Speak Out: Obama's 2012 campaign slogan.

Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 12:38 AM:

This pretty well sums it up.

"See that guy over there with more stuff than you? Vote for me and you can have his stuff."

Replies (114)

  • I just have one question what has the current republican leadership put up on the table besides continued huge tax cuts for the major coporations?

    -- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 6:14 AM
  • swampeast - have you heard of a guy named Paul Ryan? Did you see the bills that they were to pass but Obama and Sen Reid said "dead on arrival".

    I still think president Obama's campaign slogan should be "Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country can do for you". Sums up about all the Obama supporters I've seen lately.

    -- Posted by Dug on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 7:02 AM
  • To begin with, the initial premise is 100% false. I realize that the truth is often told in jest, but "I'll give you all of his stuff" is simply absurd and bizarre. Of course it's a joke, but sadly, some will think it's true.

    I support President Obama, and I agree with his position that "entitlements" need to be cut. I have recommended that my (and everyone else's) Social Security payments be reduced by 5 to 10%, and I support a Medicare co-payment of about $25 for every office visit.

    Aside from what I have paid into, I do not ask or want the country to do anything for me.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 7:47 AM
  • "Obama 2012 - Maybe This Time We'll Improve Things"

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 8:11 AM
  • Obama fundamentally changed this country as promised. His administration has accumulated more debt, put more people out of work, wasted billions of our tax dollars, violated our Constitution and laws, created a divided, class-envy population, involved our country in more "kinetic military conflicts", sold guns to drug dealers, allowed more illegal immigrants into the country, insulted us by calling us barbarians and terrorists, and more detrimental activity. The real problem we face is there are people living in this country that actually believe in him and everything he stands for and would vote for him again.

    -- Posted by jadip4me on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 8:58 AM
  • How about for a slogan 'Pass it Now... Pass My Bill Now'.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 9:13 AM
  • Redistribution of wealth by government is down right evil, and both parties play that game.

    -- Posted by BCStoned on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 7:40 AM

    Amen.

    Obama fundamentally changed this country as promised. His administration has accumulated more debt, put more people out of work, wasted billions of our tax dollars, violated our Constitution and laws, created a divided, class-envy population, involved our country in more "kinetic military conflicts", sold guns to drug dealers, allowed more illegal immigrants into the country, insulted us by calling us barbarians and terrorists, and more detrimental activity. The real problem we face is there are people living in this country that actually believe in him and everything he stands for and would vote for him again.

    -- Posted by jadip4me on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 8:58 AM

    And how does this differ from any other predident from at least LBJ on? Or even FDR on?

    -- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 9:24 AM
  • "And how does this differ from any other predident from at least LBJ on? Or even FDR on?"

    Does this mean that we need to endorse their failures by continuing to give most of them 2nd terms?

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 9:42 AM
  • Wheels, no and hell no. Interesting poll on Early Show (CBS) this morning. Only 6% of likely voters say any incumbent should be re-elected, only 33% said their own rep/sen should be re-elected. Despite the 33%, I would wager over 90% incumbents will be re-elected.

    We got what it takes to take what you got !"

    -- Posted by Rick ** on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 9:50 AM

    Rick, to quote Larry the Cable Guy, "I don't care who you are, now that's funny"

    -- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 10:42 AM
  • Rick,

    Best slogan on the thread yet.... I think you got a winner!! Not sure what the hell you win but I like the slogan, and may even get some bumper stickers printed, unless of course you intend on copyrighting it.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 10:48 AM
  • http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iaMxyt5P5rQoPFtGU4OMRH4xbKoQ?...

    Maybe this is his 2012 slogan:

    'If you love me, give me four more years'

    -- Posted by Joe Dirte on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 11:37 AM
  • Joe, I cannot think of any reason to give him my vote based on your slogan, but it is also a good one. I heard that one last night. "If you love me... pass the bill" May not be worded exactly, but close enough to merit quotations.

    I wonder if he realizes how childish and embarassing he sounds when repeating that over and over. Maybe he still believes catchy phrases like "HOPE & CHANGE still resonate. I am hoping ,but it is for a change!

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 12:41 PM
  • Looks like Jimmy Carter is rooting for the GOP to help make Obama the second living member of the one term society(:

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/16/carter-would-be-very-pleased-to-see-r...

    -- Posted by Joe Dirte on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 1:53 PM
  • Joe Dirte wrote:

    "...make Obama the second living member of the one term society"

    George H.W. Bush is still alive...

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 2:01 PM
  • Sorry, my mind and typing fingers had a break in communication(;

    -- Posted by Joe Dirte on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 2:38 PM
  • Wishful thinking if you think Obama will be re-elected. Even some Democrats are having second thoughts.

    -- Posted by voyager on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 5:18 PM
  • 2012 Campaign Slogan

    If you liked George Bush, you're going to love Rick Perry!

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 8:11 PM
  • So far I think #1 is going to be "We got what it takes, to take what you got." It is a perfect fit for Obama's 2012 Campaign.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 8:46 PM
  • Yes, Theorist, I have made up my mind. Anybody but Obama. Nothing sad about it whatever.

    -- Posted by voyager on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 9:25 PM
  • 2012 Campaign Slogan

    If you liked George Bush, you're going to love Rick Perry!

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 8:11 PM

    Why is that?

    -- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 11:03 PM
  • "Covet"

    -- Posted by bebo on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 6:33 AM
  • Why is that?

    -- Posted by DTower on Fri, Sep 16, 2011, at 11:03 PM

    President Bush only wanted to ruin Social Security by privatization.

    Governor Perry want to eliminate it and give money to the states.

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

    President Bush only wanted to reduce income tax.

    Governor Perry wants to scrap the federal income tax by repealing the Sixteenth Amendment, which he claims was only passed "mistakenly" propelled by "a fit of populist rage." (Must have been a 1913 "anti-tea party.)

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

    President Bush was grateful to the Supreme Court for halting Florida recounts.

    Governor Perry feels Congress should have the power to override Supreme Court decisions with a two-thirds vote, thereby not only eliminating the "Supreme" making Congress two thirds of the government.

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

    President Bush gave the Lord credit for resolving his (GW's) drinking problem.

    Governor Perry seems to think the Lord should take a more active role in government but yet blamed the lord when Perry called the 2010 BP oil spill an "act of God" while speaking at a trade association funded by BP. Also, Perry may not have read Matthew 6:1, which warns, "Beware of practicing your piety before men in order to be seen by them."

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

    President Bush initiated the stimulus to counter the Bush depression.

    Governor Perry was a vocal critic of Congress's recovery package, even advocating that Texas reject the money because "we can take care of ourselves." Months later, after Perry was able to balance the state's budget only with the aid of billions in federal stimulus dollars. Perry again repeated that he would reject federal funding, arguing that the government "spends money they don't have." Five months later, Perry again took advantage of federal funding to issue $2 billion in bonds for highway improvements in Texas. Even so, the state faces a $27 billion budget deficit.

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

    President Bush was only a "transplanted Texan."

    Governor Perry floated the idea that Texas may again have to secede because of a federal government that "continues to thumb their nose at the American people." (Even thought if that happened, he would no longer be eligible to run for president of the US.)

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

    President Bush got "gentleman's C's" in college.

    Governor Perry purportedly showed his "anti-elitist" status by getting C's and D's.

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

    President Bush at least passed a Medicare drug benefit.

    Governor Perry is anti-Medicare/Medicaid and his state has the highest rate of uninsured residents of any state. More than one in four Texans lack coverage; the national average is just 15.4 percent. As such, there are more uninsured residents in Texas than there are people in 33 states.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 9:27 AM
  • So in other words, if I liked George Bush, I'm gonna love barrak obama, as they are one in the same. Sorry I'm a little slow, but now i get it.

    -- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 9:33 AM
  • Commonsense has at least one thing correct. The stimulus originated with George Bush. He attempted to stimulate the economy first with income tax 'rebates' and finally with the TARP program. Government stimulus programs have been used for the past four years; not just the 2 1/2 years of the Obama administration.

    THEY DID NOT WORK FOR BUSH; THEY ARE NOT WORKING WITH OBAMA!

    There is one difference that I perceive between Bush and Obama concerning the stimulus programs. The tax rebates used by George Bush put money back in the hands of all. Obama uses 'crony capitalism'. He rewards his supporters (Unions and government workers, green energy) by focusing government spending on programs which will put money in the pockets of these groups.

    The money we borrow and waste on 'stimulus' programs serves to increase the national debt and insure higher taxes in the future.

    -- Posted by Robert* on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 10:03 AM
  • As such, there are more uninsured residents in Texas than there are people in 33 states.

    Governor Perry purportedly showed his "anti-elitist" status by getting C's and D's.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 9:27 AM

    And there are more than 5 times as many uninsured people in Missouri than Rhode Island! Numbers and statistics.

    Here's my question to you. Why do we have to insure anyone? Did you know that for the first 175 years of this country there was no Medicare or Medicaid? And the country thrived. Yes people died just like they do today, everyday. Did you know that the "rich", on average, live just a year longer than the "poor"? And some rich live less than some poor?

    Finally, can you tell me what Obama's grades were? I can't seem to find them.

    -- Posted by Dug on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 10:17 AM
  • what do college grades have to do with running the presidency?

    -- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 12:45 PM
  • A degree or one's ranking in any graduating class is often meaningless, some of the most successful people did not do well in an academic setting.

    I have encountered many people with degrees working in fast food places, Quick Marts etc.

    Also, those who can, do and those who can't... often has merit. Go talk to a bunch of really successful attorneys and see what they think of Law Professors, I doubt you will find one with that goal in mind.

    -- Posted by Acronym on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 12:58 PM
  • Acronym - agree totally.

    Theorist - which one of my degrees do you want to know about? High school as well?

    -- Posted by Dug on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 1:22 PM
  • I do know theorist. College grades have nothing to do with running the presidency other than providing fodder for useless talking points.

    -- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 1:22 PM
  • "Did you know that for the first 175 years of this country there was no Medicare or Medicaid? And the country thrived. Yes people died just like they do today, everyday."

    There have been some minor changes in life expectancy:

    Year Life -------- Expectancy

    1850 - - - - - - - - - 38

    1900 - - - - - - - - - 49

    1930 - - - - - - - - - 60

    2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - 78

    Looks like Medicare/Medicaid made a difference.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 3:33 PM
  • Looks like Medicare/Medicaid made a difference.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 3:33 PM

    Or maybe it was advances in technology and the medical field.

    -- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 4:31 PM
  • At Harvard Law School, Obama graduated Magna *** Laude, which, according to the Havard Law School website, is awarded to the top 10% of Harvard Law School students.

    With what honors did you graduate, Dug?

    -- Posted by Theorist on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 12:24 PM

    Theorist,

    A question. How do we know that President B. Hussein Obama graduated Magna *** Laude as his school records were reported to be sealed?

    And that is not your hightest honor awarded. Summa *** Laude trumps Magna.

    As I was exiting the business, so was my bookkeeper of many years retiring. Needing to have someone who could pick up the pace quickly, an accountant, newly graduated with a Summa *** Laude honor and a degree in accounting was hired.

    After my advice to fire her in 90days was rejected, it finally became apparent she could not handle the job the high school graduate bookkeeper had been doing for 15 years. It took me, with high school bookkeeping and a daughter with an accounting degree six months of part time work to straighten out the mess created in the prior 1 year. I could not believe that I had to teach that woman the difference between a debit and a credit.

    I will take common sense and knowledge over degrees any day when doing a hire. If they have these attributes and a degree so much the better, but I will pay no one more for a degree, just to do the same work.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 5:02 PM
  • -- Posted by Theorist on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 3:57 PM

    I am fortunate to have known and worked with a diverse group of individuals including attorneys including those who practice criminal, civil, defense attorneys, prosecutors, judges and yes law professors. They ranged from marginal to exceptional, so I have some basis for my opinion.

    I have teachers and full professors in my family, one of whose name you will find in textbooks. As is so often the case, you assume more than is there.

    Agreed, poor grades can mean something either about the student or teacher or maybe something else.

    I still think about prison guards too, but I am not convinced they made a difference in my life.

    -- Posted by Acronym on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 5:37 PM
  • Theorist, I like to think I influenced my teachers more than they influenced me.:)

    -- Posted by Old John on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 7:02 PM
  • Theorist, I helped them look more mature with a tinge of grey early.

    -- Posted by Old John on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 8:27 PM
  • Theorist,

    If or not I hold a degree and what is or is not my IQ score is really not relevant. I do not have a burr under my saddle for all that hold a degree in whatever. I have the utmost respect for some of them and a high level of contempt for others. What bugs me is the attitude of some that their degree somehow put them a notch above.

    I look upon a person with a degree that is truly intelligent much the way I do a person who is truly wealty, or filty rich some might say. Neither has to prove anything to anybody, they know who they are.

    The opposite is true for the wannabees, the hundred dollar millionaires and the degreed idiots. They simply must prove to you they are better, smarter and maybe have more money than you do. They like to talk down to you, use big words and let you know they are smarter, or richer. So far, I am not impressed and these people are easily spotted. Show me what you can do!

    I think my most enlightening time in the business world was watching the transition of a small but successful national company that was acquired by a larger conglomerate. The smaller company had a sales force where less than 10% were college graduates. But they knew their business, their products and their customers and they treated us with respect. I watched as the less knowledgable but highly educated MBAs took over and started picking off the people who knew the business one at a time. As the customer, we were soon dealing with educated idiots who knew nothing about the business and would lie to you at the drop of a hat.

    I took it as a personal challenge to improve upon their education.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 9:11 PM
  • Wheels - agree with your post. It's what I call "liberal elitism". My only point to this conversation is we are pointing out Rick Perry's grades - at least he made them public. Why, if Obama is so smart, are his not released to the public. Just another example of how foolish/childish he is.

    Common says:

    1850 - - - - - - - - - 38

    1900 - - - - - - - - - 49

    1930 - - - - - - - - - 60

    2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - 78

    Actually your numbers support my point. The largest increases in longevity were *before* Medicare/Medicaid. Looks like the huge increases slowed after Medicare was implemented. What say you common?

    -- Posted by Dug on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 9:54 PM
  • Dug,

    I will buy into President B. Hussein Obama's graduating rank when a link is provided to the school showing in their words that he graduated anything higher than mid level in his class. It may be out there, but I have not seen it, and I will not accept as valid anything put out by the White House or his election committee. That would be meaningless. Public speaking alone should have nipped his chance at an honors ranking. He is horrible at it. Reading a speech put together by a speech writer on a teleprompter does not qualify one as a distinguished orator.

    To me, I would gauge him as above average intelligence and far below genuis level. But if you want to get into truly smart.... that is another matter.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 10:12 PM
  • If wanted to be really skeptical I would say I will acknowledge he was in college when I hear or read someone saying they knew he was a classmate.

    -- Posted by Old John on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 10:18 PM
  • But then you wouldn't want to appear skeptical.... would you Old John??

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 10:23 PM
  • Commonsensematters wrote:

    "Year Life -------- Expectancy

    1850 - - - - - - - - - 38

    1900 - - - - - - - - - 49

    1930 - - - - - - - - - 60

    2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - 78

    Looks like Medicare/Medicaid made a difference."

    How do you figure? Looks to me as if a trend that began long before Medicare/Medicaid were enacted continued after they came into being. Life expectancy rose by 11 years between 1850 and 1900, but 11 years in the thirty years that followed, and then by only 18 years in the next 77 years. That's hardly evidence of a massive change in improvement.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 10:34 PM
  • Slogan: Stick with me and I'll stick it to you!

    -- Posted by Old John on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 11:43 PM
  • Hate to burst your bubble but the number 1 reason life expectancy is higher is the sanitation systems.

    .

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 12:22 AM
  • -- Posted by Theorist on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 6:15 PM

    Because you amuse me.

    -- Posted by Acronym on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 7:12 AM
  • -- Posted by Dug on Sat, Sep 17, 2011, at 10:17 AM

    Here's my question to you. Why do we have to insure anyone? Did you know that for the first 175 years of this country there was no Medicare or Medicaid? And the country thrived. Yes people died just like they do today, everyday. Did you know that the "rich", on average, live just a year longer than the "poor"?

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

    The statement was made claiming that people "thrived" in the first 175 years of this country. I simply pointed out that they didn't thrive as long.

    Clearly the increase in longevity was due to medical technology and knowledge, and sanitation. It is also clear that advances in most fields, such as medicine, make the most dramatic progress in the earliest stages. That is, going from rudimentary medical knowledge in 1850 to a substantial level of medicine in 1930, will naturally demonstrate a higher incremental increase than the past 70 years. There is no question that Medicare/Medicaid have had a positive impact on longevity.

    I did not find specific comparisons showing "rich" and "poor" life spans. However, there are well documented averages indicating that white Americans live about 10 years longer than black Americans. And whites are on average richer than blacks. It is also true that life style and diet influence life span, as can be seen by the life spans of people in the Caucasus and Okinawa.

    The reason to insure everyone has nothing to do with longevity, but is to reduce the overall insurance costs to individuals. Obviously with a larger "pool" costs are lower for all, plus emergency rooms will not have to pass the costs of the uninsured to others.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 7:38 AM
  • Hate to burst your bubble but the number 1 reason life expectancy is higher is the sanitation systems.

    .

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 12:22 AM

    Have no data to go by, but I could see that to be a major factor. My Great Grandfather was orphaned in the 1850s by a cholera epidemic. My research brought up articles on cholera epidemics in cities all over the country. One of their stated causes, sewage running down the steets.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 7:47 AM
  • We have proven over time that insurance does not lower costs. It does cause medical providers to build larger waiting rooms to accomodate those that are there with running noses and equally life threatening conditions because why not go.... it is freeeeeeeeee!

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 8:02 AM
  • Commonsense,

    You state that Medicare/Medicaid had a substantial impact on lifespan. Perhaps you would care to explain how these programs extended the life of individuals?

    I would contend that improved sanitation, modern transportation systems, refrigeration, improved diet (fresh vegetables and fruits available year round) extended the lifespan of individuals. Medicare/Medicaid may have had some minor part in this.

    -- Posted by Robert* on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 8:55 AM
  • Common, Should people with longer life expectancy pay a higher rate of SS taxes?

    Sounds like black folks are getting the short end of the stick with SS.

    -- Posted by Old John on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 10:07 AM
  • Theorist - disagree. The biggest single influence of students is parenting. Nothing can contribute more than good parenting and nothing can hurt a student more than poor parenting.

    That's the problem I have with education. Many believe if we just give schools more and more money (administrators, buildings, teachers, projectors, computers, etc. etc.) then education will be better. It' about parenting, not "entertainment" or "peers".

    -- Posted by Dug on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 1:02 PM
  • This mess started way before Obama became President he just happen to get stuck with it. Obama will not have to campaign much the republicans will get him re-elected.

    -- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 1:22 PM
  • -- Posted by Theorist on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 12:30

    I became interested in human behavior at an early age, relatively, and have studied, Sociology, Psychology, Social Work, Anthropology, Nature/Nurture and interviewed literally thousands of people including Teachers, Guidance Counselors, Administrators, Psychologists and Psychiatrists and still don't know what the answer is, so if you truly know, you are one up on me.

    -- Posted by Acronym on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 2:40 PM
  • Rick

    He said he would stay at his desk until the economy turned around. Then he left to fail to get the Olympics in Chicago.

    ************************************************************************

    One of their stated causes, sewage running down the streets.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 7:47 AM

    I have some docs in the family. They all say the raw sewage was number one and trash was number two. The reason we are getting older is we know what is bad for us now. Remember 50 years ago when Dr kildare always lit up coming out of the OR? Lard sales are also down.

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 5:48 PM
  • Is everyone ready to pay their $2000 dollars a year Obamacare bill in 2014? I'm sure the liberals don't even know about it. They still think it is free.

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 7:27 PM
  • "You state that Medicare/Medicaid had a substantial impact on lifespan. Perhaps you would care to explain how these programs extended the life of individuals?"

    What I said was:

    "There is no question that Medicare/Medicaid have had a positive impact on longevity."

    Presunably you do not believe that health care for the poor and elderly has a negative effect.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 8:34 PM
  • "Presumably you do not believe that health care for the poor and elderly has a negative effect."

    Not so. Medicare and Medicaid are merely government run insurance programs. We had health care for the poor and elderly before them and would have health care for them without it. We would merely have a different method of paying for that health care.

    -- Posted by Robert* on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 10:40 PM
  • "Is everyone ready to pay their $2000 dollars a year..."

    In 2013 there is a 0.9% increase on the Medicare payroll tax for individuals making more than $200,000 and married couples making more than $250,000. (About 1.5% of population.)

    So the "everyone" only applies to a tiny fraction of the population.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 11:07 PM
  • "Only?" By what standard should it be applied to anyone at all?

    -- Posted by voyager on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 6:51 AM
  • Commonsensematters wrote:

    "The reason to insure everyone has nothing to do with longevity, but is to reduce the overall insurance costs to individuals. Obviously with a larger "pool" costs are lower for all, plus emergency rooms will not have to pass the costs of the uninsured to others."

    There is no logic to that statement. The 'rule of large numbers' does indicate that larger pools permit a more accurate assessment of risk, but including those whose risks previously excluded them from the pool will raise, rather than lower, the pool.

    Having larger numbers of healthy individuals could lower the costs, but there is no indication that large numbers of healthy individuals were being excluded previously. The only way expanding the pool will lower costs is if there is a significantly greater number of healthy people entering the pool than unhealthy ones.

    Nor will emergency rooms not have to pass the costs on to others. That is the whole basis of insurance. The mechanism for passing those costs will change - i.e., they will be billed to insurance and those costs will passed to ohters through premiums, as opposed to the hospitals 'absorbing' the costs and passing the costs to others through higher charges for self-pay and other non-discounted customers.

    The fact remains, a given number of people receiving a given amount of services will cost the hospital a given amount of money, and that money will have to recouped somehow, either by spreading the costs through charges to insured customers or spreading them through charges to uninsured customers. The fact or non-fact of insurance does not change that.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 9:50 AM
  • Common - why do so many unions want out of Obamacare and are getting "waivers"?

    -- Posted by Dug on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 10:13 AM
  • swampeastmissouri

    all of America knows Mr.Obama came into a complete mess when he was elected . Americans understands this . Americans want to see action , they also understand it's been 3 years , incumbants have a tendency to go away .

    -- Posted by Rick ** on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 3:35 PM

    I agree with this.

    Obama ran on "change". He said he was going to adress the debt...Never happened.

    -- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 11:01 AM
  • lumbrgfktr wrote:

    "Obama ran on "change". He said he was going to adress the debt...Never happened."

    Oh, he addressed it alright. It now has a much larger address, in a pricier neighborhood.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 11:04 AM
  • -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 11:57 AM
  • The desk is priceless, the feet are not.

    This is showing of the president's repect for property.

    -- Posted by Old John on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 12:21 PM
  • The desk is priceless, the feet are not.

    This is showing of the president's repect for property.

    -- Posted by Old John on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 12:21 PM

    It's sad how low some people will sink to try and find criticism.

    Inferring feelings from a photograph is pretty poor.

    -- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 2:03 PM
  • He's not the first president to put his feet on that desk, but he seems to have a penchant for putting his feet on the furniture.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 2:29 PM
  • lumbrgfktr wrote:

    "It's sad how low some people will sink to try and find criticism."

    I offered no criticism, I let the pictures speak for themselves.

    He wants to run again for the presidency, let him put his best foot forward. He seems to be showing that he has a leg up on the competition, and he has what it takes to heel this country's issues. I think it's clear that he has a grasp on our problems, and feels our pain right down to the depth of his sole.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 2:44 PM
  • He is what he is!!! Lumber maybe you have never had to qualify people. If he was looking for a job and put his feet on your desk.... would you hire him?

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 2:46 PM
  • He is what he is!!! Lumber maybe you have never had to qualify people. If he was looking for a job and put his feet on your desk.... would you hire him?

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 2:46 PM

    Frankly, I don't care what the president does with his feet. I will let bigger issues be the reason I won't vote for Obama. I don't need to seek out reasons to justify weather or not I like him/don't like him.

    Its just a petty thing to bicker about.

    It also didn't seem to stop you from voting for bush. This is one of those obvious Hypocritical instanes.

    -- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 3:24 PM
  • lumbrgfktr wrote:

    "It also didn't seem to stop you from voting for bush. This is one of those obvious Hypocritical instances."

    You toss the word 'hypocritical' around, apparently assuming that everyone was aware that President Bush put his feet on the desk. There is no evidence that this is the case. While there were photos of President Bush putting his feet on the desk (and President Ford, before him), they do not appear to be well known by many posters.

    But, my purpose for posting was not about those feet on that desk. If that were the case, I would have contented myself to post a single photo showing that. What I attached was a collage showing photos of the president with his feet on a variety of White House furniture, not merely the Resolute Desk.

    Mr. Bush may well have put his feet on every piece of furniture in the building, but I have seen no evidence thereof. Then, again, Mr. Bush is no longer the president, so it doesn't matter, does it? What matters is that this thread is about finding Mr. Obama a 2012 campaign slogan, and I though the photos might help in that search.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 3:45 PM
  • -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 3:45 PM

    I don't toss the work Hypocritical around. I use when the situation calls for it. This is one of those instances.

    For instance, many on this board freeley admit to voting for bush. Yet, they didn't care about feet on the desk then, but only when obama does it. I call that Hypocritical.

    And Actually, there is plenty of evidence of bush with feet on the desk. Just google it. Lack of knowledge in this instance isn't an excuse. Afterall, if this was actually a serious issue for people, you would think they would want to know if other presidents as well.

    Furthermore, if this was once again a serious issue, you would think that they would want a more legit source than a "Photo" collage. Seriously, is this actually a good measurement of how many times he puts his feet on the desk?

    To further illustrate how ignorant a point this is, I could create a collage of photos of skip shumakers home runs. With such sound proof, I guess that would justify that Skip Shumaker has hit more home runs that Alber Pujols.

    FYI, here is a link of a couple of times bush doing it.

    http://blogs.e-rockford.com/applesauce/2011/06/01/outrageous-obama-puts-his-feet...

    Most of my criticism wasn't directed at you, but the attitude in general.

    1) posters who infer what a person beleives or feels based on a photo

    2) People who hold one accountable for an act, but not others (which is what is really wrong with party politics right now).

    -- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 4:02 PM
  • "And Actually, there is plenty of evidence of bush with feet on the desk. Just google it."

    There is now, was there in 2004, the last time anyone voted for Mr. Bush. I'm not sure that there was. I've Googled it. It appears that a photo was released in 2009 in response to the first report of Mr. Obama with his feet on the desk. It is all over the place now, but how widespread was it in 2004?

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 4:41 PM
  • Just google it."

    There is now, was there in 2004, the last time anyone voted for Mr. Bush. I'm not sure that there was. I've Googled it. It appears that a photo was released in 2009 in response to the first report of Mr. Obama with his feet on the desk. It is all over the place now, but how widespread was it in 2004?

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 4:41 PM

    i am sure there was.

    Question is, why didn't you research it if its such an important issue?

    -- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 4:43 PM
  • Not to change the subject but I am sure this would be of interest two Rick. And it concerns taxes, the USPS, and big government.

    http://www.buffalonews.com/city/communities/southern-tier/article97865.ece

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgKA-k7NPGs

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=galVure5VF8&feature=related

    -- Posted by Robert* on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 5:15 PM
  • lumbergfktr wrote:

    "Question is, why didn't you research it if its such an important issue?"

    It wasn't, and it isn't. As I've said, all I've offered is a photo collage to help us decide a slogan for Mr. Obama's 2012 campaign. I've never said it would sway my vote one way or the other, and I haven't seen anyone else on here say it would sway theirs.

    -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 5:21 PM
  • It also didn't seem to stop you from voting for bush. This is one of those obvious Hypocritical instanes.

    -- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 3:24 PM

    Lumber,

    Since you do not even know if or not I voted, that makes the above an asinine statement.

    Now to President B. Hussein Obama and his putting his feet on the furniture. As I said, I would not hire him if he came into my office and showed the lack of respect to throw his feet up on the desk or any other piece of furniture. And he is putting his feet on my furniture, your furniture and the rest of America's furniture.

    I learned to watch people when I hired them, their eyes, their facial expressions, their hands and their body motions. This cat wouldn't cut it if I were making the decision to hire or to sign his check.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 6:15 PM
  • Lumber,

    You need to settle your nerves.... every time you get excited your spelling and grammer goes to the dogs.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 6:24 PM
  • In 2013 there is a 0.9% increase on the Medicare payroll tax for individuals making more than $200,000 and married couples making more than $250,000. (About 1.5% of population.)

    So the "everyone" only applies to a tiny fraction of the population.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Sun, Sep 18, 2011, at 11:07 PM

    No.. I am talking about the $2000 that all employers with over 50 employees are going to pay per worker. More job killing for those on the lower end of the pay scale!

    http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2011/09/15/slow_employment_growth_look_...

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 7:06 PM
  • About the feet on the desk, it looks as if the desk top may be covered with a pane of glass to protect. Maybe no harm, no foul.

    But reagardless of which president does or did prop feet on the table, he deserves a stern scolding from a proper grandmother!

    -- Posted by Old John on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 11:40 PM
  • Regret, In regard to the link you posted:

    So if my battery powered bicycle conversion company that employs 25 and allows folks to utilize there bikes to save the planet catches on, and I can franchise and create another 25 jobs, this bill is going to make that idea a loser?

    So much for Jobs jobs jobs.

    -- Posted by Old John on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 1:14 AM
  • A little different but similar. When the construction business was booming we learned the hard way to limit the growth of our business. When the number of employees hit 15 there was a major change in the OSHA rules. Just one of the roadblocks government places in the operation of a business.

    There are certain magic numbers that trigger government regulations. Small businesses learn to stay below those numbers. Larger businesses employ experts to guide them through the minefield of regulations.

    -- Posted by Robert* on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 6:03 AM
  • "No.. I am talking about the $2000 that all employers with over 50 employees are going to pay per worker. More job killing for those on the lower end of the pay scale!"

    This applies to companies that don't provide health insurance. Most good employers already do, and insurance co-ops will make that even cheaper.

    -- Posted by commonsensematters on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 6:30 AM
  • question : is it wise to add regulations and restrictions to the Economy when the Economy is in a downfall ?

    -- Posted by Rick ** on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 7:56 AM

    Rick

    President B. Hussein Obama said that it was not... before he said that it was. Got to pay attention to which side of his mouth he is talking out of.

    Better still.... Pay no attention to what he says, watch what he does. He lies like a rug.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 8:14 AM
  • Rick,

    You may be right. He sure acted like someone had tied a knot in his tail yesterday.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 8:59 AM
  • Lumber,

    Since you do not even know if or not I voted, that makes the above an asinine statement.

    Now to President B. Hussein Obama and his putting his feet on the furniture. As I said, I would not hire him if he came into my office and showed the lack of respect to throw his feet up on the desk or any other piece of furniture. And he is putting his feet on my furniture, your furniture and the rest of America's furniture.

    I learned to watch people when I hired them, their eyes, their facial expressions, their hands and their body motions. This cat wouldn't cut it if I were making the decision to hire or to sign his check.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Sep 19, 2011, at 6:15 PM

    Actually, he is the president. So until the end of the term, its his office, his desk. He should treat it as he sees fit as long as he doesn't damage it.

    Its not really exactly comparable to the situation you are talking about.

    -- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 10:24 AM
  • -- Posted by stnmsn8 on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 6:03 AM

    That is a good point. I think there are a number of stumbling blocks for small business and taxes are really not as big of an issue.

    -- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 10:26 AM
  • Would Harlen Sanders, Ray Croc and Dave Thomas have a chance in today's enviroment?

    -- Posted by Old John on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 10:51 AM
  • Actually, he is the president. So until the end of the term, its his office, his desk. He should treat it as he sees fit as long as he doesn't damage it.

    Its not really exactly comparable to the situation you are talking about.

    -- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 10:24 AM

    I beg to differ with you Lumber.... it is not his desk, it is the people's property, he only gets to use it until we hire someone else for the job.

    And it is comparable... he is applying for the job again. His resumes are all over the place.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 11:44 AM
  • Caddy you are late for your therapy!

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 1:50 PM
  • ..please remember this fact when introducing Bush the Second into your arguements

    -- Posted by Rick ** on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 11:31 AM

    I do. I am not one of the ones complaining about feet on the desk.

    You see, I am different than most of the posters here. I don't need an R or D determine my standards for president. If a president wants to put his feet up, so be it.

    -- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 2:49 PM
  • I beg to differ with you Lumber.... it is not his desk, it is the people's property, he only gets to use it until we hire someone else for the job.

    And it is comparable... he is applying for the job again. His resumes are all over the place.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 11:44 AM

    Which is why he won't be president.

    -- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 2:50 PM
  • 2012 OBAMA REHIRED!!!! Case closed! That's his slogan for re-election. Thank you all the current republicans and tea baggers out there running now. i call them tea baggers because they are really not an official party. The other party have brought nothing to the table "the people" need to hear or can grasp a hold of. So, you know what i been saying all along. If they don't bring a hands on plan and stop whinning about Obama spending, there will not be a change at the top come november. Isn't that obvious. Same thing i always have to tell Rick....PAY ATTENTION!!

    -- Posted by cadillacman on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 1:48 PM

    I hate to break it to you, but he will not be re-elected.

    I actually voted for him the first time and I can tell you Caddy, it probably won't happen again.

    And Caddy, its people like me that determine elections.

    -- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 2:52 PM
  • Well lumbrg...I voted for him the first time too! I am not sure how I will vote next time, but if you live around here...your vote didn't mean a thing...

    -- Posted by Theorist on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 3:04 PM

    It always counts. It only doesn't count if you don't vote.

    But just curious, what gives you the confidence to vote for him again.

    -- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 3:55 PM
  • I'm buying into the "different" part.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 4:01 PM
  • caddy, I paid attention last time and that's why I didn't vote for him.

    -- Posted by Old John on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 4:50 PM
  • Pay as you go..... Obama said: "this is the rule that families across this country follow every single day, and there's no reason why their government shouldn't do the same."

    Now it is $4 trillion and 0 jobs later.

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 9:17 PM
  • "Hope for Change"

    "Yes, we thought we could"

    "Spend Tomorrows wealth... Today!"

    "It's GW's fault!"

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Tue, Sep 20, 2011, at 9:37 PM
  • On the job training for President B. Hussein Obaba has been a very costly experience for America. Hopefully the voters have been educated by this experience as well.

    Anybody want to start a betting pool on how Theorist will vote?

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Sep 21, 2011, at 7:43 AM
  • Theorist,

    Which part of my post didn't I have a clue about?

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Sep 21, 2011, at 8:03 AM
  • you can't argue that he doesn't have experience now...

    -- Posted by Theorist on Wed, Sep 21, 2011, at 5:38 AM

    He is a very slow learner.

    As I said in 2008. Would you hire a person that never had a real job to run your multi billion dollar company? If the answer is yes you don't have a clue of how things work.

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Wed, Sep 21, 2011, at 10:01 AM
  • Wheels...I have said this before, but it seems appropriate to repeat it at this time (and besides people learn from repetition)...

    You don't have a clue!!!

    -- Posted by Theorist on Wed, Sep 21, 2011, at 7:47 AM

    Theorist,

    Which part of my post didn't I have a clue about?

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Sep 21, 2011, at 8:03 AM

    Theorist,

    You made a charge which I asked a question about... with no answer received.

    Surely you will defend your charges.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Sep 21, 2011, at 4:25 PM
  • Anybody want to start a betting pool on how Theorist will vote?

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Sep 21, 2011, at 7:43 AM

    Theorist,

    So this is the part of my post that upset you so much.

    Where did I say I knew how you were going to vote. Nowhere have I to my recollection ever presumed to think I knew all of the answers to all of that other superfulous stuff you mentioned. Quite frankly I never cared enough to think about it.

    I was just trying to start a friendly little wager, I never said I knew how you were going to vote.

    You do leave clues though for anyone who wants to speculate on it!

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Sep 21, 2011, at 7:21 PM
  • Somwbody said somewhere a few days ago that they had never known anyone to be questioned in a political survey.

    I was surveyed about 20 minutes ago, and this has been about the 2nd or 3rd time that I have as I remember it.

    Anybody like to guess what my answer to the question on the likelyhood that I would be voting for President B. Hussein Obama in the 2012 election was?

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Sep 22, 2011, at 8:27 PM
  • I can say I have watched you guys enough I have a good idea of your political profile.

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Thu, Sep 22, 2011, at 9:56 PM
  • "Spread the wealth around!"

    -- Posted by Robert* on Thu, Sep 22, 2011, at 10:24 PM
  • I have been called several times. I ususally end the call when I realize none of the ABCD choices fit my answer to any of the questions.

    "Do you think the president's proposal if passed will A: Increase jobs, B: Save jobs or C: Make you better off than you were four years ago. D: Undecided"

    Ok, not that bad but they are sneaky in the way they word stuff so they can represent the results in the way they want.

    -- Posted by Old John on Thu, Sep 22, 2011, at 11:23 PM
  • BC, I watched the opening remarks and first lecture from Hillsdale College, plan to watch the rest including Ron Paul later. I'm trying to understand how so many can get so many different meanings from the so few words in the constitution. :)

    -- Posted by Old John on Thu, Sep 22, 2011, at 11:55 PM
  • "Spread the wealth around!"

    -- Posted by stnmsn8 on Thu, Sep 22, 2011, at 10:24 PM

    The rich were until Obama came aboard. The only difference is you had to work for it instead of getting 25% it by being lazy. The other 75% of it stops at Washington and disappears.

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Fri, Sep 23, 2011, at 12:02 AM
  • Regret, About that 75%, Missouri gets $7.5 billion from the federal gov. That means they probably take $10 billion or more. The rest is for jet fuel and $16 muffins.

    -- Posted by Old John on Fri, Sep 23, 2011, at 12:08 AM
  • BC, Why is that? Do we have better pork producers in congress? Does this count federal highway funds? Does this count EPA expenditures? Or do we just have more dead beats?

    -- Posted by Old John on Fri, Sep 23, 2011, at 1:16 AM
  • I usually reply "You are not authorised to call this number" and then hang up.

    -- Posted by voyager on Fri, Sep 23, 2011, at 8:30 AM
  • I made the guy tell me what the survey was for before I agreed to take it... I am not missing any opportunity to voice my dissatisfaction with President B. Hussein Obama.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Sep 23, 2011, at 9:08 AM
  • I buy whatever they are selling and put it on Ikes credit card. The liberals have been doing that to me for years.

    -- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Fri, Sep 23, 2011, at 10:12 AM
  • BC, The latest info I can find quickly is from 2005.

    New Jersey is still#50 followed by

    Nevada..............49

    Connecticut.........48

    New Hampshire ......47

    Minnesota...........46

    Missouri is.........17

    On top is New Mexico# 1

    Mississippi.......... 2

    Alaska............... 3

    Louisiana............ 4

    West Virginia ....... 5

    States with higher per capita income pay in more due to the progerssive income tax structure. Also to consider is the number of federal employes, people recieving entitlements and welfare, number of military bases, and amount of farm subsidies.

    Of course if your congressmen are wise Byrds that helps too in the amount sent back to the home state.

    I not sure the statistics are a meaningfull measure of anything but the fact that all states would be better off to just keep the money in the first place and send a part to DC.

    BTW, DC gets $5.55 back for every $ the people there send in.

    -- Posted by Old John on Fri, Sep 23, 2011, at 11:42 AM

Respond to this thread