The Republican Nomination For President: The Race For The Race For The White House

@revelette,

Quote:

The editors also discouraged voters from choosing Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who they say seems “persistently unable to bring gravity to the national stage.”

That might be the precise quality needed at this juncture. Those who have persistently brought gravity to the national stage have had a long run and perhaps a hiatus in their activities would be in order.

0 Replies

@revelette,

The dems have no back bone, and he GOP knows that! They all need to be replaced next year with write ins and recalls.

0 Replies

@H2O MAN,

Quote:

You must either be living off the government in some manner – or you’re just hopelessly out of your freaking mind.

But if the number of people prepared to come out and vote contains a majority of those who are "living off the government" it is of no consequence whether they hopelessly out of their freaking minds.

That is why conservatives are opposed to government spending in principle. A majority of voters who are voting to maintain, or increase, their pay and opportunities for promotion, is not an entity likely to listen to reasoned arguments and beyond a certain point of psephological penetration such a majority is unstoppable in the short term. The buffers are eventually required.

But in the long term we are all dead.

0 Replies

Damnit, Gingrich seems to be tanking in the tracking polls. Too early! He needs to win a few states and then implode.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

...And there is a debate tonight in Iowa. Romney could decide that the Newt balloon may be deflating and it would be a good strategy to avoid saying anything stupid. Some of the other candidates, though, may see an opportunity to get into the top four.
Paul, of course, will continue to be Paul.

0 Replies

Rasmussen poll shocker: Gingrich tanks in Iowa, Romney now on top
Mitt Romney has never been expected to win Iowa, but he's taken the lead in that first-in-the-nation contest, a new Rasmussen poll shows. Newt Gingrich is a close second, but he has lost ground.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/The-Vote/2011/1215/Rasmussen-poll-shocker-Gingrich-tanks-in-Iowa-Romney-now-on-top

0 Replies

I'm very impressed with Ron Paul tonight.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

In related electoral news,

Senate Republicans are trying to pass a plan that would finance the Payroll tax cut that everyone seems to want by cutting the Medicare benefits of CURRENT retirees. In order to avoid raising taxes on the wealthy to pay for it.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/house-gop-payroll-tax-cut-bill-cuts-medicare-for-current-middle-class-retirees.php

Is that the proposal that would raise medicare premiums on some beneficiaries? A kind of 'means testing' effort?

If so, I actually wouldn't mind seeing something like that get bi-partisan support. I think there are probably plenty of retirees that could apply to and not impact their overall quality of life.

1 Reply

@Irishk,

By golly, this just might be our first political/economic disagreement.

Since I use Medicare, and am very unlikely (trust me) to be impacted by any kind of means testing, it's kind of an emotional response. We paid for this program from the day it was started. I mean, anyone eligible for Medicare at the present time was almost certainly paying for it at the time the program was started. It's a kind of elegant system. You pay for it; you get it when you are 65. Now, all of a sudden it's going to be subject to means testing? There is a distinction between entitlements and welfare. Entitlements are paid for or otherwise earned. We're going to wake up some fine day and discover we've all been converted to welfare recipients.

Sure, it is kind of distasteful to see the wealthy <the article says "middle class", by the way> pull down exactly the same benefits as I, but let's not forget there is no cap on Medicare earnings. The plan is to pay more into the program than others, and come up with higher premiums anyway. Doesn't sound quite right, especially since the people I consider rich aren't really concerned with which doctor and which facility accepts Medicare in the first place.

If my short term memory serves, everyone will face the same situation by 2018, anyway.

I have the same objection to payroll tax cuts for Social Security as I do for Medicare. So each account is made whole by additions from general revenues. Sounds like a really big welfare program to me.

3 Replies

@roger,

Well said. The reason I posed the question to Cyclo is because I couldn't get his link to work in my browser (kept closing with an error msg - stupid browser!), but I'd seen this New York Times article earlier and thought the subjects were one and the same.

Not so much. The Ryan/Wyden (I really like Sen. Wyden, btw) collaboration is simply a proposal...not in any way to the legislative step yet.

Read it when you have time and let us know what you think. Could be I need to rethink all this, but I do like that we have serious politicians like Ron Wyden looking for solutions to a problem that will have a huge economic impact on the future of this country.

2 Replies

@Irishk,

That's funny, the link opens fine for me!

The Wyden/Ryan thing has tremendous issues and liabilities associated with it; and it's a political loser to boot. So I wouldn't bet on that going anywhere soon. Both Wyden and Ryan have admitted that their proposal is unlikely to save any actual money, unless the rising costs of health care outpace the rise in the 'premium support' payment - just like Ryan's earlier health care proposal in his 2012 budget. Indeed, this is how it's SUPPOSED to save money - that, and some extremely vague muttering about 'competition.'

That's a dog politically; the public isn't ready for a program that will 'end medicare as we know it,' which this does.

We really ought to stop this screwing around and go whole-hog into Single Payer HC as fast as possible. It would save tremendous amounts of time and money for each and every single person in the country, and do more to slow the rise of HC costs than any other action we could take.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Hmmm. I tried again this morning and still get "IE cannot open blah, blah...Operation Aborted".

Oh, well. Back to our regularly scheduled debating Smile

(I'm leaving now lol)

0 Replies

@roger,

I understand where you're coming from, because I'm now 76, and have used Medicare for over 11 years. It's been a god-send, because I was diagnosed with prostate cancer, and all the radiation treatment was "free." I researched how much it would have cost if I had to pay for it out of pocket, and the range about four years ago was between $35,000 and $50,000. I addition to all that, I get my annual physical, all the lab work, and prescription drugs at highly discounted prices.

The problem with Medicare isn't about those of us who have paid into the system during our working years, but how the government expanded the program to people who never paid into the system. In addition to that, with the baby-boomers reaching Medicare age, the system will be heavily subsidized by the government as fewer workers pay into the system.

Our government is useless, worthless, and impotent when it comes to spending taxpayer monies. Next year's budget that was just approved will include about a $trillion dollars in defense and homeland security. All while our infrastructure and education goes down the toilet.

They all need to be replaced by people who understand these simple concepts; you can't spend money on "defense" while letting our country go to pot.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Our government is useless, worthless, and impotent when it comes to spending taxpayer monies. Next year's budget that was just approved will include about a $trillion dollars in defense and homeland security. All while our infrastructure and education goes down the toilet.

They all need to be replaced by people who understand these simple concepts; you can't spend money on "defense" while letting our country go to pot.

Here, here!

I am so sick of watching our great county go down the tube due to the seemingly endless supply of idiots that are running it. At the same time, I am sick of the fickle voters that elect these politicians due to their reliance on sound bites and partisan bias.

I have had to work hard on pulling myself back and not joining the OWS gang while they are out and about in Columbus. I am about to graduate and cannot take the chance on somehow being arrested and having that on my record. Still, I am so damn angry at things going on in this country.

Forgive me if this offends anyone; however, it is what I really want to stand in front of Congress and say to them.

I generally stay away from the politics threads on here so I bid you adieu. Over and out. Que Sera Sera.

Razz

1 Reply

@JustBrooke,

Right JB--you're sick of everything. Brilliant.

I love the way you protest with the OWS movement without taking any unnecessary risks.

1 Reply

@spendius,

What "risk" are you talking about?

1 Reply

@Irishk,

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/15/us/politics/lawmakers-offer-bipartisan-plan-to-overhaul-medicare.html?_r=4&hp

Quote:

Lawmakers Offer Bipartisan Plan to Overhaul Medicare

By ROBERT PEAR

Published: December 14, 2011

<snip>

Congress would establish an insurance exchange for Medicare beneficiaries. Private plans would compete with the traditional Medicare program and would have to provide benefits of the same or greater value. The federal contribution in each region would be based on the cost of the second-cheapest option, whether that was a private plan or traditional Medicare.

This might be workable, depending on details. Contribution based on second cheapest option is a cute way of establishing a certain minimum coverage for all, while allowing greater benefits for anyone who wants to pay for them. "The federal contribution" still has the sound of moving from entitlement to welfare. I'll have to pay closer attention to details to have a serious opinion.

<snip>

Quote:

To stay under the limit, Congress could cut payments to providers and suppliers responsible for the overspending and could increase Medicare premiums for high-income beneficiaries, the lawmakers said.

quote]

Now, this section confuses me. It sounds like our choice of private plans, with part of the cost difference being made up for by federal contribution. Yet, they are still talking about Congress cutting payments to providers. I don't see a connection between this and the the concept of private insurance. It almost sounds like it's going to be neither one nor the other.

Maybe this will be clearer later. I'm kind of recovering from a flu shot today, and thinking it's about time for a nap.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

What "risk" are you talking about?

Those JB mentioned in her post which you have obviously not read.

1 Reply

@spendius,

That's the reason why your post doesn't make any sense; they must be self-explanatory without expecting everybody to have read every post on a2k.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

How can they make sense to somebody who butts in without knowing what is being discussed. I expect you to have read the post I responded to. Every post on A2K is not involved.

1 Reply

The Republican Nomination For President: The Race For The Race For The White House

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know