This is topic You know it's bad when Mathews is starting to hit Obama in forum Off-Topic Post, Non Stock Talk at Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/ubb/ultimatebb.php/ubb/get_topic/f/14/t/006017.html

Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
 
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/its-their-money-chris-matthews-explains-taxes-to -obama/
 
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by SeekingFreedom:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/its-their-money-chris-matthews-explains-taxes-to -obama/

Right on the money (no pun intended).
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
stupid semantics. Mathews is a wuss.

the tax cuts expire, the GOP's wrote the bill to have them expire, Bush signed it that way. The tax cuts are over whne the GOP law says they are..

teh GOP would like nothing better than to force them to expire so they could say Obama raised taxes on people making under 200 grand.
 
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
 
I read the statement below the other day, i found it rather interesting.

Guess it is one way to take the burden off the VA, but i am not sure it is the best way.

It did not set very good with veterans groups.

_________________________________________________


"FOLLOWING IS OBAMA'S RESPONSE WHEN HE WAS CALLED FOR HIS DECISION ON WOUNDED VETERANS MILITARY PAY FOR THEIR WAR INJURIES

Obama's decree that would force veterans' to pay the medical bills for their combat bad press, including mockery by comedian Jon Stewart. Obama's proclamation would have required veterans' to pay the estimated $540 million annual cost for the treatment of injuries incurred during their tours on active duty.

The President admitted that he was puzzled by the magnitude of the opposition to his
proposal. "Look, it's an all volunteer force," Obama complained. "Nobody made
these guys go to war. They had to have known and accepted the risks. Now they
whine about bearing the costs of their choice? It just doesn't compute."

"I thought these were people who were proud to sacrifice for their country," Obama
continued. "I wasn't asking for blood-just money. With the country facing the
worst financial crisis in its history, I'd have thought that the patriotic thing to do
would be to try to help reduce the nation's deficit.. I guess I underestimated the
selfishness of some of my fellow Americans."


-
 
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
 
What a jerk, I cant believe people blindly follow obama like sheep.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
Good, Lord, you guys:

http://www.moaablogs.org/battleofthebilge/2009/04/bilgealertapril2/
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Statement-from-Press-Secretary-Robert -Gibbs-on-the-Presidents-Strong-Commitment-to/
 
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
 
ROFLMAO

Look, I'm the first to admit I don't think highly of Obama...but even I wouldn't believe he'd say that. Political kiss of death...
 
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
 
lol, he also said the new health care law requires chips to be inserted in your hand to monitor tax dollars spent.


haha just kidding, this is fun though.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by SeekingFreedom:
ROFLMAO

Look, I'm the first to admit I don't think highly of Obama...but even I wouldn't believe he'd say that. Political kiss of death...

what's funny about this smear campaign? Do you inform your friends when these lies and half-truths are proven wrong?
 
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
 
Originally Posted By Tex:

"what's funny about this smear campaign? Do you inform your friends when these lies and half-truths are proven wrong?"

_________________________________________________

I thought all politics these days were about smear campaigns and half truths.

Isn't that how they get into office and stay?

Should Veterans pay for their own health insurance as proposed by Obama, would it really help the economy in the longer run?


-
 
Posted by Pagan on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by IWISHIHAD:
Originally Posted By Tex:

"what's funny about this smear campaign? Do you inform your friends when these lies and half-truths are proven wrong?"

_________________________________________________

I thought all politics these days were about smear campaigns and half truths.

Isn't that how they get into office and stay?

Should Veterans pay for their own health insurance as proposed by Obama, would it really help the economy in the longer run?


-

You do realize Obama didn't actually say that, right?
 
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
 
Didn't say what?

Not sure what any of these politicians say or don't say these days and what is buried.

I can find half truths or lies in any of these politicians daily verse, that's the sad part.

Just take a look and the campaigns for the upcoming elections, oh that's right it's their campaign commitee's that are saying things, not the candidates themselves.

Maybe there is no truth in the below link either?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/17/veterans-groups-blast-obama-plan-priv ate-insurance-pay-service-related-health/


-
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by IWISHIHAD:
Didn't say what?

Not sure what any of these politicians say or don't say these days and what is buried.

I can find half truths or lies in any of these politicians daily verse, that's the sad part.

Just take a look and the campaigns for the upcoming elections, oh that's right it's their campaign commitee's that are saying things, not the candidates themselves.

Maybe there no truth in the below link either?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/17/veterans-groups-blast-obama-plan-priv ate-insurance-pay-service-related-health/


-

it's creepy isn't it? Fox News literally makes stuff up as they go...

the lack of integrity over there isn't just incompetence, it's criminal.

notice how they loved the GOP run Govt, but today they have already said how terrible the govt is at least 50 times..

i have been watching/listening all morning. they jsut had a pretty good chase on live TV hto [Wink]
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
on that chase? it looks to me like htey broke one guys neck... he stopped moving completely but he ain't dead..
 
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
 
It's not just Fox news that posted this proposal by Obama.

But beyond just being a little pissed at the time of reading this, as i have been with him leaving our troops in Iraq longer than they should have been.

And him reinserting them into that other country in harms way ...again.

But beyond this i started thinking of the actual proposal and whether it would really make a differance in the economy.

Can you imagine insurance companies insuring soldiers going into combat, what would the premium be?

If they only had a max of a milion bucks, what would happen after that?

We know many of the major wounds would far excede a million in the private sector and the soldiers(vets) could not afford this.

Then the hospitals would be stuck again and the cycle would start all over.

Interesting as i think of different ways of doing this and how it could be handled differently to help the economy and vets both, seems like it always comes back to the VA as the best solution.


-
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
actually Iwish? it is possible to do just that right now.

If you are service connected injured the Insurance co's pay for your treatemnt if you go private. If you go to the VA they can even pay the VA IF you have the proper policy....

The VA also pays for non-service connected treatments every day, i know this for fact. Too many Vets get lied to about their benefits even by Veterans that are working at he VA after they retire from the military. I have raised holy hell with at least a half dozen of them myself. Even got one fired.

I have never been lied to so much as iw aswhile i was in the Navy, and it started at - the recruiters office.
 
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
 
I know that personally.

But not visa versa.

You would not want to use your private insurance on a major combat wound and run your max up to high in case you needed more for non service medical.

Smaller stuff fine.

What if the insurance companies thought hugh amounts of their money were used on service conditions, maybe that is another reason they want all central health records?

If your policy is like mine it has a max.

You can get more, but again what would your premium be if you were headed for combat?


-
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by IWISHIHAD:
I know that personally.

But not visa versa.

You would not want to use your private insurance on a major combat wound and run your max up to high in case you needed more for non service medical.

Smaller stuff fine.

What if the insurance companies thought hugh amounts of their money were used on service conditions, maybe that is another reason they want all central health records?

If your policy is like mine it has a max.

You can get more, but again what would your premium be if you were headed for combat?


-

and that's why they dropped the plan before it was ever even in writing, they dropped it March(a year ago:


THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
__________________________________________________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 18, 2009

Statement from Press Secretary Robert Gibbs on the President’s Strong Commitment to America’s Veterans:
The President has consistently stated that he is committed to working with veterans on the details of the 2010 VA Budget Proposal. The President demonstrated his deep commitment to veterans by proposing the largest increase in the VA budget in 30 years and calling VSO and MSO leaders into the White House for an unprecedented meeting to discuss various aspects of the budget proposal. In considering the third party billing issue, the administration was seeking to maximize the resources available for veterans; however, the President listened to concerns raised by the VSOs that this might, under certain circumstances, affect veterans and their families’ ability to access health care. Therefore, the President has instructed that its consideration be dropped. The President wants to continue a constructive partnership with the VSOs and MSOs and is grateful to those VSOs and MSOs who have worked in good faith with him on the budget proposal.


it was simply an idea they kicked out. ideas are GOOD! making them sound like a plan? criminal. He was only in office for two months and it was already dropped.. it was just talk..
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
i knew quite a few guys that would take cash instead of insurance at tehir jobs because they knew their VA rights. They'd rather pay the VA in cash instead of buying insurance
 
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
 
The VA will not push very hard for payment, at least in the past.

Never heard of them ever going after a Vet to collect bills, even if not service related.

Cheap medications to.


-
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
true, they don't push, i paid gladly.

and yeah, if they have the meds you need? which they usually do? I paid 5 up to 8 $ whne i used the VA...

when i tried to help the VA collect from my private insurer? the Insurer told me i needed to switchc policies (and it was no more 'spensive)and they would pay the VA for my care....

I decided then to screw the isnurer and go to private dotors becuase the war was starting and i figgered there were people who needed the VA more and i didn't want to use their resources. They pay so much more now it's ridiculous [Big Grin]

But i can go back tomorrow if i needed or wanted. I generally like the care at eh VA better than Kaiser, I had some fights with Kaiser too, and those guys are pricks...

one night i was drilling some glass with a diamond core bit and managed to shoot the core into my finger, so i call my Kaiser doctors office and he was not available, this is at night on a weekend too i think. Anyway his office refer me to another doctor who's picking up his calls, and he say go to eh emergency room. So i go. The bill was 500$ and kaiser refused to pay for a year. I had to pay outa pocket, and then collect it later because the doctor didn't enter my name in his books as refered to the ER.. On top of that"? the Doc wanted to do xrays too and got mad when i refused. It was simply 500$ to remove a round chip of glass out of the side of my finger because i couldn't get ahold of it with tweezers and my wife couldn't look at it at all...

that hardly even hurt...

a couple years later i shot a drywall screw thru a peice of sheet metal and got my knuckle too... i had to unscrew it myself, cuz it was on kiln that weighed about two hundred pounds and i was alone [Eek!] that hurt, it came out the other side before i cold let go of the trigger on the drill.... [Wall Bang]
 
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
 
Sounds like you should stay away from those deadly tools, then you won't need health insurance! [Smile]

Speaking of veterans, I got together with a friend of mine last weekend, hadn't talked except briefly on the phone a few weeks ago.

Someone linked us up a month ago from a veterans website.

We hadn't talked or seen each other in 40+ years, he has been living 70 miles away for 20 years.

We were good buds in Vietnam in 68, i tried to look him up several times and he said he did the same, but with no luck.

The guys that found us had gotten our SS from an old company rooster and tracked us.


-
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
that's really cool.. my old ships have websites where we can get in touch...

my wife asked me what i wanted for fathers day? i told her i wanted a framing nail gun to help with addition to the studio? she didn't get it for me [Frown]
 
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
 
I can see your wifes point.

She probably did not want to clean up the blood again. [Smile]

It was really good to see that friend again.

He said that when he first got contacted several months ago he had some old dreams that he had not had in 20 years, that was the bad part.

I had forgotten a lot of details of the past.

He was our head medic, and started talking about one of the many things that i had forgotten.

Quite of few guys had gotten hit one day and he had to prioritize who went out first.

One guy had quite a few different wounds, one which was though the throat.

He was first, the medivac chopper came in and lowered the stretcher, but on the way up they started taking fire, so they dropped him and took off.

Another chopper came after we got the fire under control, but my buddy had to decide who would be first this time.

He felt this guy would not take being dropped again, so he made him second in line to see if they got any fire, this time he got out.

The guy that got shot in the throat did okay, it took him a year and a half to learn how to swallow again.

He has been a college professior at a major university for a lot of years now and has written many books.

It was nice to hear that.


-
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
swallow? how about talking? makes sense for him to take up writing...

all of my superiors in the Navy were Nam vets or Nam era vets. (i went in 1980) since i was a gunner, i worked with quite a few guys that had seen action on the rivers and it seemd like we had quite few guys that had been marines in the gunner section too...

after i got in? i realised i really wanted to be a marine, but the recruiter had tricked me about what my gun school would be, and the "trickery" never stopped [Wink] he convinced me that the path to EOD was thru gunnery school and then signed me up in school that locked me into my rating (SOB!).. what can i say i was 19 and gullible..

the Navy does get better chow tho [Big Grin]
 
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
 
I did not think about the talking part, especially with those vocal cords involved.

Not sure.

He was really lucky to be alive though.

We did have some good laughs about some of the funny stuff that happened, we remember those better than the other stuff.


-
 
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
 
Originally Posted By Glassman:

after i got in? i realised i really wanted to be a marine, but the recruiter had tricked me about what my gun school would be, and the "trickery" never stopped he convinced me that the path to EOD was thru gunnery school and then signed me up in school that locked me into my rating (SOB!).. what can i say i was 19 and gullible..

_________________________________________________

That's funny.

My wife had ask me how this friend of mine became a medic, i said i thought that's probably where they placed him, but i was not sure.

I probably knew way back but did not remember, so i asked him when we got together.

He said when he went in he signed up for electronics, but they put him in medic school and he ended up being the number two guy in his class.

He was sent off to i believe to Brussals with great duty.

But he had a thing going with a woman officer and they caught him, so he was in trouble.

The only duty station he could transfer to was Vietnam.

He said at times he thought he might have made the wrong choice, i laughed and told him there was another guy that came through before him that said the same thing.

This guy had been there before and had been out of the service for several years.

One night in a bar he broke a pool stick over some guys head.

The judge gave him the chance to go back in the service on go to prison, he ended up back in Vietnam.

I told this bubby of mine that this guy said many times that maybe he had made the wrong chioice also, he laughed.

-
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
judge gave him the chance to go back in the service on go to prison, he ended up back in Vietnam.
several of my best buds in the Navy were in for that too....

i volunteered, i was really wanting to go to Iran...

i had worked for over year evening shift in a big hospital as bloodrawer and by all rights should have been medic. but i really got sold a bill of goods by the recruiter...
you really have to be in the military to know the truth of the book/move Catch-22...

it made no sense for me to be "utilised" the way i was, but the recruiter got a bonus for signing up rubes like mt to the job i ended up with.. i found that out later (of course).

one of my younger brothers best friends went navy medic and is now an MD... (not to worry i wouldn't have done that, i hate classroom school with a passion) who really wants to be shortarm inspector anyway? [Big Grin]
 
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
 
quote:
what's funny about this smear campaign? Do you inform your friends when these lies and half-truths are proven wrong?
What a short memory we have...this kind of thing NEVER happened while Bush was in office...did it Tex?

My laughter was directed toward the fact that this was OBVIOUS satire. No politician would even offer this as a viable plan.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
this kind of thing NEVER happened while Bush was in office...did it Tex?

it sure did, remember swiftboat? or how about when the Bush people got the rumour started in SC that McCain's adopted (non-white) daughter was actually his from an affair?

Rove was the King of this stuff.


i used to get emails all time about crap like the avenging eagle supposedly mentioned in the Koran, (not there, all you had to do was run a simple search thru an online Koran to find out)

i know for a fact that alot of them were coming thru the Churches email accounts cuz i knew the mailing lists....
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
glen beck is ranting right now about breast feeding tax credits...

this bill was proposed by one person early last year and died upon delivery...

June 25, 2009
Oregon Senator Proposes Breastfeeding Tax Credits

by Joseph Henchman

Senate Bill 1244, sponsored by Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), would create an income tax credit for "50 percent of the qualified breastfeeding promotion and support expenditures of the taxpayer for such taxable year." Such "support expenditures" would include:

(A) for breast pumps and other equipment specially designed to assist mothers who are employees of the taxpayer to breastfeed or express milk for their children but only if such pumps and equipment meet such standards (if any) prescribed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and

(B) for consultation services to the taxpayer or employees of the taxpayer relating to breastfeeding.

This is another example of why our tax code is so complex and difficult to navigate. No doubt breastfeeding has supporters who think it's a good idea. But rather than relying on persuasion, or even direct spending programs that have to prove themselves each year, many special interests resort to using the tax code to encourage or discourage their vision of the world. Subject to less oversight and scrutiny, credits clutter up the tax code and distort decision-making.


http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/24785.html

now we can go back and find that this bill has been proposed numerous times and has alwyas been DOA:


H.R. 2236:

Breastfeeding Promotion Act of 2007

To amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to protect breastfeeding by new mothers; to provide for a performance standard for breast pumps; and to provide tax incentives to encourage breastfeeding.

This bill never became law. This bill was proposed in a previous session of Congress. Sessions of Congress last two years, and at the end of each session all proposed bills and resolutions that haven't passed are cleared from the books. Members often reintroduce bills that did not come up for debate under a new number in the next session.



http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-2236

glen is just plain whacko. i wonder if he's looking for Nestle to be a sponsor? [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Pagan on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by SeekingFreedom:
quote:
what's funny about this smear campaign? Do you inform your friends when these lies and half-truths are proven wrong?
What a short memory we have...this kind of thing NEVER happened while Bush was in office...did it Tex?

My laughter was directed toward the fact that this was OBVIOUS satire. No politician would even offer this as a viable plan.

And my laughter is directed at a couple of your brethern on this board who bought it hook, line, sinker, and boat! Like CCM says, you just can't make this stuff up! [Big Grin]
 
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
 
Pagan, I get set you up hook, line, and sinker real easily. I could create a tackle box of bait just for you that would involve all sorts of leftisms!
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
holy crap!

look at this Obama didn't even come up with it;

McCain's Plan to Privatise Veterans' Health Care
Analysis by Aaron Glantz*

SAN FRANCISCO, Aug 21, 2008 (IPS) - If John McCain is elected the next U.S. president, wounded veterans could be in for a world of hurt.

On the campaign trail, the Republican's presumptive nominee has talked of a new mission for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and argued that veterans with non-combat medical problems should be given vouchers to receive care at private, for-profit hospitals - in other words, an end to the kind of universal health care the government has guaranteed veterans for generations.


http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=43626
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
and here too?

Jindal administration defends outsourcing of veterans' health-care services
Published: Monday, June 07, 2010, 4:56 PM Updated: Monday, June 07, 2010, 4:57 P

BATON ROUGE -- State Veterans Secretary Lane Carson fired back Monday at critics who say care in Louisiana's five war veterans' homes has suffered as a result of privatization efforts by Gov. Bobby Jindal's administration.

"The veterans are not losing out at all in the delivery of services," Carson told the Senate Finance Committee, referring to changes that are expected to save the state about $2 million a year by outsourcing pharmacy and physician services to private contractors.


http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/06/jindal_administration_defends.htm l

that is funny as hell...

i can't beleive that GOPs are even considering soemthing Obama was blasted for last year:

this guy too:

Ken Buck: Privatize the VA, except when I'm talking to Veterans
by: SSG_Dan
Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 08:06:16 AM MDT

( - promoted by Colorado Pols)

Ken Buck is clueless about Veterans issues.

In a state where we have 460,000 veterans, with 4 major military installations heavily involved in two major wars (including the Colorado National Guard) the GOP nominee has yet to put out a single substantive statement on where he stands on National Security and Veterans issues.

Buck STILL does not have any comprehensive National Security or Veterans issues posted on his website, or as a press release. It's not surprising, since he JUST formed a Veterans advisory committee (consisting of ONE Veteran) and is still casting about for support from the veterans community. His first "Meet and Greet" with Veterans was Monday. No announcement of policy was made at that event.

Well, let me clarify that - he did suck up to the Tea Party by stating that he would privatize the VA:

Buck: "Would a Veterans Administration hospital that is run by the private sector be better run then by the public sector? In my view, Yes."


http://coloradopols.com/diary/13840/ken-buck-privatize-the-va-except-when-im-tal king-to-veterans
 
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
 
Originally Posted By Glassman:

"On the campaign trail, the Republican's presumptive nominee has talked of a new mission for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and argued that veterans with non-combat medical problems should be given vouchers to receive care at private, for-profit hospitals - in other words, an end to the kind of universal health care the government has guaranteed veterans for generations."

-------------------------------------------------


Not really the same thing as the Presidents plan from what i read.

Not the same price tag on these type of conditions in general. (Non Combat)

Plus he is talking about a voucher system, which is an intersting idea, but would depend on how much each voucher was worth and how they would determine that.

That's a huge question knowing the VA and the Gov. system of determining things for Vets.

I would be happy to give examples of how they determine things and i just gasp sometimes.

Personally i would not chose the VA for major surgeries if i had my choice, which i do.

I have private insurance and could use the VA if i chose to.

Not to say their bad, to me there are better places for major medical problems in most cases.


-
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by IWISHIHAD:
Originally Posted By Glassman:

"On the campaign trail, the Republican's presumptive nominee has talked of a new mission for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and argued that veterans with non-combat medical problems should be given vouchers to receive care at private, for-profit hospitals - in other words, an end to the kind of universal health care the government has guaranteed veterans for generations."

-------------------------------------------------


Not really the same thing as the Presidents plan from what i read.

Not the same price tag on these type of conditions in general. (Non Combat)

Plus he is talking about a voucher system, which is an intersting idea, but would depend on how much each voucher was worth and how they would determine that.

That's a huge question knowing the VA and the Gov. system of determining things for Vets.

I would be happy to give examples of how they determine things and i just gasp sometimes.

Personally i would not chose the VA for major surgeries if i had my choice, which i do.

I have private insurance and could use the VA if i chose to.

Not to say their bad, to me there are better places for major medical problems in most cases.


-

Not really the same thing as the Presidents plan from what i read.

What plan?
 
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
 
The one at the very bottom of this page, some seem to call it that.

One seems to make some sense the other sucks, not a lot there from the different sources i have read.

They differ from what i read.

Or do you think he said none of this?


Kind of like Iraq and Afghanistan if you call them plans.

Sure seems like he is chasing his tail at the expense of our troops, very similiar to several past Presidents.

I sure do not like seeing all those dead and wounded soldiers that have served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Let alone the financial burden it has placed on this country and continues to and in the end looks like Iraq is not going to be any different than when we first got involved.

If it changes it's not going to be from our past presence there, it will be up to them to do something.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/17/veterans-groups-blast-obama-plan-priv ate-insurance-pay-service-related-health/


-
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by IWISHIHAD:
The one at the very bottom of this page, some seem to call it that.

One seems to make some sense the other sucks, not a lot there from the different sources i have read.

They differ from what i read.

Or do you think he said none of this?


Kind of like Iraq and Afghanistan if you call them plans.

Sure seems like he is chasing his tail at the expense of our troops, very similiar to several past Presidents.

I sure do not like seeing all those dead and wounded soldiers that have served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Let alone the financial burden it has placed on this country and continues to and in the end looks like Iraq is not going to be any different than when we first got involved.

If it changes it's not going to be from our past presence there, it will be up to them to do something.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/17/veterans-groups-blast-obama-plan-priv ate-insurance-pay-service-related-health/


-

Oh, I thought this had been settled. Apparently, *someone* in the Administration had an idea about shifting coverage, but once the idea got out the White House squashed it pretty quickly, within a coupla days. It was probably one of thousands of ideas floated during the whole run-up to the overall health care changes. If this is the same thing--if not, let me know. From what I've seen otherwise, it looks like they're trying to expand coverage/treatment for vets, especially for PTSD.

Anyway, see if this answers your question:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/veteranshealth.asp
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
i see your point Iwish, i shouldn't have said the same exact thing because i really meant that both sides are messing with a system that failed many Nam Era Vets and took years of hard work by alot of people to get better ( if not pretty good). Of course it can still be improved, but privatising it is no different from hiring Blackwater to fight and do security in N'Orleans... It's creepy IMO.
I wasn't joking when i said i though the VA is better than Kaiser. Kaiser is a good name for some of those health fascists in that HMO [Wink] I would strongly discourage anybody to join an HMO...(unless i don't like 'em [Big Grin] )

the VA has a model system for purchasing meds. When Bush passede the drug care medicaid package? They specifically forbid Medicare from using teh VA bulk purchasing program, and Jindal is privatising that to save money? I'm not sure who he is serving, but i doubt it's Vets.
 
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
 
Originally Posted by Tex:

Oh, I thought this had been settled. Apparently, *someone* in the Administration had an idea about shifting coverage, but once the idea got out the White House squashed it pretty quickly, within a coupla days. It was probably one of thousands of ideas floated during the whole run-up to the overall health care changes. If this is the same thing--if not, let me know. From what I've seen otherwise, it looks like they're trying to expand coverage/treatment for vets, especially for PTSD.

Anyway, see if this answers your question:

_________________________________________________

Your link of what was said is another take of what i am talking about.

A little softer version, but the key point or points are there.

The use of the word advisors is a nice way to soften, although probably true.

It sounds like the way they state it would be no problem.

Vets can use there own insurance and the insurance companies will be forced to pay the burden no matter how high.

Wish it worked that way and nobody felt the burden!(not a good word for vets)

The problem i see with the recent wars, Iraq, Afgan. and what might come, is that the weapons are changing some.

I am guessing here a little, but i think we are seeing a lot more injuries of the tbi nature, (brain) which are very costly short and long term.

Not to say there are not others that are bad also.

These type of injuries mimic what parents have to deal with when kids that have major learning disabilites because of brain damage.

Approx. 12 years ago i had a good friend that had his son go down an elevator shaft a lot of stories and lived.

The cost in the first 5 months was well over 1 million and the costs keep going, not only for medical, but for nursing home also.

So if you shift this cost to the private sector without hugh premiums, who's wants them and how do you allow for them without the gov. paying anyhow.

I love the idea of Veterans having this option of going to private doctors, but there would have to be a voucher system or something similiar that the Gov. would pick up the tab either for the insurance or the bill.

Other wise as stated, employers are going to be very hesident to hire if paying their insurance.


My fear as stated before, is that they would under voucher the injuries and you would be back in the same boat anyway.

Doesn't seem like there is anyway to get the gov. out of the VA. and be fair to all sides, especially the Vet.


We know it isn't going to be free one way or the other.

Bottom line here for me is that we are trying to avoid the thing we shoud be talking more about.

The way to save this nation money is not to concentrate on how to spread these war medical costs.

But rather to first concentrate on how to get us out of the war and keep us out, unless they are entirely necessary.

Then move on to immigration and all the fraud that goes on in the disability and unemployment system related to this.

Then move on to imports etc.

We worry about the small stuff money wise, to differ from dealing with the bigger problems that would set this country on the right track.

I know that other Presidents help create the problems, but we need one that jumps in to change it.

I am tired of hearing who created the problems, i was hoping the next one would solve them.


-


-
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
Well, I understand we more or less had to go to Afghanistan following 9/11. But once it was clear we missed Bin Laden, then why stay?

When a president inherits a war, that's tough. Not sure how you pull everybody out, safely, without leaving a bunch of gear for the enemy.

Myself I wouldn't insert ground troops anywhere unless absolutely necessary. If we wanted to help an oppressed group, we could provide air support and drop supplies. Wars are for fighting armies, controlling territory. Not endless skirmishes with guys without uniforms who can't be distinguished from civilians. Those are criminals, not enemy soldiers.
 
Posted by Pagan on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
Well, I understand we more or less had to go to Afghanistan following 9/11. But once it was clear we missed Bin Laden, then why stay?

When a president inherits a war, that's tough. Not sure how you pull everybody out, safely, without leaving a bunch of gear for the enemy.

Myself I wouldn't insert ground troops anywhere unless absolutely necessary. If we wanted to help an oppressed group, we could provide air support and drop supplies. Wars are for fighting armies, controlling territory. Not endless skirmishes with guys without uniforms who can't be distinguished from civilians. Those are criminals, not enemy soldiers.

Impressive Tex. That is one of the most cogent and succinct analysis of the Afghan conflict that I have read anywhere. And I agree completely with your analysis.
 
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
 
Originally Quoted By Glassman:

"wasn't joking when i said i though the VA is better than Kaiser. Kaiser is a good name for some of those health fascists in that HMO I would strongly discourage anybody to join an HMO...(unless i don't like 'em )"

_________________________________________________


I have never heard anything good about Kaiser from people i know, except they are cheaper.

There use to be many jokes out there about Kaiser care, don't know if they are still floating around.

Maybe they are better these days, not the jokes, Kaiser.

As far as the VA, i am not sure why there is a little bit of a lost link there.

They are a training hospital, as are many.

But there is definately a differance between lets say UCLA and the VA.

Maybe the ratios are different between how many doctors supervise the trainees.

When you go to the VA in the speciality departments, you usually get a trainee or i believe they call them interns.

Then if there is a problem, you might see the main doctor, but not usually.

Vets doctors visits are suppose to be overseen by the main doctor, but somehow you are passing information from a second to a third party which often losses a lot.

Plus the person writting the report and diagnosing the medical problem does not have the years of experiance to help make the best diagnosis, since he or she is still just training.


They are also involved in the surgeries, i don't know if the ratios and procedures are the same in surgery.

I guess vets are under so it would be hard to know. I have never had a surgery there so i don't really know, although i have heard some people talk about it.


-
 
Posted by The Bigfoot on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by SeekingFreedom:
quote:
what's funny about this smear campaign? Do you inform your friends when these lies and half-truths are proven wrong?
What a short memory we have...this kind of thing NEVER happened while Bush was in office...did it Tex?

My laughter was directed toward the fact that this was OBVIOUS satire. No politician would even offer this as a viable plan.

hmmmmmmmm....I am sure I am setting myself up here but I honestly don't remember any outright lies about prominent republicans coming from democratic sources. There was the thing that got Dan Rather fired....but even that has not been confirmed was a lie. Could you jog my memory seek? What lies did the Dem's tell about Bush and the Republicans during his term in office?
 
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
 
http://www.factcheck.org/kerry_falsely_claims_bush_plans_to_cut.html

http://www.factcheck.org/funding_for_veterans_up_27_but_democrats.html

http://www.factcheck.org/dean_wrong_on_bush_tax_cut.html

http://www.factcheck.org/article162.html

http://www.factcheck.org/a_false_ad_about_assault_weapons.html

I'll find more examples if that isn't enough, Big. [Razz]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
[Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
Contrary to what the ad clearly implies, any weapon that can fire 300 rounds per minute remains illegal for civilians to own without specific clearance by the US Department of Justice.

LOL... that's hardly the way i'd put it..

you can own one if you apply for the proper papers and they cannot deny you the ownership of one without good reason. Those reasons are defined very clearly by law.

tell me SF, what's the differnce between Soros and the Annenberg Foundation? Annenberg is well-known to support many Liberal causes too...
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
It is a common misconception[3] that an individual must have a "Class 3 License" in order to own NFA firearms. An FFL is required as a prerequisite to become a Special Occupation Taxpayer (SOT): Class 1 importer, Class 2 manufacturer or Class 3 dealer in NFA firearms, not an individual owner. Legal possession of an NFA firearm by an individual requires transfer of registration within the NFA registry. An individual owner does not need to be an NFA dealer to buy Title II firearms. The sale and purchase of NFA firearms is, however, heavily taxed and regulated, as follows:

All NFA items must be registered with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). Private owners wishing to purchase an NFA item must obtain approval from the ATF, obtain a signature from the county sheriff or city or town chief of police (not necessarily permission), pass an extensive background check to include submitting a photograph and finger prints, fully register the firearm, receive ATF written permission before moving the firearm across state lines, and pay a tax. The request to transfer ownership of an NFA item is made on an ATF Form 4.[4]

NFA items may also be transferred to corporations (or other legal entities such as a trust). When the paperwork to request transfer of an NFA item is initiated by an officer of a corporation, a signature from local law enforcement is not required, and fingerprint cards and photographs do not need to be submitted with the transfer request. Therefore, an individual who lives in a location where the chief law enforcement officer will not sign a transfer form can still own an NFA item if he or she owns a corporation. This method has downsides, since it is the corporation (and not the principal) that owns the firearm. Thus, if the corporation ever dissolves, it must transfer its NFA firearms to the owners. This event would be considered a new transfer and would be subject to a new transfer tax.
US National Firearms Act Stamp, affixed to transfer forms to indicate tax paid.

The tax for privately manufacturing any NFA firearm (other than machineguns, which are generally illegal to manufacture) is $200. Transferring requires a $200 tax for all NFA firearms except AOW's, for which the transfer tax is $5 (although the manufacturing tax remains $200).

Dealers who pay a special yearly occupational tax are exempt from these taxes for transfers to or from other special occupational taxpayers (SOT's). Only a Class 2 manufacturer can “make and register” a machine gun –– and that gun becomes a Post May-19th, 1986 Gun –– salable only to police, State, local, Federal-Government, and the military. Low volume Class 2 manufacturers (those with sales under $500,000.00) pay the $500.00 per year SOT tax, while high sales volume Class 2’s pay the full $1,000.00 SOT “ticket” price.

Transferable machine guns made or registered before May-19th 1986 are worth far more than their original, pre-1986 value. And items like registered “auto-sears,” “lightning-links,” trigger-packs, trunnions, and other “combination of parts” registered as machineguns before the aforementioned date are often worth nearly as much as a full registered machine gun. For instance, as of September 2008, a transferable M16 rifle costs approximately $11,000 to $18,000, while a transferable "lightning-link" for the AR-15 can sell for $8,000 to $10,000. New manufacture M-16s sell to law enforcement and the military for around $600 to $1000.



the fact that Dubya said he was willing to sign a new assault weapon ban (another one of those poltical timebombs) should have told it all to real Conservatives [Wink]

so here we have tax cuts with a time delay fuse and unConstitutional Weapons bans... one from each party..

fire 'em all. these people are all crooks.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
When the paperwork to request transfer of an NFA item is initiated by an officer of a corporation, a signature from local law enforcement is not required, and fingerprint cards and photographs do not need to be submitted with the transfer request.

this sounds like real good test case idea to take to SCOTUS.

This seems to me to grant more rights to corps than to individuals.
 
Posted by IWISHIHAD on :
 
Originally Posted By Tex:

"Well, I understand we more or less had to go to Afghanistan following 9/11. But once it was clear we missed Bin Laden, then why stay?

When a president inherits a war, that's tough. Not sure how you pull everybody out, safely, without leaving a bunch of gear for the enemy.

Myself I wouldn't insert ground troops anywhere unless absolutely necessary. If we wanted to help an oppressed group, we could provide air support and drop supplies. Wars are for fighting armies, controlling territory. Not endless skirmishes with guys without uniforms who can't be distinguished from civilians. Those are criminals, not enemy soldiers."
_________________________________________________

I am not really sure we were that heavily into Afghanistan to really feel like it was so large as to not pull out anytime.

Iraq a little different, but i felt we were there way to long before getting out major numbers of our troops.

I really wonder if the public had known where these wars were going under Obama if he would have been voted in.

Voters stayed away from McCain for fear he might do something similiar, me included.


Most of our recent Presidents and their advisors seem to be very slow learners, 60+ years doesn't seem to be enough time.

You don't increase troops as with Afganistan especially when it pretty obvious to most how we will be fighting there.

As far as how they fight, that doesn't appear like it's going to change in Afghanistan.

At times i feel these Presidents are looking for that prize deer and if they get it they will be remembered as the greatest President.

In recent years i guess the prize deer would be Bin Laden.

Not really sure it would make much difference though, what i am pretty sure of is that there is someone right behind him to take over.

Your analysis of war these days seems like it would be like the old gunfight in which two guys walk into the street then count to three and the best man wins.

Unfortunately in recent wars the bad guys shoot at two and if we shoot at one the government and many people are there to hang us, either way were dead.


-
 
Posted by Ric on :
 
I always love the talks about tax cuts anyways. A shell game that people believe. Their is no tax cuts in the end and the last one cost the Americans a fortune. The government has bills and if you can't reduce the bills you can';t cut taxes. So the play a paper game with naive people. They tell you that they are cutting taxes. then they give the states less money. The States can't afford the lose so the cut money to the counties. So now the local government has to come up with new money for police, schools and stuff we really need. So property taxes increase or some other hidden tax. One of the best new hidden taxes is red light or speed cameras. Cities are raking in the money and they don't have to call it a tax.

The only thing that trickle down economics does is trickle the taxes to local government and they tend to screw you even worse
 
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
 
Yeah, but things like the death tax are going too far Ric. The federal estate tax will hit 55% on everything over 1 million dollars. Over half of your inheritance? What on earth justifies that?

It is defined by the Internal Revenue Service as “a tax on your right to transfer property at your death"


"I am from the government and I'm here to help."
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by CashCowMoo:
Yeah, but things like the death tax are going too far Ric. The federal estate tax will hit 55% on everything over 1 million dollars. Over half of your inheritance? What on earth justifies that?

It is defined by the Internal Revenue Service as “a tax on your right to transfer property at your death"


"I am from the government and I'm here to help."

and it's double taxation cash...

but i know a lot trust fund brats that got around it...
 
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
 
Saw a quote today that hits the nail:


"The spirit of the Obama campaign hasn't carried over to the Obama presidency."
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by CashCowMoo:
Saw a quote today that hits the nail:


"The spirit of the Obama campaign hasn't carried over to the Obama presidency."

Think that might have anything to do with the millions of dollars the Koch's and their "foundations" have spent?
 
Posted by Ric on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by CashCowMoo:
Saw a quote today that hits the nail:


"The spirit of the Obama campaign hasn't carried over to the Obama presidency."

I can agree with that statement. I think Obama had some good ideas but he doesn't fight for them. I think he may be kin to Jimmy Carter. But I do know one thing, it would be a whole lot worse right now if McCain would have been President. That would have been like electing Bush to another term. The great Presidents not only knew what they wanted they seemed to get it even if there had to be some compromise.
 
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
 
Oh I agree on the McCain issue, I just could not bring myself to vote for him in 2008.
 


© 1997 - 2021 Allstocks.com. All rights reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2