Carl Hulse wrote in the Times, today, "The Senate approved and sent to President Obama on Wednesday what Congressional Democrats hope will be the first in a series of bills spurring employment by providing tax breaks and other hiring incentives to businesses. The measure, approved on a bipartisan vote of 68 to 29, would give employers an exemption from payroll taxes through the end of 2010 on workers they hire who have been unemployed for at least 60 days. It also extends the federal highway construction program and takes other step."
The Stimulus Bill was passed in a bipartisan way though what is heard from the 'other side' these days would not indicate that they had passed one when Bush was in office, They now make it sound like one of the worst decisions the Democrats ever made.
Fingernail biters must be having a good meal about now, waiting to here how the Democrats plan to finesse the Healthcare Bill through. Someone whose name I did not catch (obviously not a Democrat) said that this was all silly because everyone knows that most people have health care covered by their jobs. Where has this person been for the past few years as fewer and fewer employers offer benefits or full time employment? How do these people get into office, let alone on television where the audience is unable to discriminate between the wise and the fools?
Showing posts with label HealthCare bill and abortion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label HealthCare bill and abortion. Show all posts
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
LITTLE FOCUSED-ON RESISTANCE TO HEALTHCARE BILL BEING PASSED
Greed, pay-offs, excessive profits and many other elements have been talked about as some of the resistance to passing the Healthcare Bill. The Bureau of Labor Statistics lists 14,500,000 people working in healthcare in the US. These people fear that, since most people's care is paid for by insurance, they could be not only out of jobs, less likely, than that they can be out of pensions if their insurance companies go bust.
The fear of losing a job, losing insurance, or losing one's pension or retirement is a very serious fear. The non-profit insurance companies are the ones with the greatest fear as they are in the red, unlike the for-profit companies who make billions in profit.Yet I have only heard it brought up, not in the media, but from employees of the non-profits. The worst fears have already.happened. People hang onto what they have for fear that, if they don't, it won't be there for them when they need it...little realizing that is the great cry of the many for whom it ceased to be there due lack of job, money, pre-existing condition, or other numerous loopholes the insurance companies use to keep the money sent them as profit rather than paid out for the health of the subscriber. Even if the bill passes, the public will not see change for a few years. At the rate the government moves, most of us will be dead of old age by the time we see implementation.
There are many interesting notions on the public table that never make it to the politicians. I don't know who Mark Cuban is, but his blog has an interesting proposition. Click here A single payer system would ultimately work well as it does in other countries but it would take years in the US to find jobs for the thousands who work for the for-profits or to help merger those employees with a government run agency.
The fear of losing a job, losing insurance, or losing one's pension or retirement is a very serious fear. The non-profit insurance companies are the ones with the greatest fear as they are in the red, unlike the for-profit companies who make billions in profit.Yet I have only heard it brought up, not in the media, but from employees of the non-profits. The worst fears have already.happened. People hang onto what they have for fear that, if they don't, it won't be there for them when they need it...little realizing that is the great cry of the many for whom it ceased to be there due lack of job, money, pre-existing condition, or other numerous loopholes the insurance companies use to keep the money sent them as profit rather than paid out for the health of the subscriber. Even if the bill passes, the public will not see change for a few years. At the rate the government moves, most of us will be dead of old age by the time we see implementation.
There are many interesting notions on the public table that never make it to the politicians. I don't know who Mark Cuban is, but his blog has an interesting proposition. Click here A single payer system would ultimately work well as it does in other countries but it would take years in the US to find jobs for the thousands who work for the for-profits or to help merger those employees with a government run agency.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
WHO DEFINES WHAT A SMART PRESIDENT IS?
Tonight, moving around on channels, I heard Britt Hume on (Fox News) advising (in replay) Tiger Woods to convert to Christianity so that he can get absolution. The Hume went on to complain about the length of time it took Obama to do something about the Christmas Day plane bomber. Apparently a president has done nothing if the media hasn't been told so they can distort it all to the public and stir up some more upset, hate and fear.
The teabaggers have gone wild again. They have gone far beyond their right to free speech expressing opinions and are advocating, dangerously, death to the Democratic party, to Obama's goals, and when they burn Obama in effigy, I think they have gone to far in tour United States. The media says nothing about anything being done about it.
Quist is running to be a Congressman from Minnesota. He has mentored Michelle Bachman who also has his wife working for her. He admits to trying everything he can do to kill the HealthCare bill. Watch here if your stomach is strong. He accuses Obama, Pelosi and other democrats of being radicals, not liberals. He talks about doing team work but he is no team player. The team to be on is FOR the USA, not against it. He was not elected president. Obana was. I deeply resent the Republicans for not allowing Obama to do what he was elected to do and see many today as being treasonous and getting away with it.
On Countdown, one of his usually brighter guests said Obama didn't look smart in the way he handled Christmas Day bomber threat. What should he have done to look smart? Should he have done what stupid people want...play the blame game rather than focus on how to correct a present problem? Apparently he doesn't appear smart unless he continues to do that which people expect...all the things that have been done and didn't work.
The teabaggers have gone wild again. They have gone far beyond their right to free speech expressing opinions and are advocating, dangerously, death to the Democratic party, to Obama's goals, and when they burn Obama in effigy, I think they have gone to far in tour United States. The media says nothing about anything being done about it.
Quist is running to be a Congressman from Minnesota. He has mentored Michelle Bachman who also has his wife working for her. He admits to trying everything he can do to kill the HealthCare bill. Watch here if your stomach is strong. He accuses Obama, Pelosi and other democrats of being radicals, not liberals. He talks about doing team work but he is no team player. The team to be on is FOR the USA, not against it. He was not elected president. Obana was. I deeply resent the Republicans for not allowing Obama to do what he was elected to do and see many today as being treasonous and getting away with it.
On Countdown, one of his usually brighter guests said Obama didn't look smart in the way he handled Christmas Day bomber threat. What should he have done to look smart? Should he have done what stupid people want...play the blame game rather than focus on how to correct a present problem? Apparently he doesn't appear smart unless he continues to do that which people expect...all the things that have been done and didn't work.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
LOBBYING THE HOUSE BY CATHOLIC BISHOPS CONFUSES ME
Everything in politics today seems to strike me like a fingernail scraping on a blackboard. We are supposed to be a government which keeps a separation between church and state. This seems hardly the case when Catholic Bishops are allowed to lobby the House of Representatives on a bill that ends up essentially voiding a law. Abortion has been made legal in the USA for many years now. An unwanted pregnancy would bring an unwanted child into the world. In the best interests of the child one might consider that abortion might be a reasonable solution for one whose religion is not insulted by that choice. Why then, should the law be negated by people who have no religious interest in the choice of non-Catholics.
If one is to believe comments by people who have read the bill, it would even prevent women from paying for their own abortions. It is difficult to believe that people would try to sneak in language that would reverse Roe v Wade. It is further my understanding that the Church has agreed not to involve itself in politics and reversal of laws. Will someone please tell me our government has not been hijacked to that degree by people who are given credence but are, in fact, not a part of our government and should not be advocating violating the Constitution. What am I missing here?
While this may seem a non-sequitor, will someone update me on the current status of the octuplets? Is the government in any way involved in their current care? If it is, then why can't women have the choice to abort and keep the government out of the child's further care
If one is to believe comments by people who have read the bill, it would even prevent women from paying for their own abortions. It is difficult to believe that people would try to sneak in language that would reverse Roe v Wade. It is further my understanding that the Church has agreed not to involve itself in politics and reversal of laws. Will someone please tell me our government has not been hijacked to that degree by people who are given credence but are, in fact, not a part of our government and should not be advocating violating the Constitution. What am I missing here?
While this may seem a non-sequitor, will someone update me on the current status of the octuplets? Is the government in any way involved in their current care? If it is, then why can't women have the choice to abort and keep the government out of the child's further care
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)