I understand that you can't bring yourself to find fault in Obama. I have seen these sorts of obsessions before. Mr. Ryan is educated in economics and Chairs the House Budget Committe. I think that's a really good start.
Mr. Romney has lots of business experience...but I notice you avoided that.
I said, "let's talk about how many businesses Mr. Obama has successfully turned around in his career. Let's talk about his private sector business experience. Geez...let's just talk about a business he has run in the private sector". Did I miss your response to that? Can you outline Mr. Obama's vast experience?
"He's not a job-creator...He's a job destroyer. If you think I'd vote for some scumbag like that, you are sadly mistaken..."
I'm confused. Are you talking about Mr. Obama or Mr. Romney here? Please note where I called Mr. Obama a scumbag.
lionshead2010 wrote: I understand that you can't bring yourself to find fault in Obama.
And I can't understand how you came to the conclusion I can't bring myself to find fault in Obama. There are a number of things I have found fault with and posted on this board: we're still in Afghanistan, Gitmo is still open, etc.
As I said, the big thing for me in deciding who to vote for is Health Care Reform and Women's Rights to Chose. It's an easy decision for me on who to vote for.
Ryan talks out of both sides of his mouth, as does Romney. They're for it then they're against it. Ryan fights for the federal handouts then slams them. I find it laughable the architect of Massachusetts Public Health Care is now against national Health Care Reform (he was for it previously).
lionshead2010 wrote: I understand that you can't bring yourself to find fault in Obama.
And I can't understand how you came to the conclusion I can't bring myself to find fault in Obama. There are a number of things I have found fault with and posted on this board: we're still in Afghanistan, Gitmo is still open, etc.
As I said, the big thing for me in deciding who to vote for is Health Care Reform and Women's Rights to Chose. It's an easy decision for me on who to vote for.
Ryan talks out of both sides of his mouth, as does Romney. They're for it then they're against it. Ryan fights for the federal handouts then slams them. I find it laughable the architect of Massachusetts Public Health Care is now against national Health Care Reform (he was for it previously).
So clearly you care little about the state of the economy. Fair enough.
How can I ask the question in a way that you will tell me about President Obama's business experience?
As I've said on numerous occasions...I DON'T WANT a corporate vulture CEO as a president. America is not a corporation, and I personally don't want it run like one.
Raees wrote: As I said, the big thing for me in deciding who to vote for is Health Care Reform and Women's Rights to Chose. It's an easy decision for me on who to vote for.
Ryan talks out of both sides of his mouth, as does Romney. They're for it then they're against it. Ryan fights for the federal handouts then slams them. I find it laughable the architect of Massachusetts Public Health Care is now against national Health Care Reform (he was for it previously).
Tell me Raees, what is the worst thing that could happen with right to choose, an overturning of Roe v Wade? What would that do? Return the decision to the States where it should have been all along, right? Do you think California, New York, or even Colorado for that matter are going to ban all abortions entirely? Of course not. The laws that the citizens of the States decide they wish to live under in their State are their business, not mine. I am not a citizen of their State, I am a citizen of this one.
Health Care Reform. That's a rich topic. What you are for is having the federal government set the standards everywhere. What others are in favor of is opening up the market to competition and getting rid of expensive one-size-fits-none federal intervention in the matter. Every State in this union could do what Massachusetts did if they wished to do so. The citizens of those States are the ones who should be making those decisions, not 536 elected officials. The job of the federal government is to keep commerce between the States regular and predictable, not impose individual mandates on each and every citizen about how they are to spend the fruits of their labor to prevent being taxed by the federal government. Both concepts are a reform of the current model, both are therefore accurately described as Health Care Reform. One cements into place a model of what health insurance will forevermore be and the other allows for the same creative destruction which brought us the automobile to replace the horse drawn carriage.
FWIW, I agree that health insurance is too expensive, I agree that health care is too expensive. The reason that health care is so expensive is that the consumers are more and more divorced from the cost of their care. I challenge you to tell me what the actual cost of your last office visit was Raees. Not how much your co-pay was, the total cost of the visit. If you are like 99% of the population, you can't answer that question. If I ask you how fuel was per gallon the last time you filled up your tank, I'm betting you can answer that question because the money came directly out of your pocket. How much did you pay for your last loaf of bread? What was the price per pound of the last portion of meat that you bought? What do you pay for health insurance each month? These are questions the consumer can answer quickly because that money comes directly out of their pockets. They will drive across town to buy gas at the station that charges a nickel less per gallon to save themselves the $1 more it will cost them to fill up at the station across the street. Get our health care on that same economic model. Hide and watch what happens when doctors have to compete based on price for each and every patient that walks through their doors.
The current model of health insurance isn't by default the best one out there, but what our federal government has done with the ACA is ensure that a better one won't be found. What the ACA has done is tell you that you have to purchase a horse drawn carriage or be taxed for failing to do so. That prevents progress, it doesn't promote it.
PrintSmith wrote: Tell me Raees, what is the worst thing that could happen with right to choose, an overturning of Roe v Wade?
What's the worst thing that could happen if the law remains as it is?
A continuation of federal intervention into State sovereignty. That's a bad thing whenever it occurs regardless of where it is the federal government is inserting itself where it has no business.
The 14th, 15th, 19th, 24th and 26th Amendments deal with the voters rights Raees. They delegated to the federal government the authority to oversee them. So in answer to your question, no, that would not be what is being talked about here.
Democracy4Sale wrote: As I've said on numerous occasions...I DON'T WANT a corporate vulture CEO as a president. America is not a corporation, and I personally don't want it run like one.
