Throw Grandma From the Train

What on earth is Obama talking about? We were ensured that Obamacare will take care of all these situations. Or did Obama lie about that too?

You expected consistency from Obama? The Demagogue in Chief.
LOL

Dianne, Republicans filibustered and gutted most of obama care.

I don’t understand. You would rather that Obama ignore what the Republican plan proposes for Medicare and the Republican plan to eliminate the Affordable Care Act? What exactly did Obama say that is a mischaracterization of Republican proposals?
The Republicans have introduced a bill to repeal AHA. The Republicans have released a plan that replaces Medicare with vouchers. Aren’t you, as a “reporter,” supposed to know these things?

from zero hedge
Warning: people on blood pressure medication are urged not to read this.
Yesterday the media had a field day when it was uncovered that the hard fought $38 billion in budget “cuts” which almost caused America to shut down were in reality $14 billion. We, thus, can’t wait to find out what the response will be when it is uncovered that the actual cuts were… $353 million. Yes: the ongoing functioning of the government was a pawn in a soap opera whose benefit to the US debt is $353 million, or about what Goldman’s trading desk makes in less than one day.
From Washington Post:
A new budget estimate released Wednesday says that the spending bill negotiated between President Barack Obama and House Speaker John Boehner would produce less than 1 percent of the $38 billion in claimed savings by the end of this budget year.
The Congressional Budget Office estimate shows that the spending bill due for a House vote Thursday would pare just $352 million from the deficit through Sept. 30. About $8 billion in cuts to domestic programs and foreign aid are offset by nearly equal increases in defense spending.
The House began debate on the measure Wednesday with a test vote slated for the early afternoon. The measure appears on track to pass the House and Senate this week before a stopgap spending measure expires Friday at midnight despite opposition from some of the GOP’s most ardent budget cutters.
…
Republicans say they wish the measure would cut more but that the cuts negotiated by Boehner are about as good as can be expected giver that Democrats hold the Senate and the White House. In his February budget, Obama pressed a freeze on domestic agency accounts.
“We continue to push this president to places he never said he would go,” said House GOP Whip Kevin McCarthy of California. “The president said he would freeze spending. Our Speaker negotiated, outnumbered 3-1. We have cut spending.”
Speechless yet? You should be. And for those confused how B.H.O. picked the arbitrary number of $4 trillion in “cuts”, John Lohman summarizes it best.
How Washington Cuts $38 Billion in 5 Simple Steps:
1. Announce spending bill that claims $38 billion in cuts
2. Wait for CBO to announce it only cuts $353 million1
3. Realize you only do 0.0093% of what you say2
4. Divide $38 billion by 0.0093% to get necessary target3
5. Round to the nearest trillion and announce result
1 : Source: Washington Post, April 13, 2011
2 : $353 million divided by $38 billion
3 : $38 billion divided by 0.0093 = 4.1 trillion

What on earth is Obama talking about? We were ensured that Obamacare will take care of all these situations. Or did Obama lie about that too?
POSTED BY: CHUCK | APR 13, 2011 3:30:53 PM
Get this Chuck…
A new AP/Gfk Poll shows the LOWEST approval of Obama’s healthcare overhaul since it was even thought about. Only 35% now approve of it, 45% do not, 17% unsure. This poll also showed a majority of SENIORS rejecting it, too. Looks like Obama’s wheels are coming off the wagon. AAAWWWW….

This President not only does not speak the truth, but I don’t think he has a clue about what truth is. His post-modern intellectual avoid-reality-at-all-cost pretend thinking is starting to whack him with a clue bat. So he doubles his attacks on his designated enemies instead — the Republicans being the most evil ones of all. Moral relativism, it seems, stops at the Republican doorstep.

Will this make the evening news broadcast to show Obama as the liar that he is? NOPE, it will be covered up. A few internet stories, but never any real exposure of obama’s lies on the news broadcast.

“He has boldly stepped up and comitted to forming THREE panels to completely divorce him from the politically unpopular suggestions they’ll come up with as he hits the campaign trail.” – N2VIP
I thought he already had a panel tell him what should be done about cutting the spending and bring the bloated budget in line.
Oh Well.
Maybe this President doesn’t listen very well.

Obama on Grandmother – June 2009
Obama said during the ABC Special on Wednesday night that a way to save healthcare costs is to abandon the sort of care that “evidence shows is not necessarily going to improve” the patient’s health. He went on to say that he had personal familiarity with such a situation when his grandmother broke her hip after she was diagnosed with terminal cancer.
Obama offered a question on the efficacy of further care for his grandmother saying, “and the question was, does she get hip replacement surgery, even though she was fragile enough they were not sure how long she would last?”

“Republicans filibustered and gutted most of obama care.”
That’s really interesting since it passed when the Democrats had a filibuster proof majority.

DUH!!! Hes been doing this consistently!

Everything that comes out of Obama’s mouth is a lie. If his lips are moving he is lying.

Rep. Joe Wilson summed it up best at President Gardener’s 1st SOTU teleprompter reading:
Rep. Wilson: You. Lie!
and so it is with the stupidest man ever elected president.

Those families with Downs or autism USED to be able to use their HSA to pay for their educational needs. Obama slashed the $$ amount allowed. Throw Grandma indeed.

So Barry is talking out of both sides of his mouth again.
What else is new?
More Kool Aid, Obamabots?

If Obots weren’t stupid they wouldn’t be democrats.

will no one ever learn? Obama is a race-baiting, hypocritical, lying, intellectually dishonest, double-minded, lefty redistributionist.. he will always say one thing and do another, talking out of each side of his mouth and every other orifice.

“TheOtherJim”
Obviously you’re only regugitating the rhetoric and haven’t actually read what the Repubs plan is. Granny will not be thrown out into the street. Ryan is proposing that people above a certain age stay in Medicaid and younger people will start getting vouchers and keeping more of their own money to buy real health care of their own choosing. But don’t hurt yourself and actually, you know, do any reasearch.

Paul03, obamacare was passed when demorats had complete control of congress, The GOP had no say in this at all, one way or the other. What was in ObamaCare and not in ObamaCare was 100% demorat.

This is because our President is not American – and I don’t mean citizenship – I mean his temperament and leadership qualities. His politics verge on marxist, fascist, and socialist. He cannot move anything forward politically without resorting to demonization, fear-mongering, and outright lying… yknow, the usual marxist class tripe. He simply is unfit to lead a great nation of free individuals.

obamacare was passed when demorats had complete control of congress
====================
No, it passed after they had lost the supermajority.

Have we ever had a President with less compunction about outright lying to the American people?
===================
Yes for sure….George Bush is a fine example.

Skip, ObamaCare was passed when the democRATS had the majority. I’m not clear whether it was the supermajority at the time – although I believe it was – I assume that you know the difference, and are aware it doesn’t matter. His bill, they passed it. Obama lost significant blue votes over this, and couldn’t strip the usual Rhinos away to aid him. (Which should really tell you how extreme that bill was.)

He cannot move anything forward politically without resorting to demonization, fear-mongering, and outright lying
=========================
You mean like claiming Americans who disagree with you aren’t really American, they are going to destroy America instead, and those who know what America really is are promoting freedom by forcing their ideas of what America really is on others? Sounds like it’s right out of the right-wing playbook to me.

you can include leading America into a long, painful period of no liquidity, limited jobs, rising cost of living, exorbitant and crippling energy prices
========================
We believe he has a much better chance of leading us OUT of all this than the Republicans do.

You mean like claiming Americans who disagree with you aren’t really American, they are going to destroy America instead, and those who know what America really is are promoting freedom by forcing their ideas of what America really is on others?
============
Don’t you get it, skip? None of that is true. That’s not what Bush did, it’s what you Lefties kept telling us he was doing… you just haven’t realized the difference. What, exactly did he say that you needed to agree with him about or you were un-American?
Today, I heard that entitlements were as American as apple pie and Paul Ryan was going to kill my grandmother.

Sure are a lot of paid shills in this thread.
I love it when poor people defend millionaires of any kind who couldn’t care less.
Nice job creation for 10+ years of tax cuts!

Obama is a staggering con man. Nothing more. 2012 can’t come soon enough to rid ourselves of this buffoon and his merry band of “social justice” Democrats.

I think I and many other Americans are discerning enough not to trust those who apparently don’t believe in their own policies enough that they feel they need to revise history to cover for their failings. The same old stale recipe of tax cuts and deregulation are largely responsible for creating our problems and we have absolutely no reason to believe the Republicans can offer anything else instead.

Obama votes “present.” Again.
On the day Obama was inaugurated, the national debt stood at $10.626 trillion. Currently the debt is about $14.275 trillion. Obama is now proposing to cut deficits by $4 Trillion over 12 years.
So in other words, he’s proposing to reduce deficits over the course of the next 12 years by the same amount by which the debt rose in the first two years of his presidency, including his failed $800 stimulus boondoggle.
So when is Obama actually going to lead and deliver a plan for reducing out-of-control spending and the deficit?
Present…. Until 2012.

On the day Obama was inaugurated, the national debt stood at $10.626 trillion. Currently the debt is about $14.275 trillion. Obama is now proposing to cut deficits by $4 Trillion over 12 years
=================
Again blatantly ignoring that much of the debt incurred in Obama’s first years was the result of financial obligations because of prior Republican policies which could not simply be ignored by the following administration.

“Madness is rare in individuals – but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule.” — Nietzsche
Deficit spending as a matter of planned economic policy only began in the Kennedy administration. Before then, we engaged in it only in wartime. Over the past fifty years it’s become the madness of the age, and it will collapse the economy just as surely as mismanaged debt collapsed the French economy in the 1780s, with similar disastrous results for ordinary men and women. The free ride for teachers, public employees (who enjoy UNBELIEVABLY generous compensation compared to the private sector at comparable skill levels), NPR, PBS and Planned Parenthood is coming to an end, either through sane legislation enacted to calibrate the end of the ride as painlessly as possible, or, less sanely, by allowing the immutable and implacable laws of cause and effect to operate, in which case a sudden collapse will leave the national economic landscape strewn with rubble.

This man is a fraud.

“Again blatantly ignoring that much of the debt incurred in Obama’s first years was the result of …”
Democrats passing massive over-spending bills, that increased spending by 40% in just 4 years!!!
We went from $2.5 trillion to $3.7 trillion… that’s a massive increase and we need to stop it right now.
“financial obligations because of prior Republican policies”
- a lie – there was no ‘obligation’ to throw billions in wasteful stimulus money out the door, or massively increase govt spending, or pass a govt take over of healthcare.

PolitiFact rates the statement:
“…the economy began its nose dive when Democrats took control of Congress in January 2007. For 54 months before that, with a Republican president and Republican control of Congress, the economy was doing very well and growing.”
-as a Pants on Fire lie. They continue:
“The evidence shows that the economy did not “nose dive” for at least a year after the Democrats took control of Congress, and experts of various ideological backgrounds agree that long-term trends in the housing and energy markets played a bigger role in directly causing the recession. While what happens in Washington can certainly influence the economy, it is only one of many factors. We believe it is the height of partisan wishful thinking to imply that one party’s accession to power in Congress is to blame for a major recession.”

Why on Earth didn’t Bush do anything to stop them? How many vetoes did they manage to overcome? Remember this congress was derided as “do nothing”. Historical revision is easily detectable.
====
If Bush declined to veto legislation, wasn’t that a sign of his bipartisanship?
A Democratic congress in the last 2 years of the Bush administration is a revision of history? You would have liked it to be a Republican congress instead?

This right-wing attempt to blame trillions of dollars in debt on teachers, public employees, and public broadcasting is comical.
====
SKIP, if you want to search for blame, why don’t you add some of the most detestable things congress has done?
For example, the GSEs, Fannie and Freddie, are now backstopped by the federal government. What does that mean?
Well, it means that the government is on the hook for all losses from Fannie and Freddie. The potential losses from these companies, who own the majority of US mortgages, is not on the official figures for US debt.
So what will this decision cost us? Who knows. But it will cost us a heck of a lot more than public employees once the losses are realized.
The big fish are more important than the small fish. We need to worry about all the fish right now, but don’t think we can start to take things off the table when things are already out of control.
The fact that Obama speaks in soothing tones isn’t going to change reality, and your insistence that tough decisions are really tax decisions is simplistic.

For example, the GSEs
====================
Of course the GSEs were hard hit, they were the largest players in real estate when the housing bubble burst. The GSEs were a good idea and successfully freed up money for loans for potential homeowners. If they hadn’t succumbed to shareholder pressure and lowered their lending standards to keep from losing more market share to the runaway private sector they might not be as bad off now.

…and all I have to do is point to the checkbook with the negative balance and shrug
———————–
That’s the same attitude most Republicans have. Luckily many Americans aren’t buying…
-According to Gallup:
“For next year’s budget, more Americans favor raising taxes on upper-income households than making additional domestic spending cuts”

“For next year’s budget, more Americans favor raising taxes on upper-income households than making additional domestic spending cuts”
Posted by: Skip | Apr 14, 2011 12:21:39 AM
It’s easy for 50% of Americans to say that. They don’t pay any federal income taxes at all. Many receive credits (aka welfare). I’m sure they’d like that to continue.

“The GSEs were a good idea and successfully freed up money for loans for potential homeowners. If they hadn’t succumbed to shareholder pressure and lowered their lending standards to keep from losing more market share to the runaway private sector they might not be as bad off now.”
Posted by: Skip | Apr 14, 2011 12:13:07 AM
The GSEs were a horrible idea. They were thoroughly politicized and infiltrated by Democratic Party operatives who made millions before the companies collapsed (Frank Raines, Jim Johnson, etc.). They didn’t lower lending standards due to shareholder pressure. They lowered standards due to political pressure and incentives. Jim Johnson received a huge bonus when he accumulated $1 trillion in subprime loans. To meet their targets, they basically told private sector banks that they would back risky loans. So nobody should be surprised the private sector transferred the risk to the GSEs. From their perspective, it would have been idiotic not to. The rest is history, including billions of bailout dollars from taxpayers. But at least criminals like Raines and Johnson are living well.

When will Democrats be honest enough to admit that a tax on one is a tax on all?
If you raise taxes ‘on the rich’, what happens?
Prices of goods and services provided by ‘the rich’ (your doctor, your local business owner etc) go up, and who pays the increase?
That’s right. You pay their increased taxes.

Having a daughter that is autistic, i know that insurance does not pay for therapy, and it’s no surprise that this moron of a president is completely clueless about that. what an incompetent.

Obama is a skilled community organizer.
Whipping up class and race resentment is the most important skill in a community organizer’s tool box.
That makes Obama a master craftsman – of sorts.

Jake, Thank you for your report. I happen to believe you are the only fair minded reporter from any of the three major networks ABC, CBS, or NBC. I still can’t believe they gave the moderator spot to Christine Amanpour on “This Week”. They lost me as a viewer.

“For next year’s budget, more Americans favor raising taxes on upper-income households than making additional domestic spending cuts”
Posted by: Skip | Apr 14, 2011 12:21:39 AM
Awesome, lets figure out what tax rate we need on the over $250,000 crowds to remove the 1.6 trillion dollar deficit.
Figure income taxes… income, current tax rates… calculating.
Oh, and none of this namby-pamby graduated tax rate, tax all their money at the same rate. The over $250,000 crowd made 1.4 trillion last year; we need to cover 1.6 trillion so…
A 114.3% tax rate will cover it. For every dollar they make they’ll need to pay $1.13 in taxes and we’ll cover it.
So we confiscate every dollar they own, plus a bit more, and keep state taxes, sales taxes, etc… do you think they’ll keep working if they have to pay to work?
For next year’s budget, most Americans don’t understand there aren’t enough “rich” to get the problem under control.
Fixed that statement for you; you’re welcome.

“You mean like claiming Americans who disagree with you aren’t really American, they are going to destroy America instead,”
Skip, that’s exactly what Obama has done for the last four years. Now Obama is actually doing it. Obama was the one who said he was going to “fundamentally transform” the United States of America. Fundamentally, the United States of America is a democratic republic and that is what Obama intends to change.

Gas is going to $5.00 a gallon,interest rates are primed to go up,we have no coherent foreign policy and all that this mediocrity offers is scare tactics and the usual “Republicans eat children” tripe.And what is he doing today? Running off to Chicagoland for campaign dinners.Government by Brownian motion.

Didn’t he also tell Republicans that they needed to be in Washington, not campaigning for President, because we face some serious issues in the next two years?
And then he begins his campaign the week of an impending shutdown.

Wow, some post-election vetting by ABC news!

Patrick, your comment really ignored the recent history of this country: ‘The economy WAS strong, until the Democrats took control of Congress in 2007, doubled the deficit, startied passing job-killing regs, refused to drill as oil soared, engaged in talk that caused banks to collapse and mismanaged us into worse fiscal crisis.’
Not one word of the above quote is true. Anyone can check for the stats for those years. The economy wasn’t strong, good-paying jobs were in decline and rising oil and gas prices were pinching the poor and middle-class hard and slowing the economy.
Drilling here doesn’t lower prices as all oil is sold on the world market to the highest bidder.
The Republicans in the 90′s weakened the banking regulations, which allowed the banking crisis to happen, don’t you remember how rated A but actually junk mortgage bonds were sold here and all over the world, causing a world-wide banking crisis when they turned out to be crap.
Bush was in charge, he could have vetoed anything the Dems passed that he didn’t approve of.
I know it is a waste of time to talk to a history/reality revisionist but please don’t think you are fooling anyone. I will never understand why people lie about easy to look up facts. If you dealt in facts you would realize the Republican party is solely looking out for big corporations, and the very wealthy, at the expense of small businesses, middle-income folks and the country’s economy in general. It is the fall of Rome all over again, if greed is allowed to rule for its selfish short term gain that sets us up for calamity.

“The [Bush] economy wasn’t strong, good-paying jobs were in decline and rising oil and gas prices were pinching the poor and middle-class hard and slowing the economy.”
Posted by: Lydia | Apr 14, 2011 10:01:14 AM
Then how do you explain my business sales doubling, my payroll expanding, and my net worth tripling during those years even though I was middle class?

The One’s greatest difficulty is that it is getting harder and harder and harder to blame Bush.

It is funny how Fannie and Freddie are blamed for the mortgage crisis, but there were a lot of investors buying new condos and homes, sight unseen, to ride the wave of rising home prices.
====
The democrats just awarded these speculators with the biggest bailout known to mankind. Democrats voted for it, and that is a matter of the record.
====
Those investors, just like folks buying gold today, were driving the prices up artificially high with their greed.
====
Currently, the Fed has flooded the world with free money. That money is used for speculation. If he increased interest rates, then the speculation would decrease. Petition the Fed to stop his zero interest rate policy.
====
And many of those investors were buying with very little money down, so they could buy many properties. When the prices started falling, they tried to sell quickly which flooded the market and drove prices further down.
====
If the prices go down, it makes things more affordable. Note that it is the current policy of Democrats to increase home prices. Why? Because if they don’t increase home prices, all the mortgages owned by Fannie and Freddie are underwater. And then the US taxpayer, yes, the US taxpayer is responsible for covering those losses.
====
It was just like the investors buying stocks with little or no money down right before the Great Depression, counting on a rise, to then sell for a profit. Eventually the bottom fell out of that too, because the rise in prices was artificially built up by investors, not actual demand for the products the companies made.
The greed of bankers giving bad loans made the whole mess possible. That and their ‘bundling’ of these bad loans as A rated paper they sold around the world.
====
The greed of bankers is unabated as long as they are not allowed to fail. TARP prevented their failure, which artifically kept home prices high, allowed them to transfer their bad debt to the US taxpayer, and caused gas prices to rise 100% due to zero interest rate policy.
Even worse, we pay the banks interest on the US Treasuries they own.
You have really confused who the enablers are. The enablers for this chicanery and fraud are the Democrats. They voted for TARP, they voted for greed, they vote to underwrite the losses of greedy banks.
Don’t make the mistake of voting for them again.

Again blatantly ignoring that much of the debt incurred in Obama’s first years was the result of financial obligations because of prior Republican policies which could not simply be ignored by the following administration.
Posted by: Skip | Apr 13, 2011 10:25:45 PM
You’re Blatantly ignoring the fact that the Dems had control of the House and Senate since 2007, when the debt began climbing at an alarming rate. Bush was a lame duck President for the last 2 years. It was the Dems that were spending.

And that downturn was caused by 4 policy changes by previous administrations: the Repubs in the 90′s weakening banking regs, bad trade agreements which lost us jobs, encouraging outsourcing of jobs with tax breaks and lifting of tariffs,& Bush’s tax breaks for the wealthy.
====
One of the most important factors in the subprime crisis was the existence of GSEs. Without the GSEs, they banks had no one to offload their toxic mortgages to. One other major factor was low interest rates. Low interest rates allowed liquidity to enter the system in irrational ways.
The regulations would have no realistic effect. The high leverage ratios employed by the banks were universally supported. And the proof of the inadequacy of regulation is that no one of significance has been prosecuted.
====
This administration has pushed through strong banking regs, Dems tried to end the tax breaks for out-sourcing but Repubs blocked it from coming to a vote and the Repubs are against ending the tax cuts for the wealthy. I don’t think anyone is talking about reworking trade agreements.
====
Strong banking regulations are a very irrelevant. The idea that banks will be held accountable is ludicrous. They are getting free money from the taxpayer, why do they need regulations for that? We are giving money to them, and the regulations allow it? Why would they want to change or break the rules when they are getting money for free?
====
Even if all 4 of these things were fixed tomorrow, it doesn’t change the fact that a tremendous amount of money was lost by a lot of people, so they have less to spend. Some folks lost half their savings.
====
The money that was left over from being lost is now being devalued because of our federal deficit spending. It’s a double whammy!