Obama '08?

I notice more stimulus supported companies are going belly up. When will we find out how many of them received money because of connections and friendships with Obama and members of his administration? Probably never would be my guess. No wonder people are fed up with government!

Do you keep up with news? I suggest you check Fox, listen to Rush, Hannity, and folks like Beck to help you be moreinformed. There will likely be more on this as it develops.

Just like your inability to name any new ideas Republicans have had in the last few decades, because you were 'too busy.' Right. Nobody is fooled by this stuff, Okie.

Cycloptichorn

Oh, I assure you, I keep up with the news to a degree which you probably can't even imagine. I merely assume that you do not, and your inability to actually NAME any one of the companies you are referring to is proof enough of that.

Just like your inability to name any new ideas Republicans have had in the last few decades, because you were 'too busy.' Right. Nobody is fooled by this stuff, Okie.

Cycloptichorn

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Just like your inability to name any new ideas Republicans have had in the last few decades, because you were 'too busy.' Right. Nobody is fooled by this stuff, Okie.

Cycloptichorn

I named you one,but you ignored it, which is not unusual.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Oh, I assure you, I keep up with the news to a degree which you probably can't even imagine. I merely assume that you do not, and your inability to actually NAME any one of the companies you are referring to is proof enough of that.

Just like your inability to name any new ideas Republicans have had in the last few decades, because you were 'too busy.' Right. Nobody is fooled by this stuff, Okie.

Cycloptichorn

Your steady stream of empty assertions and boastful hypocrisy is wearing a bit thin. Apparently none of us can fully imagine your extensive study, wisdom and achievement, or fully appreciate the wonders of your accumulated wisdom.

These are the boasts of a fool, and you are increasingly looking like one.

The Fair Tax, which you named, is designed to cut taxes for people such as yourself. It's revenue-neutral, but only because it screws over lower-income tax payers. It counts as a tax cut, not a 'new idea.' Just more of the same BS from your side.Cycloptichorn

Considering your` `posts, your demand for proof by others is pretty lughable, cyclops. Besides, some things are intuitively obvious to the most casual observer that has any common sense.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

The Fair Tax, which you named, is designed to cut taxes for people such as yourself. It's revenue-neutral, but only because it screws over lower-income tax payers. It counts as a tax cut, not a 'new idea.' Just more of the same BS from your side.Cycloptichorn

All debatable of course, and you refuse to consider all of the positive effects that it offers, which is not surprising from your closed liberal mindset.

If you didn't believe it would lower your taxes, Okie, you'd never support it.

Cycloptichorn

For example, if a rich man earned his money, I do not favor taking alot more of his money to pay for a government program that benefits me more than him.

Q: Another observation you're famous for is juxtaposing "public squalor" with "private affluence."

Galbraith: There's no question that in my lifetime, the contrast between what I called private affluence and public squalor has become very much greater. What do we worry about? We worry about our schools. We worry about our public recreational facilities. We worry about our law enforcement and our public housing. All of the things that bear upon our standard of living are in the public sector. We don't worry about the supply of automobiles. We don't even worry about the supply of foods. Things that come from the private sector are in abundant supply; things that depend on the public sector are widely a problem. We're a world, as I said in The Affluent Society, of filthy streets and clean houses, poor schools and expensive television. I consider that contrast to be one of my most successful arguments.

WASHINGTON – Medicare Advantage premiums fell while enrollment rose this year, despite predictions from opponents of the new federal health care law that it would drive down enrollment and force up premiums.


By Jacquelyn Martin, AP
Kathleen Sebelius said, "Medicare is stronger than ever."


Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) officials said Thursday that enrollment will rise another 10% in 2012 and that premiums will fall 4%. Extra benefits in some Medicare Advantage plans, such as for vision or hearing, also are expected to remain the same.
The new statistics disprove the doom-and-gloom predictions of last year and show that because of the new law, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said, "Medicare is stronger than ever."
"On average, Medicare Advantage premiums will go down next year and seniors will enjoy more free benefits and cheaper prescription drugs," she said.[\quote]

Medicare Advantage premiums fell while enrollment rose this year, despite predictions from opponents of the new federal health care law that it would drive down enrollment and force up premiums.