|
Given the deep/deepening recession, do you think it was wise
|
|
Topic Started: Nov 30 2013, 10:46 PM (3,483 Views)
|
|
Pat
|
Dec 5 2013, 06:25 PM
Post #81
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 31,086
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #200
- Joined:
- Apr 13, 2011
|
So Ken, tell me what you think about a leader who has met ONCE with the cabinet head that oversees the implementation of his signature accomplishment? Quite the leader huh?
I'm telling you guys, the more that come to the surface the more incredible I find having this man for president. Yea I know, "go get another beer Pat." Boy were you guys played. Oh and be sure to attack the source.
A stunning new study unveiled on Fox News' Hannity finds that President Barack Obama’s White House calendar records just one face-to-face meeting between Obama and his Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in the more than three-and-a-half years leading up to the disastrous Obamacare launch.
The startling statistic comes from a new Government Accountability Institute (GAI) analysis of Obama’s own official White House calendar, as well as the Politico presidential calendar, and raises new questions about Obama’s executive leadership and management throughout the implementation of his singular legislative achievement.
More alarming still, the president’s schedule lists 277 private meetings with 16 other Cabinet secretaries in the same time span from Obamacare’s March 23, 2010 signing to November 30, 2013. Why Obama would devote so little face time to the person tasked with implementing what he calls his “most important initiative” is presently unclear.
According to the GAI report, technically, the official White House calendar contains zero meetings with Sebelius, as it only reaches back to July 12, 2010. GAI researchers then used the Politico presidential calendar to assess listings between Obamacare’s signing (March 23, 2010) and the first date listed on the White House’s calendar (July 12, 2010). The study also analyzed the entirety of the Politico calendar from March 23, 2010 to November 30, 2013 and found a single mention of an April 21, 2010 joint meeting between Obama, then-Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, and Sebelius.
|
|
|
| |
|
Mountainrivers
|
Dec 5 2013, 09:07 PM
Post #82
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 33,547
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Mar 24, 2008
|
- Banandangees
- Dec 5 2013, 05:18 PM
- Mountainrivers
- Dec 5 2013, 08:33 AM
- Pat
- Dec 5 2013, 06:33 AM
- campingken
- Dec 5 2013, 06:02 AM
My health insurance is great so in the spirit of conservatism lets go back to the old system and get rid of Medicare while we are at it. Old people should die and stop being a burden on the young if they didn't save enough for those $500,000+ heart surgeries. They sure as heck didn't contribute enough to Medicare to cover these type of procedures.
You mention that nearly every time we discus this Ken so I'm taking you up on it. Since we are playing shoulda, coulda, woulda. I will forgoe both medicare and social security, what I want in exchange is a check for $2,500,000 for lost investment opportunities had I had the money invested elsewhere. Are we on?
Yeah, right! You only wish you could have $2.5 mill made on that money. You can't possible know that, so saying it is ridiculous. Besides, it's that old it's "all me" attitude that you have. What you got for that money is guaranteed health care whether you can afford your own health care or not. Most people can't afford health care in old age and moral people wouldn't deny that to them. You constantly amaze me with the lack of empathy you exhibit toward anyone other than you or your family. Pat, it appears to me that MR is in total disagreement with Campken on this one. But, he unfairly (IMO) notices your seemingly lack of empathy while totally ignoring Campken"s obvious lack of it. I suppose its that sticking together at most costs by those on the Left. Campken apparently has lost that leftish show of compassion for "the weak" that we hear so much about, and possibly never has had it to begin with, and is actually ready to discriminate against the elderly, while MR still does maintains his empathy for his elderly brothers and sisters. I'm not sure how Sea would feel about Campken's discriminatory lack of empathy for a segment of our population, but probably won't comment on it either due to that cross border liberal loyalty. But Sea knows one thing I'm sure, while he travels south through the U.S. this winter and during his return home in the Spring, he probably won't feel a need to put a distance, for personal safety purposes, between him and our elderly population but might definitely avoid various of the younger population areas. I would have felt better if with MR's show of compassion for the elderly, which Campken obviously lacks, if he would have mentioned, in some context, Campken's, I guess we can say "blatant," obvious lack of compassion and discrimination for folks MR's age. He totally ignored it. That's not like him. But all that being said, Reid and that whole crew are total hypocrites. He was for his staff being on the same healthcare system as the general population before he was against it. When you're special, your special. But that's the way economic populism usually works. Everybody is "equalized;" everybody except the elite leaders in equalization management. Being the king of sarcasm, you are obviously unable to recognize your own talent in someone else.
|
|
|
| |
|
Sea Dog
|
Dec 5 2013, 09:38 PM
Post #83
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 13,849
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #46
- Joined:
- Apr 17, 2008
|
Since I have been drawn into the discussion, I am curios as to how much Pat would have paid into Medicare and SS.
The reason being, I am wondering how much investment it takes to gain a profit of 2.5 million.
|
|
|
| |
|
Banandangees
|
Dec 5 2013, 09:59 PM
Post #84
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 20,839
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #23
- Joined:
- Mar 14, 2008
|
- Mountainrivers
- Dec 5 2013, 09:07 PM
- Banandangees
- Dec 5 2013, 05:18 PM
- Mountainrivers
- Dec 5 2013, 08:33 AM
- Pat
- Dec 5 2013, 06:33 AM
- campingken
- Dec 5 2013, 06:02 AM
My health insurance is great so in the spirit of conservatism lets go back to the old system and get rid of Medicare while we are at it. Old people should die and stop being a burden on the young if they didn't save enough for those $500,000+ heart surgeries. They sure as heck didn't contribute enough to Medicare to cover these type of procedures.
You mention that nearly every time we discus this Ken so I'm taking you up on it. Since we are playing shoulda, coulda, woulda. I will forgoe both medicare and social security, what I want in exchange is a check for $2,500,000 for lost investment opportunities had I had the money invested elsewhere. Are we on?
Yeah, right! You only wish you could have $2.5 mill made on that money. You can't possible know that, so saying it is ridiculous. Besides, it's that old it's "all me" attitude that you have. What you got for that money is guaranteed health care whether you can afford your own health care or not. Most people can't afford health care in old age and moral people wouldn't deny that to them. You constantly amaze me with the lack of empathy you exhibit toward anyone other than you or your family. Pat, it appears to me that MR is in total disagreement with Campken on this one. But, he unfairly (IMO) notices your seemingly lack of empathy while totally ignoring Campken"s obvious lack of it. I suppose its that sticking together at most costs by those on the Left. I would have felt better if with MR's show of compassion for the elderly, which Campken obviously lacks, if he would have mentioned, in some context, Campken's, I guess we can say "blatant," obvious lack of compassion and discrimination for folks MR's age. He totally ignored it. That's not like him.
Being the king of sarcasm, you are obviously unable to recognize your own talent in someone else.
But why such criticism of Pat while totally ignoring how Campken's position on the elderly (above) differs so greatly from yours?
|
|
|
| |
|
colo_crawdad
|
Dec 5 2013, 10:06 PM
Post #85
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 39,310
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #4
- Joined:
- Feb 16, 2008
|
- Pat
- Dec 5 2013, 06:25 PM
So Ken, tell me what you think about a leader who has met ONCE with the cabinet head that oversees the implementation of his signature accomplishment?  Quite the leader huh? I'm telling you guys, the more that come to the surface the more incredible I find having this man for president. Yea I know, "go get another beer Pat." Boy were you guys played. Oh and be sure to attack the source. A stunning new study unveiled on Fox News' Hannity finds that President Barack Obama’s White House calendar records just one face-to-face meeting between Obama and his Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in the more than three-and-a-half years leading up to the disastrous Obamacare launch.
The startling statistic comes from a new Government Accountability Institute (GAI) analysis of Obama’s own official White House calendar, as well as the Politico presidential calendar, and raises new questions about Obama’s executive leadership and management throughout the implementation of his singular legislative achievement.
More alarming still, the president’s schedule lists 277 private meetings with 16 other Cabinet secretaries in the same time span from Obamacare’s March 23, 2010 signing to November 30, 2013. Why Obama would devote so little face time to the person tasked with implementing what he calls his “most important initiative” is presently unclear.
According to the GAI report, technically, the official White House calendar contains zero meetings with Sebelius, as it only reaches back to July 12, 2010. GAI researchers then used the Politico presidential calendar to assess listings between Obamacare’s signing (March 23, 2010) and the first date listed on the White House’s calendar (July 12, 2010). The study also analyzed the entirety of the Politico calendar from March 23, 2010 to November 30, 2013 and found a single mention of an April 21, 2010 joint meeting between Obama, then-Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, and Sebelius.
WOW! Yet ANOTHER Faux News bash Obama hit piece. What a surprise! No surprise about who is distributing it on this forum, though.
|
|
|
| |
|
Mountainrivers
|
Dec 5 2013, 10:23 PM
Post #86
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 33,547
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Mar 24, 2008
|
- Banandangees
- Dec 5 2013, 09:59 PM
- Mountainrivers
- Dec 5 2013, 09:07 PM
- Banandangees
- Dec 5 2013, 05:18 PM
- Mountainrivers
- Dec 5 2013, 08:33 AM
- Pat
- Dec 5 2013, 06:33 AM
- campingken
- Dec 5 2013, 06:02 AM
My health insurance is great so in the spirit of conservatism lets go back to the old system and get rid of Medicare while we are at it. Old people should die and stop being a burden on the young if they didn't save enough for those $500,000+ heart surgeries. They sure as heck didn't contribute enough to Medicare to cover these type of procedures.
You mention that nearly every time we discus this Ken so I'm taking you up on it. Since we are playing shoulda, coulda, woulda. I will forgoe both medicare and social security, what I want in exchange is a check for $2,500,000 for lost investment opportunities had I had the money invested elsewhere. Are we on?
Yeah, right! You only wish you could have $2.5 mill made on that money. You can't possible know that, so saying it is ridiculous. Besides, it's that old it's "all me" attitude that you have. What you got for that money is guaranteed health care whether you can afford your own health care or not. Most people can't afford health care in old age and moral people wouldn't deny that to them. You constantly amaze me with the lack of empathy you exhibit toward anyone other than you or your family. Pat, it appears to me that MR is in total disagreement with Campken on this one. But, he unfairly (IMO) notices your seemingly lack of empathy while totally ignoring Campken"s obvious lack of it. I suppose its that sticking together at most costs by those on the Left. I would have felt better if with MR's show of compassion for the elderly, which Campken obviously lacks, if he would have mentioned, in some context, Campken's, I guess we can say "blatant," obvious lack of compassion and discrimination for folks MR's age. He totally ignored it. That's not like him.
Being the king of sarcasm, you are obviously unable to recognize your own talent in someone else.
But why such criticism of Pat while totally ignoring how Campken's position on the elderly (above) differs so greatly from yours? Since you understood neither Ken's post nor mine, I'll explain it to you real slow so you can "get" it.
Ken's post was sarcastic, Pat's was not.
|
|
|
| |
|
Brewster
|
Dec 5 2013, 10:26 PM
Post #87
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 32,223
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #105
- Joined:
- Jul 16, 2008
|
FOX is well known for its tendency to be economical with the truth, (the proven-to-be-a-lie-before-it-was-finished-being-told story of an 18 month old not being covered by Obamacare one recent example) but Pat's OP is beyond stupid.
You've really got be buried up to your eyeballs in Right Wing wishful thinking to believe that one.
Edited by Brewster, Dec 5 2013, 10:34 PM.
|
|
|
| |
|
Banandangees
|
Dec 5 2013, 10:51 PM
Post #88
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 20,839
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #23
- Joined:
- Mar 14, 2008
|
- Mountainrivers
- Dec 5 2013, 10:23 PM
- Quote:
-
Being the king of sarcasm, you are obviously unable to recognize your own talent in someone else.
- Quote:
-
But why such criticism of Pat while totally ignoring how Campken's position on the elderly (above) differs so greatly from yours?
Since you understood neither Ken's post nor mine, I'll explain it to you real slow so you can "get" it. Ken's post was sarcastic, Pat's was not.
Oh, I think it just the opposite MR. Kens post, while maybe being sarcastic was serious, he has posted quite a few very similar attitudes toward the elderly and SS in the past in terms of what they are deserving of regarding entitlements from the government and has expressed his opinion that they, because of age, should move way to the back of the line in consideration because of "their bleeding of funds" that should go to those yet to be worthy of.
Your and Ken's post aren't very difficult to understand at all MR. You just chose to ignore what Campken posted while criticizing Pat, who was more likely to be using a little sarcasm in his "for instance" example.
|
|
|
| |
|
Banandangees
|
Dec 5 2013, 10:54 PM
Post #89
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 20,839
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #23
- Joined:
- Mar 14, 2008
|
Why do such knowledgeable people stay on a forum where stupid people just don't see the light of their truth?
|
|
|
| |
|
Banandangees
|
Dec 5 2013, 11:01 PM
Post #90
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 20,839
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #23
- Joined:
- Mar 14, 2008
|
- Banandangees
- Dec 5 2013, 10:51 PM
- Mountainrivers
- Dec 5 2013, 10:23 PM
- Quote:
-
Being the king of sarcasm, you are obviously unable to recognize your own talent in someone else.
- Quote:
-
But why such criticism of Pat while totally ignoring how Campken's position on the elderly (above) differs so greatly from yours?
Since you understood neither Ken's post nor mine, I'll explain it to you real slow so you can "get" it. Ken's post was sarcastic, Pat's was not.
Oh, I think it just the opposite MR. Kens post, while maybe being sarcastic was serious, he has posted quite a few very similar attitudes toward the elderly and SS in the past in terms of what they are deserving of regarding entitlements from the government and has expressed his opinion that they, because of age, should move way to the back of the line in consideration because of "their bleeding of funds" that should go to those yet to be worthy of. ( addendum: while you were quite clear about your statement which suggested (if looked at) was describing Camken's statement of lack of concern for the elderly as immoral.) Your and Ken's post aren't very difficult to understand at all MR. You just chose to ignore what Campken posted while criticizing Pat, who was more likely to be using a little sarcasm in his "for instance" example.
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|