[TheRealThing]

^^
Thank you for that explanation.

No problem. You will not see any news about this coming from the main stream media but it should be noted that as of yesterday, 8 new taxes associated with ObamaCare came "into effect". From now on to help fund ObamaCare, things like capital gains will be taxed at a higher rate. The list goes on, taxes on medical devices and certain health policies are to be taxed.

"On January 1, regardless of the outcome of fiscal cliff negotiations, Americans will be hit with a $1 trillion Obamacare tax hike.


Obamacare contains twenty new or higher taxes. Five of the taxes hit for the first time on January 1. In total, for the years 2013-2022, Americans face a net $1 trillion tax hike for the years 2013-2022, according to the Congressional Budget Office."


http://www.infiniteunknown.net/2012/12/3...an-1-2013/

The liberals go on and on about how we fought two unfunded wars. This is not true since George W actually followed the dictates of established law and went before the congress, who then voted to fund those two wars. However, in the case of ObamaCare, the koolaid drinking devout, of the democrat's legion of 'voter-serfs' are willing to believe there is some vast untapped pool of money out there from which ObamaCare will be paid for. Sort of like believing in the big bang and evolution. Once one sets foot in la-la land, anything is possible. The truth is taxpayers and consumers are the only source of revenue and they will bare 100% of the burden for likely over 50 million non-payers. Who really believes that is even possible?

[Wildcatk23]

I remember a thread being spammed with post about how it's not in affect and that it hasn't helped anyone. After 4 real stated it helped his wife. Funny How opinions change so easily.

[TheRealThing]

I remember a thread being spammed with post about how it's not in affect and that it hasn't helped anyone. After 4 real stated it helped his wife. Funny How opinions change so easily.

Post it.

[Wildcatk23]

http://www.bluegrassrivals.com/forum/sho...717&page=3

[Wildcatk23]

Post it.

http://www.bluegrassrivals.com/forum/sho...717&page=3

[TheRealThing]

Hereeeeeeee's those layoffs those layoffs we voted for last November!

Kroger- "Obamacare could result in tens of thousands of Kroger employees being limited to working 28 hours per week."

Darden Restaurants- According to the Orlando Sentinel, Darden Restaurants, a casual dining chain best known for their Red Lobster, Olive Garden and LongHorn Steakhouse restaurants, is "experimenting with limiting the hours of some of its workers to avoid health care requirements under the Affordable Care Act when they take effect in 2014".

JANCOA Janitorial Services- "The CEO of JANCOA, Mary Miller, testified to Congress that Obamacare was a "dream killer","

•Smith & Nephew - 770 layoffs
•Abbott Labs - 700 layoffs
•Covidien - 595 layoffs
•Kinetic Concepts - 427 layoffs
•St. Jude Medical - 300 layoffs
•Hill Rom - 200 layoffs

As for that seemingly innocuous 2.3% tax on medical devices? Well it is not so painless after all. It seems that a firm up in Michigan (Stryker Corp.) has plans to lay off 1,000 workers as the direct result of the new tax which took effect on Jan. 1st---- “In a statement Tuesday, Stryker President and CEO Kevin A. Lobo made it clear that the layoffs were directly related to the increased costs on business imposed by the Affordable Care Act, which is scheduled to be fully implemented in 2014.

“Stryker remains significantly concerned with the upcoming medical device excise tax and its negative impact on jobs and innovation, and will continue to work with Congress to try to repeal the tax,” said Lobo.----
http://www.examiner.com/article/stryker-...device-tax

Welcome to your 'fundamentally changed' face of America.
"The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either." – Benjamin Franklin

[TheRealThing]

http://www.bluegrassrivals.com/forum/sho...717&page=3 "Funny How opinions change so easily"

What in the world are you talking about 23? Who changed their opinion from that thread to this one? From the day ObamaCare was rammed through in March of 2010, parts of ObamaCare went immediately active, others became active on various dates until full implimentation was to be acheived in 2014.

Effective September 23, 2010 AMONG OTHERS;

- Insurers are prohibited from imposing lifetime dollar limits on essential benefits, like hospital stays, in new policies issued.

- Dependents (children) will be permitted to remain on their parents' insurance plan until their 26th birthday, and regulations implemented under PPACA include dependents that no longer live with their parents, are not a dependent on a parent's tax return, are no longer a student, or are married. < This one is what 4real was talking about

[Granny Bear]

Soo, Hillary is finally testifying regarding facts/theories/decisions in the Benghazi affair. Anybody see her swinging her fists and raising her voice???

She doesn't have the cool control of Slick Willy, but guess that's just the breaks.

[RunItUpTheGut]

A lot is riding on this for Hillary.
IMO, she either kisses Obamas ass and lies about everything she knows.
OR, she does the Clinton thing and throws him under the bus so that in 2016 she can run for Pres.

[WideRight05]

Looks to me like the senate is just letting her slide...Rand Paul tore her a new one though LOL.

[Granny Bear]

^
Yes, he did!! I didn't care for her response either; I think she was really trying to divert attention away from his questions. But that appears to be the way most of the administration is handling the Benghazi affair.

I don't think she can make a bid in 2016 Gut, even if she does expose the whole truth.

[TheRealThing]

Looks to me like the senate is just letting her slide...Rand Paul tore her a new one though LOL.

Republicans are scared to death of public opinion. If their worst fears were to be confirmed, and the GOP is going down, (I don't buy that for a second BTW) they should at least have the courage to stand by their guns. We sent them up there because we don't want to be governed by a boat load of la-la's, otherwise we'd have elected lieberals. You'd think they could figure that out on their own.

[TheRealThing]

Finally saw a couple congressmen go after Hillary as if they were trying to get to the truth, and not just thanking her over and over for her service ad-nauseum. She's the secretary of state, and almost every questioner thanked her for her service and appologized for subjecting her to the rigors of a hard day on Capital Hill answering questions. 136 days after 4 American heros lay dead and we're appologizing to the secretary of state for wanting to know why it happened? :please: And yet, she answered absolutely nothing, citing the findings of the review board in her every response. I actually heard her maintaining that the video could still be deemed responsible for the attacks at Benghazi. It was sickening to see her act as if she is above reproach, feigning personal insult for direct questions about her knowledge of the matter.

In truth, we are no closer to getting to the bottom of it now, than we were in the beginning. Matter of fact, the interim Libyan president, Mohammed el-Megarif, has been infinitely more forthcoming with the American public than this secretary of state or her boss, Mr Obama. Megrif's official statement on Sunday, Sept. 16, 2012--- "The idea that this criminal and cowardly act was a spontaneous protest that just spun out of control is completely unfounded and preposterous," Megarif told NPR. "We firmly believe that this was a pre-calculated, pre-planned attack that was carried out specifically to attack the U.S. Consulate." I mean, it only took the acting president of war torn Libya 5 days to make an official statement which aired on Sunday news programs, (which turned out to be 100% accurate BTW). Consider how absurd this is, fully 15 days after the attack on Benghazi, our president is standing in the well of the United Nations still saying the attacks were the resultant from the video;

EXCERPT---
On September 25, in an address before the United Nations General Assembly President Obama stated, "The attacks on our civilians in Benghazi were attacks on America...And there should be no doubt that we will be relentless in tracking down the killers and bringing them to justice." He also said, "There is no video that justifies an attack on an Embassy." [Wiki]
END EXCERPT

He never did admit to the attacks being acts of terror until he and Candy Crowley conspired to defraud Mitt Romney in the second debate on October 16th. That is the first time I remember any dircect assertion of Benghazi being the result of terror coming from Obama's mouth, and still it was Crowley that actually said it, LOL. That's 35 days after the Benghazi attacks by my math. So actually, the Libyan president beat Obama to the punch by a full month. Libyan president 5 days to respond honestly, the American president 35 days, semi-honestly.

The whole thing stinks to high heaven. When you think about it for a moment you realize her whole defense for her dereliction of duty is that she didn't see the emails or cables from Ambassador Stevens. I like what Megarif said, "It's preposterous."

My favorite part of the questioning was when the congressman, exairforce combat pilot, asked her about the real time link drones are known to send directly to the White House. She slobbered around about that one before bailing out altogether.

[vector]

Slippery Hillary your next president :worthy:

[WideMiddle03]

Slippery Hillary your next president :worthy:

marco rubio your next president

[RunItUpTheGut]

^
I wouldnt mind that.
I believe its obvious Rand Paul is gearing up to run in the primary in 2016.
If Rubio, Christie, Paul, and Santorum all run in 2016, we could see some tight races.

[Granny Bear]

Not for me. I have a clear choice between those four!!

[RunItUpTheGut]

^
Please, do tell.
I believe everyone might have there mind made up.

[TheRealThing]

^
I wouldnt mind that.
I believe its obvious Rand Paul is gearing up to run in the primary in 2016.
If Rubio, Christie, Paul, and Santorum all run in 2016, we could see some tight races.

Compared to what we have now, any one of those four would be like trading Alfred E Newman [attachment=o2764] for Albert Einstein, LOL.


Rubio- I like him but, I was a little disappointed in his performance while questioning Hillary yesterday. He will learn from that. Growing into a full fledged statesman takes time and experience. Obama for instance had neither. He may be our best shot in 2016 if he shows courage and doesn't get appologetic for his conservative views.

Christie- I don't know about you all but, I'm still mad and confused about his on stage love affair with Obama. As it all turned out, it was all political kabuki theater for the sake of the Obama reelection bid. A fact that seemed obvious to everybody except Christie.

Paul- Although I like him, I think the democrat smear machine would make the same kind of hash out of him, as they did Romney. Romney was a far superior candidate than Obama ever thought about being and still lost. The dems understand something the republicans do not. America has bred an entire voting bloc of folks who think the government is there to give them things and, they will cvontinue to vote for the dems, who BTW do know how to buy votes and don't mind sacrificing their last shred of credibility to get elected. I would certainly vote for a president Rand Paul, over a President Hillary Clinton.

Santorum- Same problem as Paul

[vector]

^
I wouldnt mind that.
I believe its obvious Rand Paul is gearing up to run in the primary in 2016.
If Rubio, Christie, Paul, and Santorum all run in 2016, we could see some tight races.

I would love to see rand paul run Christie has got no chance

[vector]

what would the crazys do if this would happen under obamas watch I can still rember when this happen


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beirut...ks_bombing

[WideMiddle03]

what would the crazys do if this would happen under obamas watch I can still rember when this happen


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beirut...ks_bombing

do you remember barck promised to bring us out of this mess and he only made it worse
do you remember nething
or are you still dreeming about your poster boy

[WideMiddle03]

[Image: http://www.bluegrassrivals.com/forum/pic...tureid=554]

[TheRealThing]

what would the crazys do if this would happen under obamas watch I can still rember when this happen

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beirut...ks_bombing

Funny how things stand out in a man's mind, here's two that stand out in mine.

OBAMA PROMISE----#1 I will cut the deficit in half during my first term. (That's the very same deficit that went from 10.75 trillion in Feb of 2009, to 16.45 trillion in 2013)

QUOTE--- ”the President today promised that by the end of his first term, he will cut in half the massive federal deficit we’ve inherited. And we’ll do it in a new way: honestly and candidly.”

Indeed, President Obama did make that promise that day, saying, “today I’m pledging to cut the deficit we inherited in half by the end of my first term in office. This will not be easy. It will require us to make difficult decisions and face challenges we’ve long neglected. But I refuse to leave our children with a debt that they cannot repay — and that means taking responsibility right now, in this administration, for getting our spending under control.”


OBAMA PROMISE----#2 I will cut the cost of a typical family's premium by up to $2,500 a year.

POLITIFACT.COM
No cut in premiums for typical family

Updated: Friday, August 31st, 2012 | By J.B. Wogan

When it came to health care premiums for the typical family, Obama said he would cut the annual cost by $2,500. Months before Obama took office, a New York Times reporter dubbed it one of the most audacious pledges of the campaign.

We reached out to David Cutler, an economist who advised Obama during the 2008 campaign and helped calculate the $2,500 figure that appeared in Obama's speeches. He said the calculation encompassed total health care costs, not just premiums. These would include out-of-pocket costs, employer-provided insurance costs, and taxes to pay for public insurance programs.

Cutler acknowledged that Obama made "occasional misstatements” that tied the $2,500 reduction to premiums and not total medical spending. We can't judge whether Obama misspoke, but we checked the Project Vote Smart database of public statements by politicians, which shows that Obama said premiums (and only premiums) would go down for the typical or average family by $2,500 repeatedly.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...e-premium/

[vector]

Funny how things stand out in a man's mind, here's two that stand out in mine.

OBAMA PROMISE----#1 I will cut the deficit in half during my first term. (That's the very same deficit that went from 10.75 trillion in Feb of 2009, to 16.45 trillion in 2013)

QUOTE--- ”the President today promised that by the end of his first term, he will cut in half the massive federal deficit we’ve inherited. And we’ll do it in a new way: honestly and candidly.”

Indeed, President Obama did make that promise that day, saying, “today I’m pledging to cut the deficit we inherited in half by the end of my first term in office. This will not be easy. It will require us to make difficult decisions and face challenges we’ve long neglected. But I refuse to leave our children with a debt that they cannot repay — and that means taking responsibility right now, in this administration, for getting our spending under control.”


OBAMA PROMISE----#2 I will cut the cost of a typical family's premium by up to $2,500 a year.

POLITIFACT.COM
No cut in premiums for typical family

Updated: Friday, August 31st, 2012 | By J.B. Wogan

When it came to health care premiums for the typical family, Obama said he would cut the annual cost by $2,500. Months before Obama took office, a New York Times reporter dubbed it one of the most audacious pledges of the campaign.

We reached out to David Cutler, an economist who advised Obama during the 2008 campaign and helped calculate the $2,500 figure that appeared in Obama's speeches. He said the calculation encompassed total health care costs, not just premiums. These would include out-of-pocket costs, employer-provided insurance costs, and taxes to pay for public insurance programs.

Cutler acknowledged that Obama made "occasional misstatements” that tied the $2,500 reduction to premiums and not total medical spending. We can't judge whether Obama misspoke, but we checked the Project Vote Smart database of public statements by politicians, which shows that Obama said premiums (and only premiums) would go down for the typical or average family by $2,500 repeatedly.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...e-premium/

if you have no answer change subject

[WideMiddle03]

if you have no answer change subject

if you have no defense call out poster for changing subject
posted that post pretty late
must have been up playing world of worcraft all night

[Granny Bear]

if you have no answer change subject

The thread title is about Hillary's diagnosed concussion, and the general discussion is about her Benghazi testimony; or the lack of it.

Who changed the subject?

[TheRealThing]

The thread title is about Hillary's diagnosed concussion, and the general discussion is about her Benghazi testimony; or the lack of it.

Who changed the subject?

Very astute of you Granny. Define irony-- A poster named vector, who has yet to ever hit the debated target, accusing others of changing the subject.

[vector]

The thread title is about Hillary's diagnosed concussion, and the general discussion is about her Benghazi testimony; or the lack of it.

Who changed the subject?

I was just comparing what happens under a democrat president and a republican president

[TheRealThing]

I was just comparing what happens under a democrat president and a republican president

Well, you're gonna have to get out on the thin ice just a bit farther if you expect anybody to be able to understand what significance your having posted an obscure Wiki link was supposed to have.