hundred dollars from a distant relative I never met) that spent his life in a va/mental hospital after serving ww2. My aunt recently asked me to make a copy of picture of a guy in my moms yearbook from 1943 - some kind reunion and they all wanted a picture of the guy because he was the class clown and was killed in WW2. That isn’t even getting into the various fronts they were in etc.

What I always recalled on the subject of Vietnam was an argument/discussion my dad was having with friends. I’m pretty sure some of them served with LeMay. The name stuck because my dad was Pacific. The one thing they agreed on was not arguing to get their sons to go to Vietnam. In their opinion, the draft was a joke because if you went to college or had connections, by then it was obvious you could get out, and I imagine from the reports, they could tell something was going horribly wrong, hence the arguments.

Also throw in the mix that I had a relative that was both a monk and a headmaster at military academy, that had priests and other coming back as missionarys from S & C America in the 70s. Can't say I really knew him, but I recall the conversations at family functions. Yeah, there were some interesting contradictions. I have a concept of missionary though, and what that may entail.

Am I unique? No. I’m pretty much typical of anyone with family extended.

Did I vote for Obama? Yes. I pretty much had it with Bush once I realize there really was something called The New American Century and there were no WMD in Iraq. I also would have voted for McCain against Gore. My parents were pretty much democrats but they voted for Reagan.

Keep trying to get that line widely drawn in the sand though. It MUST be Democrat versus Republican for a reason, right?

[stolen virtue]

Romney was protesting the war at the same stage of his life that Obama was coming out of his pot fog and starting to become interested in the world around him!

If we get to forgive Obama his wild and crazy days I think I can get past a young Mitt Romney doing war protests!

Romney never protested war. He was a draft dodger that supported the war. Now that is sad, others should give their lives but he should not be bothered to risk his life. No amount of laughing icons makes that even remotely funny. Wow, some people have a strange idea of what is funny.

[fish]

Romney was protesting the war at the same stage of his life that Obama was coming out of his pot fog and starting to become interested in the world around him!

If we get to forgive Obama his wild and crazy days I think I can get past a young Mitt Romney doing war protests!

Sure-- what I can't get over is the dog on the roof, the horse that should have been retired due to lameness sold for $100K+, the bland admissions "I don't worry about the poor," and that, if elected, he would not represent 47% of the population. To me, Romney and Ryan are insults to the moral values of myself and my fellow Americans.* This hit me full force when both addressed ME, saying "if YOU're over 60, YOU can STOP LISTENING, because our plan will not affect YOU." What an INSULT-- to assume that I and other seniors care about no one's benefits except our own?!?? I cannot explain such a low, depraved vision of human nature unless it comes from what these guys see and presume to be "normal" when they look into their own entirely selfish, self-centered minds and hearts.

I heard there was a poll re: which candidate we would trust to care for our children. Obama won. It terrifies me to think that Romney might win this election-- if only because it has a helluva lot to do with our children.

[vineyridge]

What should the federal response be to Hurricane Sandy? From the right and the left? Responses should be telling. It's apparently a major disaster.

I'm interested in both theoretical and practical.

People who believe in government intervention to help the community survive and prosper would naturally think that the federal government should not stint in its recovery assistance. That would be me.

Folks who are anti-federal involvement and spending (reduce the deficit and damn the community) what do you think the feds should do now? Let the states handle the aftermath themselves? Don't spend tax dollars on what is essentially a local matter?

[Bluey]

What should the federal response be to Hurricane Sandy? From the right and the left? Responses should be telling. It's apparently a major disaster.

I'm interested in both theoretical and practical.

People who believe in government intervention to help the community survive and prosper would naturally think that the federal government should not stint in its recovery assistance. That would be me.

Folks who are anti-federal involvement and spending (reduce the deficit and damn the community) what do you think the feds should do now? Let the states handle the aftermath themselves? Don't spend tax dollars on what is essentially a local matter?

I don't think you are starting from the right premise when you assume those that want the government to stay out of so much that should be done by private enterprises are against ALL the government does.

Your post seems to insinuates that democrats want to hand hold all citizens and republicans will leave those that need help swinging in the wind.

Try thinking that those against overburdensome government trying to micromanage society is what the question is.

We already have basic government assistance for all that need it.
Examples are Medicaid and so many other programs.
You can walk into any hospital today and get the same care if you are homeless without any assets as someone with the best insurance.

We already have so much else the government runs, some of it thru independent contractors.
Example, highway building and repair.

We have FEMA and FDIC and USDA and FDA and FFA and so many other government agencies that regulate and offer basic government programs to help where needed and no one is talking about dismantling them.

The debate is about how MUCH more we want the government to do?
Can we afford it and is that we want to add better than what we have?
Should we keep working with what we have in the private sector and the safety net the government already provides?

THAT is the real question.

[sid]

I don't know anyone who believes the federal government needs to tighten its belt should not step in and provide the extra resources necessary to help in situations like this. There is so much wasteful spending throughout the federal government, when monies could be could be better spent on situations just like this.

[subk]

..and that, if elected, he would not represent 47% of the population.

I'm curious, do you actually beleive this is what he said? Did you personally listen to the tape and this is what you came up with or is more about where you choose to get your information?

[vineyridge]

But articulate a consistent philosophy that would allow the federal government a role in state disaster relief.

I can see a consistent philosophy that would limit the federal government to foreign affairs, the military, and highways that connect the states together, as well as control of the skies, but little else.

The Constitution specifically mentions "taxing and spending for the general welfare" which is very broad and would cover most of the federal efforts that have taken place to date.

But when you say that some spending of this kind is good and some is bad, where do you draw the lines?

[War Admiral]

I don't know anyone who believes the federal government needs to tighten its belt should not step in and provide the extra resources necessary to help in situations like this. There is so much wasteful spending throughout the federal government, when monies could be could be better spent on situations just like this.

Except, of course, for Romney and Ryan.

[LauraKY]

We already have basic government assistance for all that need it.
Examples are Medicaid and so many other programs.
You can walk into any hospital today and get the same care if you are homeless without any assets as someone with the best insurance.

Bluey, that's just not true. A hospital is legally required to stabilize you, not give you the same treatment as someone with health insurance. Have cancer and need chemo with no insurance? You're out of luck. Over 26,000 people a year die because of the lack of health insurance.

Medicaid doesn't cover everyone who needs it. In some states, you have to have income less than $4,000 to $5,000 per year.

[fish]

Let's put the discussion in other terms ... personal

Are you better off today vs four years ago ???

>> YES!!!

My savings are decreased via inflation & low yield.
>> My IRA has recouped all it lost under Bush as the stock market went back to 14 from the 8 of 2008

My health care costs have increased from from $600/ month to $1,333
>> Thanks to Medicare, which the Republicans would utterly destroy, mine have gone down from $1300/ month to more like $130.

Next year my taxes will increase. Instead of 7.5 percent of income the med deduction threshold is 10%
>> Due to discontinuance of alimony, mine will go down. Makes sense to me. My income will be 4/5 of what it was. I believe in progressive taxation and believe it should apply to $ made from capital gains just as it does to other forms of income.

A president has 4 years to lead the country with 2 equal branches of gov't.
>> and then....??? (Perhaps your grammar has lapsed here?)

Starting Jan 21 he/she leads with the country as is.
>> Yep-- and should be given credit for improvements when "as is" happens to be teetering on disaster.
There are no do-overs, excuses or blame others. If the country does well, we should give him/her another 4 years to lead. The last 4 years have not been good for me.
>>Perhaps, but the country as a whole is a whole lot better off than it was when Obama took over-- sure, we're far from where we'd like to be, but the economic health of the country WHOLE lot better than it was. Turning huge ships and then taking off in the new direction takes time, with sudden changes of direction pretty risky.

We need a change in leadership.
>> Obviously, we disagree. IMO, the last thing we need is a return to the same Republican policies which brought us to the disasters of 2008.

Obama has actually exceeded my expectations for bringing this country around. He walked into such a mess that I was afraid we'd have another Great Depression no matter how hard he tried to fix things. My reading of history suggests that Romney would finish what Bush started: accelerate the growing gap between the rich and the poor by further increasing the tax breaks, further enriching this new generation of "robber barons" at the expense of the rest of the us until the disparity does bring about a repeat of 1929.

Sure hope that doesn't happen, though, thank goodness, my farm is paid for and (going by the promises at least), I do have my medicare and social security. From the Romney/Ryan point of view, I shouldn't care about younger, less fortunate citizens, but, I do. Unlike them, I consider caring for others, including the poor, an essential part of being a respectable human being.

[carolprudm]

I don't think you are starting from the right premise when you assume those that want the government to stay out of so much that should be done by private enterprises are against ALL the government does.

Your post seems to insinuates that democrats want to hand hold all citizens and republicans will leave those that need help swinging in the wind.

Try thinking that those against overburdensome government trying to micromanage society is what the question is.

We already have basic government assistance for all that need it.
Examples are Medicaid and so many other programs.
You can walk into any hospital today and get the same care if you are homeless without any assets as someone with the best insurance.

We already have so much else the government runs, some of it thru independent contractors.
Example, highway building and repair.

We have FEMA and FDIC and USDA and FDA and FFA and so many other government agencies that regulate and offer basic government programs to help where needed and no one is talking about dismantling them.

The debate is about how MUCH more we want the government to do?
Can we afford it and is that we want to add better than what we have?
Should we keep working with what we have in the private sector and the safety net the government already provides?

THAT is the real question.

This is not exactly true. Yes, if you are having a heart attack you will be treated. No matter what. But in most cases the hospital WILL try to recover its costs. Aggressively. Locally the only exception I know of is if your household income is less than 200% of the local poverty level. If they can't get blood from a stone the hospital will write off the expenses, adding it to the bill they send the people who actually pay their bills.

This is not good for at least 2 reasons.
First it is not fair to the people who pay their bills.

Second, it's a very inefficient method of paying for health care. Not all heart attacks can be prevented of course but perhaps if the uninsured person actually had insurance he would have had a primary care physician and been screened and treated for risk factors, saving money in the long run.

Some people don't have health insurance because they don't have an option for an affordable plan. Others would rather spend their money somewhere else. Obamacare addresses some of these issues.

[cowboymom]

Romney never protested war. He was a draft dodger that supported the war. Now that is sad, others should give their lives but he should not be bothered to risk his life. No amount of laughing icons makes that even remotely funny. Wow, some people have a strange idea of what is funny.

So obtuse.

My point was that Romney was young and figuring things out in the same way that Obama was young and figuring things out at the same stage in their lives. If you aren't going to take MR's actions in context then Obama is still a pot-addled druggie. Right?

I get what MR was protesting, I was typing in short little sentences and that's how it came out.

[carolprudm]

[QUOTE=fooler;6635722]

You are missing the point. FDR, who did not serve in the military and eventually was stricken with polio, is a greatly admired president. Again he tried to get the US in the European theater after Hilter came to power and started attacking other countries. .

FDR was assistant secretary of the navy in the 1910's. He wanted to enlist but Woodrow Wilson opposed that idea.
One of the reasons many Americans opposed becoming involved in WWII was the Communist movement. (also some degree of anti Semitism) Initially Russia was allied with Germany. When Germany attacked Russia sentiment quickly changed.

[Noms]

Under Pres Obama

$6 trillion dollar US Debt (and growing)
23 million unemployed
50 million on foodstamps or welfare
unstable foreign relations
Stagnant GDP
Obamacare - the single largest tax increase in history

He has devestated this country, will continue to do the same if reelected.

Dogs on cars, lame horses, draft dodging are UNIMPORTANT.

[vineyridge]

Romney has come out clearly against federal disaster planning and relief.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/op...me&ref=general

[vineyridge]

Today housing prices and starts are at their highest level in 4 years. Unemployment is the lowest that its been in 4 years. The stock market, which of course only benefits the rich, has recovered almost all it lost in the great Bush crash. The economy is still growing slowly, unlike much of Europe which is in recession. Without price controls, which we all know don't always work, government can't affect fuel prices except that the US is now producing more domestic fossil fuels than it has in decades.

Once again, what isn't working?