CNN - Obama PAC ad a lie - cancer victim had insurance

CritiKalBill wrote:

Raees wrote: Let me put it this way with a little analogy: teacher pay sucks and the job is dangerous. But we don't run out of teachers, do we?

We don't run out of teachers, we just add more to the classroom and we have very little accountability for grades WHICH SUCK.

That has nothing to do with the number of teacher graduates. Class size and accountability have more to do with school district management.

Wanna try again?

The doctor shortage you describe will prompt more college students to consider the medical profession. Guaranteed job security!

Tasteless and deceptive ad. This is the monster created by unlimited donations to the PACs. Neither Obama or Romney can coordinate these ads with the PACs, but they probably do...which is all the more reason to get the money out of the process.

Interesting the Romney spokesperson responded to the ad by saying had the folks in the commercial lived in Massachusetts, they would have been covered by Romneycare.

It is highly suspected that Obama DID coordinate this ad. This is most probably going to be quite a big political backlash and investigation of the connection between Obama campaign and the PAC.

Only the "true believers" will deny how this smells of a full outhouse.

plaidvillain wrote: Tasteless and deceptive ad. This is the monster created by unlimited donations to the PACs. Neither Obama or Romney can coordinate these ads with the PACs, but they probably do...which is all the more reason to get the money out of the process.

Interesting the Romney spokesperson responded to the ad by saying had the folks in the commercial lived in Massachusetts, they would have been covered by Romneycare.

Glad you agree the ad is tasteless and deceptive.

But it's not just PACs. The same guy was in an earlier Obama campaign ad. So they know him and they've used him too.

Joe Soptic, an Obama supporter who appeared in another political ad released by the Obama campaign back in May, told CNN he blames Romney for the loss of his job and his insurance.

http://whitehouse.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/07/ad-linking-romney-to-death-of-the-wife-of-a-laid-off-steelworker-not-accurate/

Yeah, while he blamed Romney for the loss of his health insurance (still a pretty wild claim), he didn't yet blame Romney for his wife's death 5 years after he got laid off.

All Obama needs to do at this point is refute the claims from the recent PAC ad. Will he?

pineinthegrass wrote:

plaidvillain wrote: Tasteless and deceptive ad. This is the monster created by unlimited donations to the PACs. Neither Obama or Romney can coordinate these ads with the PACs, but they probably do...which is all the more reason to get the money out of the process.

Interesting the Romney spokesperson responded to the ad by saying had the folks in the commercial lived in Massachusetts, they would have been covered by Romneycare.

Glad you agree the ad is tasteless and deceptive.

But it's not just PACs. The same guy was in an earlier Obama campaign ad. So they know him and they've used him too.

Joe Soptic, an Obama supporter who appeared in another political ad released by the Obama campaign back in May, told CNN he blames Romney for the loss of his job and his insurance.

http://whitehouse.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/07/ad-linking-romney-to-death-of-the-wife-of-a-laid-off-steelworker-not-accurate/

Yeah, while he blamed Romney for the loss of his health insurance (still a pretty wild claim), he didn't yet blame Romney for his wife's death 5 years after he got laid off.

All Obama needs to do at this point is refute the claims from the recent PAC ad. Will he?

Curious, have we ever heard a candidate refute an ad from a super PAC? Usually they just distance themselves from anything the PAC puts out. Truth is, there is nothing in the ad that is an outright lie....yes the guy lost his job, yes the guy lost his health insurance, yes his wife died. The issue seems to be the inference that Romney was involved in the circumstances that caused that series of events. I believe that is up to those who watch the ad to believe or not. The problem Romney has is that the more they scream about the ad the more front and center it is in the public's mind.

archer wrote:

pineinthegrass wrote:

plaidvillain wrote: Tasteless and deceptive ad. This is the monster created by unlimited donations to the PACs. Neither Obama or Romney can coordinate these ads with the PACs, but they probably do...which is all the more reason to get the money out of the process.

Interesting the Romney spokesperson responded to the ad by saying had the folks in the commercial lived in Massachusetts, they would have been covered by Romneycare.

Glad you agree the ad is tasteless and deceptive.

But it's not just PACs. The same guy was in an earlier Obama campaign ad. So they know him and they've used him too.

Joe Soptic, an Obama supporter who appeared in another political ad released by the Obama campaign back in May, told CNN he blames Romney for the loss of his job and his insurance.

http://whitehouse.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/07/ad-linking-romney-to-death-of-the-wife-of-a-laid-off-steelworker-not-accurate/

Yeah, while he blamed Romney for the loss of his health insurance (still a pretty wild claim), he didn't yet blame Romney for his wife's death 5 years after he got laid off.

All Obama needs to do at this point is refute the claims from the recent PAC ad. Will he?

Curious, have we ever heard a candidate refute an ad from a super PAC? Usually they just distance themselves from anything the PAC puts out. Truth is, there is nothing in the ad that is an outright lie....yes the guy lost his job, yes the guy lost his health insurance, yes his wife died. The issue seems to be the inference that Romney was involved in the circumstances that caused that series of events. I believe that is up to those who watch the ad to believe or not. The problem Romney has is that the more they scream about the ad the more front and center it is in the public's mind.

Wow, I didn't think you of alll people would brush this ad off as no big deal. If a romney superpac did something this dispicable, would you not be screaming for him to denounce it? I would.

CritiKalBill wrote: Wow, I didn't think you of alll people would brush this ad off as no big deal. If a romney superpac did something this dispicable, would you not be screaming for him to denounce it? I would.

I seriously doubt that.....they are super PACS......complain all you want, they have no rules, the conservatives on the Supreme Court made sure of that. And surely Romney has no cause to complain "Corporations are people, my friends"....and they have free speech too, and they can contribute all they want to these super PACs with immunity, or so it seems. This is the new face of political campaigns, brought to you by conservatives. So deal with it Bill.....

archer wrote:

CritiKalBill wrote: Wow, I didn't think you of alll people would brush this ad off as no big deal. If a romney superpac did something this dispicable, would you not be screaming for him to denounce it? I would.

I seriously doubt that.....they are super PACS......complain all you want, they have no rules, the conservatives on the Supreme Court made sure of that. And surely Romney has no cause to complain "Corporations are people, my friends"....and they have free speech too, and they can contribute all they want to these super PACs with immunity, or so it seems. This is the new face of political campaigns, brought to you by conservatives. So deal with it Bill.....

So if Rmooney makes up a bs ad about how Obama killed somebody, you would be ok with that? How could an ad get any sleazier that claiming Romney is somehow at fault for a woman's cancer death? Good luck with that one.

CritiKalBill wrote:

archer wrote:

CritiKalBill wrote: Wow, I didn't think you of alll people would brush this ad off as no big deal. If a romney superpac did something this dispicable, would you not be screaming for him to denounce it? I would.

I seriously doubt that.....they are super PACS......complain all you want, they have no rules, the conservatives on the Supreme Court made sure of that. And surely Romney has no cause to complain "Corporations are people, my friends"....and they have free speech too, and they can contribute all they want to these super PACs with immunity, or so it seems. This is the new face of political campaigns, brought to you by conservatives. So deal with it Bill.....

So if Rmooney makes up a bs ad about how Obama killed somebody, you would be ok with that? How could an ad get any sleazier that claiming Romney is somehow at fault for a woman's cancer death? Good luck with that one.

There is an ad out there that insinuates Obama is responsible for the death of a young man in the fast and furious debacle?

Lobbying group American Future Fund released a new Operation Fast and Furious ad on Wednesday aimed at pushing President Barack Obama’s administration for “answers and accountability.”

The ad begins: “December 2010, U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry [was] gunned down along the Arizona-Mexico border.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/13/group ... z23AOSrIZ6

Since there is no proof that the president caused this man's death, I guess I should be all bent out of shape over this ad, and screaming like a little pig as the conservatives have done over the Obama super PAC ad.....get a grip people, these are super PACS, and they lie, and they lie some more....and if you think your guy Romney and his super PACs don't lie as much as you claim Obama and his super PACs do, then maybe you would be interested in some ocean front property I own in Arizona.

Raees wrote: OMG! We CAN'T have health care reform. That would mean EVERYONE would go in for yearly physicals!

EVERYONE with insurance now doesn't go in for yearly physicals Raees - what makes you think that is magically going to change if more people are insured?

Something else for you to ponder -

Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) has been used for > 25 years, with recent technological advances making the procedure very easy to use. Research has shown that increased SMBG is associated with improved glycemic control. Despite the improved technology, however, patients often do not adhere well to this aspect of the diabetes regimen. A recent study using a large national sample of patients with type 2 diabetes found that 24% of insulin-treated patients, 65% of those on oral medications, and 80% of those treated by diet and exercise alone either never performed SMBG or did so less than once per month. Daily SMBG (at least one blood glucose check per day) was reported by only 39% of patients treated with insulin and just 5% of those treated with either oral medications or diet and exercise.
http://clinical.diabetesjournals.org/co ... /2/71.full

These people KNOW that they have a serious medical condition Raees. People who are on insulin KNOW that they have to check their glucose levels at least daily and yet less than 40% of them do it. 80% of the people who KNOW they have diabetes that can be controlled by diet and exercise don't bother to check their glucose levels even once a month. As long as they are feeling good, they don't bother - which is precisely why the majority of adults don't bother with an annual physical as well.

About 44.4 million adults, or nearly 21 percent of the population, get a preventive physical exam annually.
About 19.4 million women, or about 18 percent of adult women, get a preventive gynecological exam annually.
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500368_162-3293409.html

Care to compare these numbers with the number of adults who had health insurance and the number of women who had health insurance Raees? Do you honestly believe eliminating the $35 co-pay is going to appreciably alter these figures? You're living in a fantasy world if you do.