The latest revelations on vote stealing by the Billionaires.. by investigative reporter Greg Palast.
The information in this book will either leave you in complete disbelief or will make you sick to your stomach... or both.
A Must Read - so click on the 'Get it Now' button below.
Also - for great tips on making sure your vote is actually counted download
7 Ways to Beat the Ballot Bandits
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
Quote a Ultra-Right Blogger - Really? REALLY?
I didn't think I'd ever quote one of the most conservative bloggers I can find - Erick Erickson of Redstate.com While I don't agree with this ultra-conservative blogger,
I do find this analysis strangely... accurate.
I do find this analysis strangely... accurate.
Why Mitt Romney Will Not Beat Barack Obama
You’d think that given the economy, jobs, and the present angst about the direction of the country that the GOP would have an easy path to victory. You would be wrong.
...
Mitt Romney, on the other hand, is a man devoid of any principles other than getting himself elected. As much as the American public does not like Barack Obama, they loath a man so fueled with ambition that he will say or do anything to get himself elected. Mitt Romney is that man.
Monday, November 5, 2012
Voting disputes: A perfect storm in Ohio and Florida?
The LA Times reports that legal fights already have erupted over early voting in Ohio and Florida, and storm damage poses challenges in New York and New Jersey.
Republican Governors in both Ohio and Florida are trying their best to disqualify early voter ballots.
So far, the legal challenges have been coming down on the side of the voters, but the challenges will continue well past November 6th. Is this what voting has come down to? - It's like a 3rd world country.
If we have anything to learn from this election cycle, is that the voting process needs reform.
Republican Governors in both Ohio and Florida are trying their best to disqualify early voter ballots.
So far, the legal challenges have been coming down on the side of the voters, but the challenges will continue well past November 6th. Is this what voting has come down to? - It's like a 3rd world country.
If we have anything to learn from this election cycle, is that the voting process needs reform.
Sunday, November 4, 2012
Climate Change - Leaders Lead
We cannot risk having leaders in Washington who turn a blind eye to the
threat of climate change and the devastating impact it's having across
the nation.
It's time to act on climate change.
It's time to act on climate change.
Reflections - A reminder of where we've come from
We all tend to have a short memory about current events, and the advertising blitz of the current political campaigns makes it even harder to put our economic situation in perspective.
It is easy to be dissatisfied with the current state of the economy when we don't clearly remember just how close to a total financial collapse we were. In 2008, for Thanksgiving, 800,000 people lost their jobs. In the next month, for Christmas, 800,000 more people lost their jobs. Thousands of our troops were dying in Iraq and Afghanistan fighting two unfunded (and off budget) wars. The country was failing, the stock market was in a free fall, and a de-regulated Wall Street had lost Billions of dollars while defrauding investors with exotic derivative investments based on bad home loans. No one wanted to see or hear from President Bush, with good reason.
Four years later, not a single Republican candidate, even through the entire primary cycle, would dare mention the former President's name.
When I reflect back, I see just how much President Obama has accomplished, and knowing that there is far more to be done, I am proud of what he has done so far. Here's a video that will put it all together for you.
It is easy to be dissatisfied with the current state of the economy when we don't clearly remember just how close to a total financial collapse we were. In 2008, for Thanksgiving, 800,000 people lost their jobs. In the next month, for Christmas, 800,000 more people lost their jobs. Thousands of our troops were dying in Iraq and Afghanistan fighting two unfunded (and off budget) wars. The country was failing, the stock market was in a free fall, and a de-regulated Wall Street had lost Billions of dollars while defrauding investors with exotic derivative investments based on bad home loans. No one wanted to see or hear from President Bush, with good reason.
Four years later, not a single Republican candidate, even through the entire primary cycle, would dare mention the former President's name.
When I reflect back, I see just how much President Obama has accomplished, and knowing that there is far more to be done, I am proud of what he has done so far. Here's a video that will put it all together for you.
Ballot Tampering Alert - Clackamus County Oregon
This story breaks in Clackamus County Oregon, where a temporary ballot worker was caught and accused of modifying cast mail-in ballots by filling in votes for Republican candidates.
It is unlikely that we will know prior to election day the impact of this event, if it is isolated, or if it is part of a wider attempt to tamper with the vote by Republican operatives
"We can confirm we are currently investigating criminal felony violations of Oregon's election laws, which allegedly took place in Clackamas County and allegedly involved a temporary county elections employee tampering with cast ballots," said Jeff Manning, a department [of Justice]spokesman.This is the Oregon Secretary of State's worst nightmare. They don't know how many ballots have been tampered with, and the concern is that this is mostly about down-ballot candidates. The Oregon state house is split 30-30 between Democrats and Republicans, and with the typically close elections there, this ballot fraud could sway control of the state house.
It is unlikely that we will know prior to election day the impact of this event, if it is isolated, or if it is part of a wider attempt to tamper with the vote by Republican operatives
"Mr Romney has an economic plan that works only if you don’t believe most of what he says."
Said conservative publication "The Economist" in a balanced critical analysis of Obama and Romney. With it comes an Endorsement for Obama. Not a enthusiastic endorsement, but certainly a thoughtful rejection of Romney and of Obama being better for America (and Europe and the UK).
Recommended Reading - especially if you are still struggling with the choice over economic issues.
Recommended Reading - especially if you are still struggling with the choice over economic issues.
Saturday, November 3, 2012
Romney Profiteering from TARP bailout of Auto Industry
It turns on that Mitt and Ann Romney made huge profits from the Auto Bailout through their share of the hedge fund takeover investments of Delphi Automotive. Estimates are from a minimum of $15 Million to as much as $115 Million or more that are now held in offshore accounts. As part of that takeover, 25,000 union jobs were wiped out and shipped to Mexico and China, worker's pensions were dumped on the Government Pension Guarantee system and their healthcare insurance cancelled.
The UAW and others have filed formal complaints with the US office of Government Ethics. The complaints involve Romney's failure to disclose the investments, his non-disclosed 2009 tax return and connection through Bain Capital. Now we know why he's refused to reveal that tax return. To do so would reveal how much money he's made (so far) from those backdoor investments.
The detailed investigation by Greg Palast was published in The Nation.
Profiteering while wiping out Jobs, Pensions and Healthcare for 25,000 people, then sending Paul Ryan out
to Blame Obama for the job losses.
That's Helping People - Romney Style
Remember - "Corporations are People" too
The UAW and others have filed formal complaints with the US office of Government Ethics. The complaints involve Romney's failure to disclose the investments, his non-disclosed 2009 tax return and connection through Bain Capital. Now we know why he's refused to reveal that tax return. To do so would reveal how much money he's made (so far) from those backdoor investments.
The detailed investigation by Greg Palast was published in The Nation.
Profiteering while wiping out Jobs, Pensions and Healthcare for 25,000 people, then sending Paul Ryan out
to Blame Obama for the job losses.
That's Helping People - Romney Style
Remember - "Corporations are People" too
How to Destroy your Own Credibility - Romney Style
Romney thinks that Ohioans are all named Forrest Gump.
He must be thinking we are Stupid Stupid Stupid. Well Romney's Completely Wrong again.
Prove it - Vote Obama, Vote Democrat !
He must be thinking we are Stupid Stupid Stupid. Well Romney's Completely Wrong again.
Prove it - Vote Obama, Vote Democrat !
Friday, November 2, 2012
What would life be like with President Romney?
Obama ad outlining day 100 of a Romney Presidency. Don't let this happen !
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Hurricane Sandy and FEMA Disaster Relief - Romney Style
While the East Coast trys to swim it's way out from under what is the worst storm to hit the US this the year, we should all pause and reflect on how fragile our lives really are.
If you care to help, donate to the Red Cross. There will be an ongoing need for weeks to come as people recover from this disaster.
Of all the ironic things that happened today, Mitt Romney participated on a status call with FEMA, the organization that he and his running mate Paul Ryan would all but eliminate under their economic plan. He stated in a 2011 debate that he would like to see the FEMA role sent to the states. Romney clearly doesn't understand the role of FEMA.
The whole point of having FEMA is to supplement the states during a disaster when a states' resources are overwhelmed. FEMA provides a single flexible backup disaster resource for the states that can be deployed when and where it's needed, instead of having each state duplicate these capabilities on their own, saving the inefficient duplication of cost, management and maintenance of these resources.
Actually, Romney went much further, and stated flatly that he'd like it even more to see FEMA's role directed to the private sector.
Privitizing FEMA implies that companies will be making PROFIT FROM DISASTER. The idea of a private company making profits from public tax dollars meant to go for disaster relief is offensive. Protection of the people and the country from threats, including natural disasters, is the role of government. FEMA is exactly what our government SHOULD be doing!
Paul Ryan's budget proposal in Congress last year proposed a 41% cut in funding for the part of the budget that includes FEMA. His, and Romney's ideas would leave little, if any disaster response capability in the federal government. If there were to be a terrorist strike in this country like what happened on 9/11, the federal government wouldn't be able to respond.
Should New York have to bear the entire cost of the World Trade Center attack, when it was an attack against the United States or should that burden be shared among all Americans? Should Louisana and Mississippi carry the entire cost of the Katrina recovery? I think we are sronger if we all stand together and share the load through our federal government.
We only need to go back to the presidency of George W. Bush and Hurricane Katrina to know what a disaster a non-functional FEMA can be. Let's not go back to that time. Let's go FORWARD instead.
If you care to help, donate to the Red Cross. There will be an ongoing need for weeks to come as people recover from this disaster.
Of all the ironic things that happened today, Mitt Romney participated on a status call with FEMA, the organization that he and his running mate Paul Ryan would all but eliminate under their economic plan. He stated in a 2011 debate that he would like to see the FEMA role sent to the states. Romney clearly doesn't understand the role of FEMA.
The whole point of having FEMA is to supplement the states during a disaster when a states' resources are overwhelmed. FEMA provides a single flexible backup disaster resource for the states that can be deployed when and where it's needed, instead of having each state duplicate these capabilities on their own, saving the inefficient duplication of cost, management and maintenance of these resources.
Actually, Romney went much further, and stated flatly that he'd like it even more to see FEMA's role directed to the private sector.
Privitizing FEMA implies that companies will be making PROFIT FROM DISASTER. The idea of a private company making profits from public tax dollars meant to go for disaster relief is offensive. Protection of the people and the country from threats, including natural disasters, is the role of government. FEMA is exactly what our government SHOULD be doing!
Paul Ryan's budget proposal in Congress last year proposed a 41% cut in funding for the part of the budget that includes FEMA. His, and Romney's ideas would leave little, if any disaster response capability in the federal government. If there were to be a terrorist strike in this country like what happened on 9/11, the federal government wouldn't be able to respond.
Should New York have to bear the entire cost of the World Trade Center attack, when it was an attack against the United States or should that burden be shared among all Americans? Should Louisana and Mississippi carry the entire cost of the Katrina recovery? I think we are sronger if we all stand together and share the load through our federal government.
We only need to go back to the presidency of George W. Bush and Hurricane Katrina to know what a disaster a non-functional FEMA can be. Let's not go back to that time. Let's go FORWARD instead.
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Presidential Debates - What's Not Said?
The third debate is over, and I got to thinking.. what is it about the debate format that I find so frustrating?
To me, in some ways, the debates are like reading the headline and maybe the 1st subtitle line of a newspaper article, but not having the opportunity to read the rest of it. It's not always what is said during the debate, it's what's not said; what's left on the table, that drives me nuts.
What wouldn't I give for a 'Fact Meter' (or rather a BS meter) that sets off a horn every time the Facts are left outside the hall.
Sometimes I wish I could hit 'Pause' on my remote, and take apart and have discussion and analysis on some of the statements in detail, instead of having to 'let them go' in the interest of time, or to move on to make some other point or NOT answer the next question.
Other than the American public's amazingly short memory; Here are just a few examples of what's driving me nuts about these debates, and the campaigns.
Romney is constantly harping on the size of the deficit under Obama's 1st term. What's not said? The bulk of the deficit spending is the result of the Bush tax cuts, two unfunded wars and an unfunded increase in the drug coverage for Medicare. When you look at the budget numbers under Bush and then Obama, what people forget is that they are comparing apples and oranges. The two unfunded wars were "Off Budget" under Bush. Obama included their cost in the budget, so the American people could understand and see what the financial costs of those wars were. A brave move, and certainly not the best for Obama's re-election campaign.
Romney is constantly attacking Obama's domestic record, over jobs, deficits, income levels, and how bad things are here after 4 years under Obama. What's not said? Obama inherited a financial system that was imploding. Before even taking office, the economy , both the stock market and the housing market, had fallen off a cliff. In perspective, Obama has come a long way in guiding the country through a recovery. Historically speaking, most economists agree that it takes 7 to 10 years to recover from the kind of financial crisis that our country went through. Considering that the country is recovering while fighting 2 wars, and facing not just a domestic financial crisis, but a global financial crisis, Obama has done remarkably well. I'm not sure why, but it seems that Obama just leaves this perspective sitting on the table unsaid. Perhaps it's because he's Presidential, and doesn't want to seem like he's shifting the blame or making excuses. Bull. The Public memory is notoriously short. They don't remember all the 'whys' and need to be reminded.
What else is Not Said? The Stock Market has recovered. If you left your money in your 401k, it's all come back. The TARP funds used for the Auto Industry bailout have ALL been paid back - WITH INTEREST.
The loans to Banks - same thing. In almost every case, the money has been paid back ahead of schedule and with interest. Best investment ever made.. and it saved a LOT of jobs.. not just those at GM and Chrysler, but in all the suppliers of parts as makers of raw materials as well.
Oh, and by the way Mitt, you can't drop the price of gasoline back to a buck a gallon, because oil is a global market, and the only way to prevent oil companies from selling oil overseas would be to impose huge tariffs, which completely violate your 'free market' concept. But you knew that (where's the BS meter?). The best way to reduce the cost of gasoline is to use less of it. Obama's mandate to improve fuel economy and incentives for alternate fuel vehicles are the best way to get the price back down.
Romney's move to the Center (actually, a bit left of center after this 3rd debate). Are you kidding me?
Please Please Please play clips from the Republican Primary debates! Most of the Neo-Cons and Tea Partiers are grumbling and feeling betrayed by the new 'Moderate Mitt'. What's NOT said? Most of them will vote for Romney because they are HATERS. They Hate Obama and will vote against him no matter who is running. Maybe we will all get lucky and they'll stay home out of disgust with their own candidate, or will vote for Huntsman. Could we only be so lucky.
Huntsman is Romney's Ralph Nader. He might just pull off enough votes to make a difference. Too bad he wasn't in the debates. He would have forced Romney to stay true to his supporters instead of pandering to undecided and women voters with his softball tone and Neo-Moderate views that are so opposite of his positions of only a couple of weeks ago.
Romney's tactics are too obvious, and that's being Not Said as well.
To me, in some ways, the debates are like reading the headline and maybe the 1st subtitle line of a newspaper article, but not having the opportunity to read the rest of it. It's not always what is said during the debate, it's what's not said; what's left on the table, that drives me nuts.
What wouldn't I give for a 'Fact Meter' (or rather a BS meter) that sets off a horn every time the Facts are left outside the hall.
Sometimes I wish I could hit 'Pause' on my remote, and take apart and have discussion and analysis on some of the statements in detail, instead of having to 'let them go' in the interest of time, or to move on to make some other point or NOT answer the next question.
Other than the American public's amazingly short memory; Here are just a few examples of what's driving me nuts about these debates, and the campaigns.
Romney is constantly harping on the size of the deficit under Obama's 1st term. What's not said? The bulk of the deficit spending is the result of the Bush tax cuts, two unfunded wars and an unfunded increase in the drug coverage for Medicare. When you look at the budget numbers under Bush and then Obama, what people forget is that they are comparing apples and oranges. The two unfunded wars were "Off Budget" under Bush. Obama included their cost in the budget, so the American people could understand and see what the financial costs of those wars were. A brave move, and certainly not the best for Obama's re-election campaign.
Romney is constantly attacking Obama's domestic record, over jobs, deficits, income levels, and how bad things are here after 4 years under Obama. What's not said? Obama inherited a financial system that was imploding. Before even taking office, the economy , both the stock market and the housing market, had fallen off a cliff. In perspective, Obama has come a long way in guiding the country through a recovery. Historically speaking, most economists agree that it takes 7 to 10 years to recover from the kind of financial crisis that our country went through. Considering that the country is recovering while fighting 2 wars, and facing not just a domestic financial crisis, but a global financial crisis, Obama has done remarkably well. I'm not sure why, but it seems that Obama just leaves this perspective sitting on the table unsaid. Perhaps it's because he's Presidential, and doesn't want to seem like he's shifting the blame or making excuses. Bull. The Public memory is notoriously short. They don't remember all the 'whys' and need to be reminded.
What else is Not Said? The Stock Market has recovered. If you left your money in your 401k, it's all come back. The TARP funds used for the Auto Industry bailout have ALL been paid back - WITH INTEREST.
The loans to Banks - same thing. In almost every case, the money has been paid back ahead of schedule and with interest. Best investment ever made.. and it saved a LOT of jobs.. not just those at GM and Chrysler, but in all the suppliers of parts as makers of raw materials as well.
Oh, and by the way Mitt, you can't drop the price of gasoline back to a buck a gallon, because oil is a global market, and the only way to prevent oil companies from selling oil overseas would be to impose huge tariffs, which completely violate your 'free market' concept. But you knew that (where's the BS meter?). The best way to reduce the cost of gasoline is to use less of it. Obama's mandate to improve fuel economy and incentives for alternate fuel vehicles are the best way to get the price back down.
Romney's move to the Center (actually, a bit left of center after this 3rd debate). Are you kidding me?
Please Please Please play clips from the Republican Primary debates! Most of the Neo-Cons and Tea Partiers are grumbling and feeling betrayed by the new 'Moderate Mitt'. What's NOT said? Most of them will vote for Romney because they are HATERS. They Hate Obama and will vote against him no matter who is running. Maybe we will all get lucky and they'll stay home out of disgust with their own candidate, or will vote for Huntsman. Could we only be so lucky.
Huntsman is Romney's Ralph Nader. He might just pull off enough votes to make a difference. Too bad he wasn't in the debates. He would have forced Romney to stay true to his supporters instead of pandering to undecided and women voters with his softball tone and Neo-Moderate views that are so opposite of his positions of only a couple of weeks ago.
Romney's tactics are too obvious, and that's being Not Said as well.
Romney on Education and Immigration
During Debate #2, during the segment on Immigration, Romney stated flatly that students graduating college should have a Visa 'stapled' to their diploma. He suggested, in effect, that we have an open door immigration policy to those non-Americans who graduate from our colleges and universities.
In Debate #3, Romney made note about the unemployment rate, and how terrible it was that half of the new college graduates couldn't find a job. Which way do you want it Governor? If you open the door and invite all those rich foreign students (and I say rich, because the have to have substantial money to come into the country to go to school) to stay and compete with American college graduates, you are going to make unemployment worse in this country, not better.
There's nothing wrong with opening the doors to our colleges and universities to foreign students, but Romney's position to offer them free access to our job markets, in direct competition with our own new graduates for jobs is shockingly bad.
Furthermore, it seems that Romney's only plan for Education in this country is his repeating over and over that he "Loves teachers". I think Bob Schieffer said it best when he said "I think we can all agree that we all love teachers". It's one thing to love teachers, but it's quite another to pay for them. Governor Romney's budget plans involve cutting domestic 'discretionary' spending. Since his math doesn't add up to pay for his tax cuts, and the discretionary domestic budget is already such a small part of the overall budget, you know that the 3rd thing to go (after PBS and Planned Parenthood) under a Romney plan will be Education funding. Goodbye Pell grants and student loan programs. You might love teachers, but apparently you don't want to help put students in front of them.
In Debate #3, Romney made note about the unemployment rate, and how terrible it was that half of the new college graduates couldn't find a job. Which way do you want it Governor? If you open the door and invite all those rich foreign students (and I say rich, because the have to have substantial money to come into the country to go to school) to stay and compete with American college graduates, you are going to make unemployment worse in this country, not better.
There's nothing wrong with opening the doors to our colleges and universities to foreign students, but Romney's position to offer them free access to our job markets, in direct competition with our own new graduates for jobs is shockingly bad.
Furthermore, it seems that Romney's only plan for Education in this country is his repeating over and over that he "Loves teachers". I think Bob Schieffer said it best when he said "I think we can all agree that we all love teachers". It's one thing to love teachers, but it's quite another to pay for them. Governor Romney's budget plans involve cutting domestic 'discretionary' spending. Since his math doesn't add up to pay for his tax cuts, and the discretionary domestic budget is already such a small part of the overall budget, you know that the 3rd thing to go (after PBS and Planned Parenthood) under a Romney plan will be Education funding. Goodbye Pell grants and student loan programs. You might love teachers, but apparently you don't want to help put students in front of them.
ROMNESIA
Wow, after tonight's debate, I understand what President Obama means by "Romnesia".
Governor Romney forgot that he's a Conservative. He sounded like a "Moderate".
Moderate is a dirty word in this era of Tea Party Republicans. Moderate Republicans have been chased out of Congress left and right by the right wing of the Republican Party, targeted by the Tea Party conservatives.
What happened to the Conservative Romney of the Primaries? Mitt sounded so 'dovish' on foreign policy that he made President Obama sound hawkish.
How does a candidate that touted being further to the right than his competition during the primaries end up to the left of the President in foreign policy?
Romesia.
Governor Romney forgot that he's a Conservative. He sounded like a "Moderate".
Moderate is a dirty word in this era of Tea Party Republicans. Moderate Republicans have been chased out of Congress left and right by the right wing of the Republican Party, targeted by the Tea Party conservatives.
What happened to the Conservative Romney of the Primaries? Mitt sounded so 'dovish' on foreign policy that he made President Obama sound hawkish.
How does a candidate that touted being further to the right than his competition during the primaries end up to the left of the President in foreign policy?
Romesia.
Completely Wrong
It's time to resurrect this blog. Actually, it's way past time, but that's for another post.
This week, Mitt Romney told us he was "Completely Wrong".. But what was he completely wrong about? Was it his statement about his opinion about the 47%, or was it that he was wrong about defending that statement repeatedly in the press once the quote was published? Once we get onto the subject of Mitt being "Completely Wrong" there is a laundry list of things he is completely wrong about.
Romney's tax plan is "Completely Wrong"
We all know that the math doesn't add up without a net increase in taxes for people in the $100k to $200k income bracket. But even if it is as he claims and is "revenue neutral", it does nothing to reduce the deficit. Romney's plan for deficit reduction can only come from two sources; deep cuts to government spending, and growth of the tax base (taxing more people). Let's look at those two options. Romney has already said that he proposes INCREASING military spending by 2 Trillion dollars, so that takes military spending off the table. What's left? To make a significant impact, he would have to decimate domestic spending. Pretty much all government programs you can think of, and most significantly, Medicare would face drastic cuts. To grow the tax base, Romney says that his tax cuts will spur job creation. This new iteration of "trickle down economics" is already proven not to create jobs. It was tried by Ronald Reagan and failed, and again by George W. Bush with similar failure. In fact, the combination of tax cuts and two unfunded wars is what has us in deficit crises right now. What few private sector jobs that might be created through tax policy will be more than offset by large reductions in government jobs as a result of the severe cuts to domestic programs. Cutting those domestic programs will also hurt private employers related to those programs. Romney's Foreign Policy agenda is Completely Wrong Mitt Romney argues that US foreign policy needs better Leadership. Following behind Netan-Ya-Hoo's belligerent attempt to goad the US into war with Iran isn't Leadership. Carrying out the Neo-Con agenda under the guise of "unconditionally supporting Israel" is a foolish folly. The war in Iraq destabilized the region, allowing Iran to focus on pursuing it's own agenda without the counterbalance of a strong Iraq to keep it at bay. Now the same 'big stick' approach to foreign policy will have us doing the same to Iran? The Neo-Con world domination agenda full steam ahead. Then there is the Romney statement that Russia is our biggest threat. Really? Russia? Not a nuclear China, nor North Korea with it's nuclear capable ICBMs, and it's willingness to sell arms to the highest bidder? Not Pakistan, another nuclear country with an unstable government that allows extremist Taliban to take over whole regions of the country and harbored Bin Laden for years? Not Al Qaeda? Not Iran? Really?
The cold war is over Mitt. I think you missed something.
Romney's Health Care Plan is "Completely Wrong"
First, he's for it, then he's against it, now he's against it, but wants to replace it (because some parts really are OK). But do it with block grants to states, so there will be another layer of bureaucracy, because Federal programs are bad but state programs are good? He says his plan will cover Pre-existing conditions, but how? If the plans are left up to the states, and there is no mandate, and funding is limited, who is to say if the "good parts" will be implemented and how? The reality is, his plan will not provide coverage for millions of Americans that can't obtain insurance because of Pre-Existing conditions. He's said, in public interviews, that a 45 year old man with a pre-existing heart condition couldn't get insurance unless he'd gotten it when he was healthy, and had continuous coverage since then. Huh? That person doesn't need a new health plan - they have one that is providing continuous coverage already. The whole problem in this country is providing coverage for people just like that 45 year old man. People, and families who, usually through no fault of their own, can't get, or lost, or can't afford, health insurance. That's the entire purpose of the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare). Another purpose is to provide coverage for children, especially those born with medical issues. Another problem with Romney's plan is that he says he'll repeal ObamaCare on day 1. The immediate effect of that will be to cause hundreds of thousands of people to lose their health insurance. Children on their parent's plan between the age of 18 and 26 will lose insurance. People with Pre-Existing conditions who are already getting coverage through the ACA's Pre-Existing Insurance Pool (check out PCIP.GOV)will lose their coverage. All of them would be then ineligible for coverage under whatever Romney's plan would be. Hey Mitt, isn't the point of all this to provide coverage, not take it away? Another fallacy of the Romney plan is the idea of being able to buy coverage out of state. He says to 'foster competition'. But how would that work? Conventional insurance these days usually consists of a PPO (preferred provider), EPO (exclusive provider), or HMO. All these plans have contracts with lists of doctors and other provider groups to provide service at set rates. If I live in California and want to buy a plan from an insurer in New York, they won't have contracted doctors in my area. The only way to buy out of state insurance would be to go with an unrestricted insurance plan that would allow me to see any doctor anywhere and anytime. This is the most expensive type of coverage plan available.
There's so much more.. it makes my head spin. How is it that anyone could still be "undecided"? It must be that Romney has them confused because he keeps talking out of both sides of his mouth.
This week, Mitt Romney told us he was "Completely Wrong".. But what was he completely wrong about? Was it his statement about his opinion about the 47%, or was it that he was wrong about defending that statement repeatedly in the press once the quote was published? Once we get onto the subject of Mitt being "Completely Wrong" there is a laundry list of things he is completely wrong about.
Romney's tax plan is "Completely Wrong"
We all know that the math doesn't add up without a net increase in taxes for people in the $100k to $200k income bracket. But even if it is as he claims and is "revenue neutral", it does nothing to reduce the deficit. Romney's plan for deficit reduction can only come from two sources; deep cuts to government spending, and growth of the tax base (taxing more people). Let's look at those two options. Romney has already said that he proposes INCREASING military spending by 2 Trillion dollars, so that takes military spending off the table. What's left? To make a significant impact, he would have to decimate domestic spending. Pretty much all government programs you can think of, and most significantly, Medicare would face drastic cuts. To grow the tax base, Romney says that his tax cuts will spur job creation. This new iteration of "trickle down economics" is already proven not to create jobs. It was tried by Ronald Reagan and failed, and again by George W. Bush with similar failure. In fact, the combination of tax cuts and two unfunded wars is what has us in deficit crises right now. What few private sector jobs that might be created through tax policy will be more than offset by large reductions in government jobs as a result of the severe cuts to domestic programs. Cutting those domestic programs will also hurt private employers related to those programs. Romney's Foreign Policy agenda is Completely Wrong Mitt Romney argues that US foreign policy needs better Leadership. Following behind Netan-Ya-Hoo's belligerent attempt to goad the US into war with Iran isn't Leadership. Carrying out the Neo-Con agenda under the guise of "unconditionally supporting Israel" is a foolish folly. The war in Iraq destabilized the region, allowing Iran to focus on pursuing it's own agenda without the counterbalance of a strong Iraq to keep it at bay. Now the same 'big stick' approach to foreign policy will have us doing the same to Iran? The Neo-Con world domination agenda full steam ahead. Then there is the Romney statement that Russia is our biggest threat. Really? Russia? Not a nuclear China, nor North Korea with it's nuclear capable ICBMs, and it's willingness to sell arms to the highest bidder? Not Pakistan, another nuclear country with an unstable government that allows extremist Taliban to take over whole regions of the country and harbored Bin Laden for years? Not Al Qaeda? Not Iran? Really?
The cold war is over Mitt. I think you missed something.
Romney's Health Care Plan is "Completely Wrong"
First, he's for it, then he's against it, now he's against it, but wants to replace it (because some parts really are OK). But do it with block grants to states, so there will be another layer of bureaucracy, because Federal programs are bad but state programs are good? He says his plan will cover Pre-existing conditions, but how? If the plans are left up to the states, and there is no mandate, and funding is limited, who is to say if the "good parts" will be implemented and how? The reality is, his plan will not provide coverage for millions of Americans that can't obtain insurance because of Pre-Existing conditions. He's said, in public interviews, that a 45 year old man with a pre-existing heart condition couldn't get insurance unless he'd gotten it when he was healthy, and had continuous coverage since then. Huh? That person doesn't need a new health plan - they have one that is providing continuous coverage already. The whole problem in this country is providing coverage for people just like that 45 year old man. People, and families who, usually through no fault of their own, can't get, or lost, or can't afford, health insurance. That's the entire purpose of the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare). Another purpose is to provide coverage for children, especially those born with medical issues. Another problem with Romney's plan is that he says he'll repeal ObamaCare on day 1. The immediate effect of that will be to cause hundreds of thousands of people to lose their health insurance. Children on their parent's plan between the age of 18 and 26 will lose insurance. People with Pre-Existing conditions who are already getting coverage through the ACA's Pre-Existing Insurance Pool (check out PCIP.GOV)will lose their coverage. All of them would be then ineligible for coverage under whatever Romney's plan would be. Hey Mitt, isn't the point of all this to provide coverage, not take it away? Another fallacy of the Romney plan is the idea of being able to buy coverage out of state. He says to 'foster competition'. But how would that work? Conventional insurance these days usually consists of a PPO (preferred provider), EPO (exclusive provider), or HMO. All these plans have contracts with lists of doctors and other provider groups to provide service at set rates. If I live in California and want to buy a plan from an insurer in New York, they won't have contracted doctors in my area. The only way to buy out of state insurance would be to go with an unrestricted insurance plan that would allow me to see any doctor anywhere and anytime. This is the most expensive type of coverage plan available.
There's so much more.. it makes my head spin. How is it that anyone could still be "undecided"? It must be that Romney has them confused because he keeps talking out of both sides of his mouth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
