He's already signed defense budget cuts, about half a trillion dollars. That's a bit more than 0.012%.

Don't forget Gary Johnson. The conversation mentions him too.

Hasn't happened and isn't likely to.

Still not a single link of those " 1000 of places online " ....

Probably will be done with the help of this guy :
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/3...opperfield.jpg

PS: Vote for Romney, please .. nothing better can happen for the rest of the world ...

Maybe not all, but it will cut billions and reinvest others into better (defense) programs.

I know you are capable of doing your own research.

I will give you a hint, the links have his name in it.

you're a naive fool if you think anything is going to change. big government and big business go hand in hand and romney or obama will just do like every other politician in the last 30 years, serve their friends and donor interests.

Ranking Republicans have even said that if Obama wins it is pretty much a mandate to raise taxes on high income earners.

Reading between the lines that essentially says "yeah, we know it needs to be done but if people are dumb enough to elect Romney we won't have to do it."

It was a Yes or No question.

Why do you think romney or the gop will be any different? they all break their promises and none reduce government significantly. its just the same cycle over and over with different sponsors.

We must have taken different reading comprehension classes.

Oh so if he wins a second time suddenly the Republicans must work with him? When he is a lame duck? :1orglaugh

No, they know what needs to be done.

They were not discussing if the Democrats get control of Congress, just what it means if Obama wins.

They know it needs to be done, will go along with it and then blame Obama. They will suddenly cooperate because they will have an excuse to play along (along with spending cuts).

i dont have to pull your links. Romney will do it for me when he gets elected.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

He will probably first go after teen sites. Maybe Ed will get to meet his hero at the DOJ press conference?

yo Ed google Mitt Romney vows to ban pornography :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

http://sausedo.net/wp-content/upload...t-in-mouth.jpg

Oh but you see, he won't really. When he says stuff like that he is lying, but when he actually lies he's not really lying.

I know, doesn't make sense to me either, but it seems to make sense to his supporters. They probably have some kind of secret language to know what lies are real and what lies are fake.

One thing for sure though, Mormons are the least fanatical about pornography so we have nothing to worry about. :1orglaugh

Porn isn't my big worry, What Obama has done to the medical field has fucked us much more...

Get ready for the next big fucking when the bond bubble breaks. Interest rates have to go back up and governments are going to be holding the bag.

Bankers will skate clear again.... and, they are banking on Rmoney to give them the pass.

Real examples, please.

Have posted it all on here many times...

As an early adopter of ObamaCare you are wrong on all counts. I can go to any doctor, going out of network just means separate deductible and 20% coinsurance, just like a PPO. I have to get four routine tests every six months that cost about $350 anywhere and I would have 20% coinsurance on them so I just go to the super cheap lab I found ran by a doctor that I love where I pay $75. It is a little more expensive than if I go through my insurance but I like it and am thankful he was there when I did not have insurance.

Besides listening to talking points ... or regurgitating them ... how about getting them from someone actually in the system?

Edit: oh yeah so far CVS, Walgreens, Albertsons and Publix all accept my ObamaCare prescription insurance where I pay $4 for generics after an annual $250 deductible.

Well I guess one way of not getting called out for being wrong is editing your post where you are wrong. Luckily I quoted it before that happened.

Not true, this has just started going into effect in the last couple of months. and is not from "Obama care" All insurance companies have not started doing it yet.

So what is happening then is insurance companies are fucking with people to steer public opinion. Whose fault is that? Maybe its all of the Republican screaming about death panels and things even though every insurance company has always decided what they will cover.

Edit: the government currently manages my perfectly good policy. It is ran by the same people who administer federal health benefits. Since insurance companies can't figure it out maybe it needs to be government run. Works fine for millions.

Things have dramatically changed in the last 2 years. and what makes you think this is not inside info? Do you really think that would be my main concern if it was just because I heard someone talking about it?

Edit: maybe I edited the post because I felt it was something I decided against posting on gfy.

Thank you for taking that away from me...

Don't forget one of the reasons how we REALLY got here...



https://youtube.com/watch?v=oSAzYWmsiwI

OK JohnnyClips get out of here with your stupid shit.

Of course, because you actually have no inside knowledge your going to result to name calling... :Oh crap

No, I am calling BS because nothing has changed for the handful of doctors I know socially, nothing has changed for people I know with conventional health insurance and I have no complaints as someone in the system.

But yeah, I will listen to some guy on a message board that owns a small program and has "insider information."

You may want to go back and talk to the Doctor friends of yours that own their own practice.

Edit: I guess a guy that owns a small program can't have a family member who is a doctor that own his own practice.

I do all of the time. My best friend is engaged to one.

Here is a simple one to start with, ask if they still get clocks etc. from drug reps.

Anyone who votes for Obama makes less than $250k a year.

I will admit, doctors are afraid of some thing. That reimbursements will go down a bit and the number of patients they have to see will go up. What you don't hear them telling people is that hiring a PA will allow them to do that without a real extra workload on them and that the money thing will even out with the PA(s).

The upside to that is mostly everybody will be insured. Since there are doctors left that believe in the oath they took, non-biased ones see this as a good thing.

Just like PAs saved everybody in Vietnam they will do the same thing here.

That doesn't fit in the talking points though.

That was done in late '08 before Obama and are actually rules from The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.

Let me guess... your inside source is a Republican?

You would be surprised. Some value social issues more than money.

Reimbursements have already gone down. And yes there will be many more patients to see, and in order for doctors to see them their quality of care will go way down, people will be moved in one door and out the other like cattle, just to try to make up for the loss.

I took a girl to a "diet doctor" to get some weight loss pills. The doctor never even seen her the second visit. the first one he talked to her for about 1 minute. The PA is the one who took care of everything everything. They never even checked blood work to make sure her body was in good enough shape to handle the pills. Luckily "we know one" and had this checked first. Is this really the type of care we want from our personal doctors?

Same is true for the majority of Romney voters.

98% of US workers make less than $250K p/year.

97% of US businesses make less than $250K p/year.

If Romney needs more than 2% of the vote, he'll have to pull from that same remaining 98%.

There have always been quacks. It is not a new phenomenon.

Anything else?

Nice way to move around answering the question. I was just giving the scenario based on your post.


If that is the Medical attention your happy with then cool :thumbsup

Some who make over $250K will vote for Obama, too.

Is that why Romney is leading in the polls? because of that 2% voting for him.

Oh btw the PA by law is allowed to take care of everything. They just have to be supervised by a doctor. State laws very but in many they do not even have to be in the same office.

We need to rely more on PAs and they will be the solution just like they were in Vietnam.

Far too many doctors are tied up with patients they do not need to see.

A multi-doctor practice should be ran just like a ER where you are triaged and that determines who you see.

Doctor offices are far from efficient. Most are still using paper charts.

Their own inefficiency are why they are falling behind and consolidators come in and buy them and bring them up to modern standards.

Surely you aren't against that...its just the free market doing its thing.

I do not receive medical attention like that. I can't help it that a girl went to a quack because she is too lazy to eat right and exercise.

I don't even know what to say to that.

All I said is that both candidates require votes from the majority 98% in order to win.

That flew right over your head... but since you went there anyway, Scott Rasmussen says that with Romney's two point lead in the polls "Either way, it remains too close to call."

Now it actually sounds like you have some inside knowledge. I would think you would know exactly what I'm talking about on the rest of the problems.


Sorry my mistake :)

Thats some convoluted logic you got there!
what lies are real = untruths
what lies are fake = truth

Alright, its Sunday, I have shit to do that I have been procrastinating on all day so might as well do it before I go to bed.

It was nice sparing with you Mr. Hammer.

Until next time...

(Great now I have MC Hammer playing in my head)