And it gets worse with Medicaid. They want to make it into a "block grant" program run by each state. How well is that going to work out when federal assistance to states dries up in order to grow the already massive defense budget? Medicaid will die a slow, painful death, much like the many seniors who depend on it and Medicare to deal with health care issues in their golden years.

QuakerOats;1246635 wrote:obama can cut $700 billion from medicare because the death panels will be eliminating health care beyond a certain age.

All's well that ends well.


Change we can believe in ...

Will you ever stop lying or do they put something in the water in Salem to make you so deluded?

Footwedge;1247055 wrote:Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare will be solved by the R's? LMFAO.

Solved?

A proposal to the current growing debt is what we are posting about. What formal proposal has a democratic legislator proposed?

Con_Alma;1247234 wrote:Solved?

A proposal to the current growing debt is what we are posting about. What formal proposal has a democratic legislator proposed?

For a libertarian, FW has this uncanny ability of blaming the "neo-con's" for all of America's ills yet never (well, rarely at least) points an accusatory finger at the obvious lack of planning, ideas, and planning from American socialists.

At least eeeevil neo-cons like Paul Ryan have the testicular fortitude of bringing something tangible to the table.

BoatShoes;1247130 wrote:Or perhaps taken-to-task by Ronald Reagan's budget director.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/14/opinion/paul-ryans-fairy-tale-budget-plan.html

Or praised by Clinton's COS. To each his own I guess.

stlouiedipalma;1247136 wrote:Careful with the Stockman quotes, Boat. The righties here don't consider him one of them anymore, therefore he is not to be believed.

Did you people kick Erskine Bowles out of the Club yet?

fish82;1247257 wrote:Or praised by Clinton's COS. To each his own I guess.

Well Mr. Bowles is part of the Mr. Serious Centrist People crowd who has been duped by Paul Ryan and that's fine for now. I'm sure he will come around. He'll still make at least as good of Treasury Secretary as Timmy Geithner if he is indeed the front runner for the job.

Mittens now picking up some of the yute vote? Interesting.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/a-romney-first-over-40-of-youth-vote-back-him/article/2504893#.UCugeKD2T1W

Bunch of racist kids

BoatShoes;1247282 wrote:Well Mr. Bowles is part of the Mr. Serious Centrist People crowd who has been duped by Paul Ryan and that's fine for now. I'm sure he will come around.

So the American taxpayers have been duped out of $6 TRILLION by obama in his first term, and you are chastising Mr. Ryan, the first person who has laid out a real solution in a long, long time.

What do you get paid per post?

I think the Medicare age should be raised from 65 to 70, maybe even 72. Life expectancy, in 1965 when the Medicare age was set, was 70. So Medicare would pay on average for 5 years. The life expectancy in 2012 is 78, so Medicare is now paying on average of 13 years. That's obviously something that can't sustain itself without the constant raising of the Medicare tax.

I'm a believer that Gov't needs to be ran as a business, and with that comes tough decisions. Kasich has done it in Ohio, and now we need Romney/Ryan to do it on a national level.

believer;1247233 wrote:

a little racist eh?

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/243697-romney-comes-out-swinging-against-obama-in-tough-new-speech


'TAKE YOUR CAMPAIGN OF DIVISION AND ANGER AND HATE BACK TO CHICAGO'...



Thank you, Mr. Romney!

se-alum;1247446 wrote:I think the Medicare age should be raised from 65 to 70, maybe even 72. Life expectancy, in 1965 when the Medicare age was set, was 70. So Medicare would pay on average for 5 years. The life expectancy in 2012 is 78, so Medicare is now paying on average of 13 years. That's obviously something that can't sustain itself without the constant raising of the Medicare tax.

I'm a believer that Gov't needs to be ran as a business, and with that comes tough decisions. Kasich has done it in Ohio, and now we need Romney/Ryan to do it on a national level.

I agree. Age should be raised and benefits should be cut. Good luck getting anyone to do that though since all the seniors will never vote for the party that raises the retirement age. The boomers don't want sacrifice, they want their benefits now and they want them increased.

Pick6;1247462 wrote:a little racist eh?

Obama has big ears. Nothing racist about that.

The defections continue:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/15/former-obama-campaign-co-chair-to-stump-for-romney/

QuakerOats;1247374 wrote:So the American taxpayers have been duped out of $6 TRILLION by obama in his first term, and you are chastising Mr. Ryan, the first person who has laid out a real solution in a long, long time.

What do you get paid per post?

In comparison to you?

^^^ I get nothing; just defending liberty and advocating for fiscal sanity ........plus helping to drive liberals over the edge.

QuakerOats;1247597 wrote:^^^ I get nothing; just defending liberty and advocating for fiscal sanity ........plus helping to drive liberals over the edge.

Your defending your own version of liberty and fiscal sanity. Fortunately, there is room in this country for all crackpots.

Great article that Boatshoe, I Wear Pants and Ty (sorry a Union leader has to read it first an explain it) should read and do a little research to verify the facts… … tell us what you find.

American left is the most self-indulgent, arrogant, and spoiled group of people on the face of the earth. They live in a nation facing national bankruptcy and societal upheaval -- a country presently subsisting on the residue of past economic achievements. Yet the only things that matter to them are their lifestyles and imposing their self-determined superiority on rest of the American people.


http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/08/the_childishness_of_the_american_left.html

American left is the most self-indulgent, arrogant, and spoiled group of people on the face of the earth. They live in a nation facing national bankruptcy and societal upheaval -- a country presently subsisting on the residue of past economic achievements. Yet the only things that matter to them are their lifestyles and imposing their self-determined superiority on rest of the American people.



Thought it deserved to be in BOLD.

Footwedge;1247051 wrote:I doubt the man can even read a pie chart. And anyone....and I mean anyone that doesn't understand the military bloat...and it's consequences, is no fiscal hawk....at all.

Just because it wasn't part of his budget proposal (which dealt mostly with Medicare) doesn't mean he doesn't understand it. But the final decision for the military budget (and all parts of the budget) would be with Romney, not Paul Ryan.

BoatShoes;1247130 wrote:Or perhaps taken-to-task by Ronald Reagan's budget director.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/14/opinion/paul-ryans-fairy-tale-budget-plan.html

BoatShoes;1247140 wrote:My mistake lol. I was unaware of his pariah status. Another former reliable conservative who simply isn't a "true conservative" I suppose.

Another "reliable conservative" who can't read a pie chart either. Conviently left out of Stockman's brilliant analysis is the fact that in 1960 (when Medicare and Medicaid didn't exist), defense spending was 35% of the total budget. Now it's in the upper teens.

Stockman's railing against the banks and Federal Reserve is admirable, but I must have missed the part where he recommended someone else as Romney's running mate.

Also, do you mean to tell me you guys would be on board with this part:

A true agenda to reform the welfare state would require a sweeping, income-based eligibility test, which would reduce or eliminate social insurance benefits for millions of affluent retirees. Without it, there is no math that can avoid giant tax increases or vast new borrowing. Yet the supposedly courageous Ryan plan would not cut one dime over the next decade from the $1.3 trillion-per-year cost of Social Security and Medic

He seems to be saying Ryan's plan doesn't go far enough, which most of us righties would agree with. But when one step is taken in that direction, a step no one on the left running for office dares to take, the lies and distortions coming from Obama's campaign tell me all I need to know about which side to lean to.

Footwedge;1247051 wrote:I doubt the man can even read a pie chart.

It's a safe bet he can't read pie charts like you do. I doubt anyone can. I mean that in all sincerity.

se-alum;1247446 wrote:I think the Medicare age should be raised from 65 to 70, maybe even 72. Life expectancy, in 1965 when the Medicare age was set, was 70. So Medicare would pay on average for 5 years. The life expectancy in 2012 is 78, so Medicare is now paying on average of 13 years. That's obviously something that can't sustain itself without the constant raising of the Medicare tax.

I'm a believer that Gov't needs to be ran as a business, and with that comes tough decisions. Kasich has done it in Ohio, and now we need Romney/Ryan to do it on a national level.

Agreed on raising the age. Add to that we are getting fatter as a nation, and heart disease, diabetes , etc are on the rise.

QuakerOats;1247468 wrote:http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/243697-romney-comes-out-swinging-against-obama-in-tough-new-speech


'TAKE YOUR CAMPAIGN OF DIVISION AND ANGER AND HATE BACK TO CHICAGO'...



Thank you, Mr. Romney!

Ehh, I could live without this on both side. Blah.

QuakerOats;1247493 wrote:The defections continue:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/15/former-obama-campaign-co-chair-to-stump-for-romney/

Old news. He changed sides a while ago.

QuakerOats;1247597 wrote:^^^ I get nothing; just defending liberty and advocating for fiscal sanity ........plus helping to drive liberals over the edge.

Good for you.