Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
PromoteFacebookTwitter!
RE: The President That Hates His Country By Joan Swirsky
11/19/2013 4:59:53 PM
LIKE if you think Charles Barkley makes sense!
+1
RE: The President That Hates His Country By Joan Swirsky
11/20/2013 2:37:50 PM
Poll: Romney Would Beat Obama in Presidential Rematch

Image: Poll: Romney Would Beat Obama in Presidential Rematch
Image Below Headline End
Tuesday, 19 Nov 2013
By Melanie Batley
Just one year after President Barack Obama roundly defeated Mitt Romney in the 2012 presidential election, a new poll has found that a rematch today would put Romney in the Oval Office.

According to a
Washington Post-ABC News poll of 1,006 adults conducted Nov. 14-17, 49 percent would back Romney compared to 45 percent who would support Obama, a flip in the 4-point popular vote loss Romney had in 2012.

The results reflect just how much support the president has lost as a result of the Obamacare debacle which has undermined public confidence in both the president and the viability of the new healthcare law.

The survey also indicates that Obama's biggest loss of support comes from women, the young, the less-educated, the poor, and among liberals.

In 2012, the president beat Romney among women voters by 11 points, but if the election were today, he would lead by only 1 point. His support among young voters has dropped from 18 percent to 2 percent since the election last year, while those with less than a college degree flipped from giving him a lead of 4 points to a deficit of 9 points.

Perhaps most surprising is that support among liberals for the president has dropped to 59 percent from 75 percent, with roughly 20 percent now saying they would vote for Romney if the election was held today.

The Post points out, however, that the survey findings cannot be definitive since there are other factors that affect the outcome of a race, including margin of error in polling and the fact that the Electoral College — not the popular vote — elects the president.

Nevertheless, an 8 point swing in the popular vote toward Romney would have given him an additional 125 electoral votes, allowing him to win the race by 331-207, or virtually the same margin as Obama's 332-206 win.

Related Story


+1
RE: The President That Hates His Country By Joan Swirsky
11/20/2013 3:58:39 PM
You know, I can't help but say I told you so to those who were trying to blame the Republicans for trying to take away from their Medicare. I wonder just what they're thinking now with the truth staring them in the face. The Obama administration's going to take billions from the Medicare program and when that happens I wonder what they'll say then?? It would be funny if it were not so sad and affecting many innocent people. And as the saying goes, you ain't seen nothing yet.

Administration program cuts Medicare patients off from their existing medical suppliers
11/19/2013

The Obama administration implemented a competitive bidding program that causes many Medicare patients to lose their existing health equipment providers, forcing seniors to rely on out-of-state companies that increase their medical costs and keep them waiting for essential services like oxygen.

Between 80 and 90 percent of previously-eligible providers of medical equipment and services are now excluded from serving Medicare patients in bid areas, according to figures compiled by the nonpartisan homecare advocacy group People for Quality Care (PFQC) and provided to The Daily Caller.

“Prior to competitive bidding, providers were chosen from a long list of Medicare-eligible providers. Not anymore,” PFQC executive Kelly Turner told TheDC.

And while the competitive bidding, which ignores a host of other factors in pursuit of the lowest offer, saves some money up front, anecdotal evidence suggests it may end up costing more as seniors without proper preventive care end up using more emergency room services.

The Obama administration has defended its implementation of the cost-cutting “Competitive Bidding Program for Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics and Supplies,” which was signed into law by President Bush in 2003 but only partially implemented in 2011 and more extensively implemented in the last several months over bipartisan opposition.

The program saves money for the federal government by only allowing low-bid companies to provide Medicare patients with devices, supplies, and other services.

PFQC’s telephone hotline has already yielded more than 2,500 complaints from Medicare patients losing their existing equipment and services providers and having to switch to government-contracted companies that are out of state and unable to respond in a timely manner to patient requests. Additionally, many Medicare-eligible providers are now going out of business due to the competitive bidding program.

A North Carolina woman with breathing problems who registered a complaint with PFQC said that she lost her longtime medical devices and supplies provider when it did not receive a government contract under competitive bidding. The woman now has a new provider 40 miles away from her home, and she waits up to two weeks for her supplies. Additionally, she and her elderly husband lost their “hardship case” discount when they switched providers, significantly raising their medical costs.




+1
RE: The President That Hates His Country By Joan Swirsky
11/20/2013 4:03:51 PM

normal

Remember the good old days, five years ago, before Obama established the “new” normal?

This was a time of white presidents you could criticize without being attacked as a racist. For me and my fellow black conservatives, it was a time when we wouldn’t be called an Uncle Tom because we didn’t support “the brotha.”

I long for the good old days, when gasoline prices passed $3 a gallon and I screamed at President George W. Bush from high Heaven. Gas prices settled below $2 a gallon before Bush left office, and the Left said it was because the Bush family killed Iraqi’s for oil.

Today, gas prices remain at least a dollar above “Bush gas,” and Leftists are spiking the football.

“SEE, I told you gas wouldn’t stay at $5 a gallon, fool!”

I don’t think Obama will remind people that he DIDN’T inherit that mess!

As for his minions, there is no talk of Obama killing Iraqis for oil, or even talk about how the price of gas impacts most Americans more than taxes. Just “business as usual,” which is to try to distract the low-information voters from reality.

We’ve spent trillions of dollars to get unemployment under 6 percent, and we are nowhere close to that level of unemployment. Our debt spirals in an upward vortex, we are spending $1 trillion more than the biggest spender in history, George W. Bush, and we continue to put people on welfare in record numbers.

Just business as usual for those protecting Barack Obama and his insane fiscal policies.

Princeton professor and economist, Paul Krugman wrote this op ed in the NY Times, titled A Permanent Slump:

Spend any time around monetary officials and one word you’ll hear a lot is “normalization.” Most though not all such officials accept that now is no time to be tightfisted, that for the time being credit must be easy and interest rates low. Still, the men in dark suits look forward eagerly to the day when they can go back to their usual job, snatching away the punch bowl whenever the party gets going.

But what if the world we’ve been living in for the past five years is the new normal? What if depression-like conditions are on track to persist, not for another year or two, but for decades?

Krugman is no right-wing extremist, and he sees the writing on the wall. In his op-ed, he references Larry Summers, the Charles W. Eliot University Professor and President Emeritus at Harvard University. Summers served as the 71st Secretary of the Treasury for President Clinton and the Director of the National Economic Council for President Obama.

So again, these are people who are firmly in the pro-Obama camp, yet they are letting the cat out of the bag.

These economists want “normalization,” because the opposite of normalization is chaos. And under Obama, America is in economic (and other) chaos.

The concern of these economists is not the impact of Obama’s policies today, but the possible impact America will experience for DECADES! You can’t shift an economy this large on a dime for the better. But as Obama has proven, you can shift it quickly for the worse.

Leftists won’t admit it, but Obama has undoubtedly engendered the worst economic period in American history, wounds hidden only by clever government marketing (lying about the data), and Obama’s ability to print money.
+1
RE: The President That Hates His Country By Joan Swirsky
11/20/2013 5:06:36 PM

+1


facebook
Like us on Facebook!