published Saturday, November 24th, 2012

Life of O

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

82
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
dude_abides said...

Love it! Now if the tiger were eating humble Pi.

November 24, 2012 at 12:16 a.m.
dude_abides said...

somebody said... "You got it. Some not all. Most have moved on to talking about the issues that need addressing."

Do we have, like, a committee that sorts out all this jibber jabber and lobbies congress with the results of our labor so as to address the issues in need? Because I was all but certain that every long winded treatise that gets egested onto the floor of this forum just kind of sits there as a monument to some self important, powerless grunt. A cathartic effluvium for the silence challenged.

November 24, 2012 at 12:18 a.m.
fairmon said...

Dude_

Our congressman and senator are made will aware of what I think by email and phone calls. I avoid any discussions about religion but have yet to see anyone that might qualify as a religious scholar. I had assumed those with an opinon regarding issues being cinsidered by congress did communicate them to their elected officials. You are probably right, some may feel better by venting on various topics here.

November 24, 2012 at 2:02 a.m.
fairmon said...

The assumption of this cartoon is that Obama has the right answers and only those not agreeing with him are failing to be bipartisan. Could it be neither party is pursuing the correct action to take? The republicans are stupid for pledging to give up their taxing option while the democrats are flapping in the wind and are not pledged to do anything that would prevent their getting more money to spend.

The cartoon animal should be a tigerlion..a tiger head on one end and a lion on the other. Such an animal couldn't shat, right? Right, that is what makes a him crazy enough to do something like running over a cliff to commit suicide.

I don't buy the fiscal cliff myth being used by both sides to justify their position. Let the temp rates expire then do what is needed that can be agreed on to the resulting permanent rates and to simplify the tax codes.

November 24, 2012 at 2:26 a.m.
MTJohn said...

Harp - the President does have at least one right answer and that is the commitment to seek solutions that balance differing perspectives. It is also fair to assume that those who refuse to work with the President in that spirit probably do not have the right answers.

November 24, 2012 at 5:11 a.m.
fairmon said...

MTJohn said...

Harp - the President does have at least one right answer and that is the commitment to seek solutions that balance differing perspectives. It is also fair to assume that those who refuse to work with the President in that spirit probably do not have the right answers.

MTJ...That assumes a balanced solution of differing perspectives would be a good thing. It may be the option of no agreement would yield better results. Of course if the results were good both parties would claim credit if bad both would blame the other.

One thing I agree with both parties on. Any government document as voluminous as the tax codes is way to complex and needs a total make over. Liposuction of deductions, credits, reductions etc. would be a good start plus, increased IRS funding and staffing to assist with interpretation and audits and enforcement would yield a good ROI. The amount of unreported and under reported income, in my opinion, is grossly under estimated.

November 24, 2012 at 6:52 a.m.
jesse said...

Put TWO tigers in that boat w/Joe Public in the middle and it would be more apt!! Harp may be right, let it go off the cliff! At least that way something will get done!

November 24, 2012 at 7:17 a.m.
davisss13 said...

So pubes, what is job #1 now? It was to make Obama a single term president.

November 24, 2012 at 7:38 a.m.
MTJohn said...

harp3339 said..."That assumes a balanced solution of differing perspectives would be a good thing. It may be the option of no agreement would yield better results. Of course if the results were good both parties would claim credit if bad both would blame the other."

It assumes that a balanced solution would be consistent with the democratic principles on which our nation is founded. It assumes that elected officials put the best interests of the country ahead of the best interests of their respective parties and personal ambition. It also assumes that the no agreement option is the poorer/poorest option. And, as we have observed the past four years, there is good reason to think that no agreement should not be an option.

You and I agree that the tax codes ought to be simplified. How to do that necessarily requires cooperation in the endeavor to seek balanced solutions. That kind of cooperation requires a commitment to bipartisanship. And, as this morning's cartoon reflects, the President has show his stripes in that regard - so has the GOP.

November 24, 2012 at 8:17 a.m.
jesse said...

How anybody can ASSUME that anybody in Washington is gonna do anything except con the voters into re electing them is beyond me!

We've had a deficit and a nat debt ALL my life and they just keep on doing what they do!

November 24, 2012 at 8:41 a.m.
EaTn said...

The ten trillion dollar debt created by Bush/Obama to run two wars, provide vast tax breaks and a massive questionable bailout is really the tiger in the boat with Obama, Boehner and Reed. Will they continue to hand feed the tiger until it grows to the point of sinking the boat, or do they starve the tiger and chance it tipping the boat to sink? Either way the boat will sink.

November 24, 2012 at 8:58 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Nothing short of a TOTAL tax overhaul will work. No one in power has the nads to gitter-dun.

November 24, 2012 at 9:05 a.m.
conservative said...

So it's bipartisanship as long as Republicans sit is the back of the boat or bus - "We don't mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back."

November 24, 2012 at 9:05 a.m.

More rhetoric on bi-partisanship.

President Obama wrote the book on partisan governance during his first two years in office. Victimizing the man who refused to meet with the opposing party on major legislation is ludicrous. The myth of the unprovoked, obstructionist Congress rolls on. Hats off to Senator Corker for calling him and the Ozombie media out for their rank hypocrisy on this issue.

“But the president also repeatedly reminded GOP lawmakers that his ability to compromise is limited by pressure from the liberal base of his party. “It seems like the definition of bipartisan is always the furthest-left thing that can pass through the Senate, which ends up not being partisan,” said [Sen.] Brownback.” http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/99859-gop-senator-tells-obama-has-qaudacityq-to-visit-senate-and-use-gop-as-props

“A Scorecard On President Obama's Campaign Promises” http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/sep/01/scorecard-president-obamas-campaign-promises/

November 24, 2012 at 9:12 a.m.

Congrats to dude_abides on his new thesaurus.

November 24, 2012 at 9:15 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Poor Obama. He has to deal with two party rule. He finds it hard to work with the other party and be a nasty narcissistic partisan at the same time.

This cartoon would be more accurate if Obama was flipping the bird to the tiger.

November 24, 2012 at 9:43 a.m.
EaTn said...

It's impossible to obtain bipartisanship when the opposition's number one goal is to make you a one term president. Now that is history..maybe the GOP can make their number one goal to save the economy.

November 24, 2012 at 9:57 a.m.

harp3339, I'll take Obama at his worst over the lying hypocrisy of the GOP which simultaneously attempts to blame Obama for being partisan while themselves dedicating their cause to making him a one-term president.

See the examples by the self-proclaimed right-wingers here? Total lack of self-recognition of the actual GOP stance, which is "My Way or nothing" that has been practiced for quite a while. Of course, when their way is implemented, they find a reason to complain about it too.

Whatever solution you might wish for, don't you think it'll at least involve some honesty, and not be disingenuous?

November 24, 2012 at 10 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

One thing about Bulbous. He's consistent...like toon boy. But soooo myopic.

November 24, 2012 at 10:17 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

JonRoss....cuts to the military. Oh, wait a minute...

November 24, 2012 at 10:44 a.m.
dude_abides said...

whats_wrong_with_the_world said... "Congrats to dude_abides on his new thesaurus."

wads_worth_wrong_fellow... By insulting me you actually reveal the deficiency of your own vocabulary. Most people wouldn't even find anything in my post to remark on. What threw you, dubdubdubTdub? Was it jibber jabber? Grunt? Them big ole fancified words?

I would like to congratulate you on your avatar! It goes right along with your plea for bipartisanship! The President looks so silly! You make him look foolish! LOL That's an excellent (good x 2) way of opening any discussion. What nettled you, "the self important, powerless grunt" description? Touch a nerve, did I?

November 24, 2012 at 10:48 a.m.
dude_abides said...

tu_, was one side of your body, by any chance, not working very well when you typed the above missive? I am praying to degage's specifically outlined, exclusionary Lord of Hosts that you were just lit.

November 24, 2012 at 10:59 a.m.
hambone said...

Bulbs, your 100% right about the GOP being my way or the road. Most all the rightwing posters here complain about Obama not compromizing when it's the GOP holding their breath till they turn blue like three year olds. Complain about Obamacare when Romney passed the same thing in MA. and almost 100% of the people are in it and happy.

November 24, 2012 at 11:24 a.m.
fairmon said...

happywithnewbulbs said...

harp3339, I'll take Obama at his worst over the lying hypocrisy of the GOP which simultaneously attempts to blame Obama for being partisan while themselves dedicating their cause to making him a one-term president.

happy...You can have Obama at his best for all I care, I would have felt the same about Romney. The GOP didn't have a lock on lying or misleading. The election is over, one timer is no longer an option and he is still partisan. Both parties have made and issued statements that sound good about doing what is right for the country but neither has made a proposal reflecting their words. The problem nay be what we as voters and they as politicians think is best for the country. I rather see the temp rates expire than a rushed document that is a mess like the AHCA or to see the issue moved further down the calendar. Let the temp rates expire, stop the uncertainty then make changes to the tax laws that are effective until new changes are made but no more temporary crap.

November 24, 2012 at 11:49 a.m.
fairmon said...

happywithnewbulbs said...

Whatever solution you might wish for, don't you think it'll at least involve some honesty, and not be disingenuous?

Happy...Honesty is like a foreign language to politicians of both parties. I don't share your admiration of Obama and his stable of advisers, czars or his cabinet. You prefer central government controlled almost everything while I prefer less government intervention and less government control at all levels. Republicans talk about a smaller government but their actions don't reflect such.

November 24, 2012 at 11:58 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

D.C. doesn't have the stones to make significant tax or immigration reform. The system is broken. No real leadership on either side. Term limits please. Get rid of deadwood on both sides. (that would be most of them)

November 24, 2012 at 12:02 p.m.
ricardo said...

Republicans were wrong on tax hikes for the wealthy. Chambliss is coming out publicly against the no-tax pledge. Good bye, Grover Norquist.

November 24, 2012 at 12:21 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

JonRoss rants: “All you have to do is look at the rape of our healthcare system carried out by Obama and his fellow Progressives on Christmas Eve 2009 and you know that Obama does not compromise.”

Rape of our healthcare system on Christmas Eve 2009? Specifically, what heath care system are you referencing, JonRoss? The last time that I checked the statistics thousands of people in the U.S. were dying each year because they lacked health insurance and could not get good care – about 45,000 per year to be exact. This is why the U.S. Congress established the Affordable Care Act.

November 24, 2012 at 12:37 p.m.
hambone said...

Sure J R, they can walk into the ER and stiff you with the bill.

November 24, 2012 at 1:26 p.m.
alprova said...

JonRoss wrote: "Not one person has died because of a lack of insurance."

What would you know about it? People are denied live saving or preserving operations every single day, due to a lack of insurance or the funds to pay for them.

People do indeed die premature deaths due to a lack of insurance.

"Most anyone can walk into a hospital ER and be treated."

There are ER's that do treat people who are unisured, but an ER is only required by law to stabilize a patient and then are allowed to kick the patient out onto the street with instructions to follow up with their primary care physician.

"You don't rape the system to provide medical insurance for a small number of people."

Mister, charity and good will is on its way to becoming the law of the land, whether you like it or not. You might live longer if you get on board with it, or pop a vein for all I care.

"obamacare has nothing to do with medical benefits, it has everything to do with Progressives and Dems and other leftwing groups controling the lives of 330 million people."

You're a blooming moron. Who cares what you think?

"The rape was carried out with not one single vote from the opposition party. That has never happened in the 235 years of the Republic."

Many legislative bills have been passed on a partisan basis over the years. The Democrats dominated both houses of Congress for 40 years.

If the Republicans don't start doing their jobs in short order, expect a good deal of them to be kicked out of office in 2014. The American people are sick and tired of gridlock in Congress, and the Republicans are taking most of the blame for it.

"For Bennett or any other of the lefties to talk about obama reaching accross the aisle is a solid load of steaming crap."

His reach is not going to extend nearly as far as that which the Republicans are going to have to reach. Why? Because he won reelection and he ran on raising taxes on the wealthy.

It's going to happen, no matter what. It's long past time for it and most of this nation is tired of the rhetoric being spewed from the right side of the aisle.

Lowered taxes has spawned nothing but weak economic growth, little job growth, and a rising national debt. The Republicans have had ten years to prove that lower taxes works and it hasn't.

Enough is enough and the President has an agenda that the majority of the people in this nation are on board with.

You've been out-voted and that trend is likely to continue.

Get used to it.

November 24, 2012 at 1:47 p.m.
alprova said...

JonRoss wrote: "alpo your ignorance continues to amaze me."

Your record in this forum does not lend and credibility in your camp to call anyone else ignorant.

"You made comments attacking each of my points but no proof or facts whatsoever come with your screed."

Four years ago, I pre-paid a Surgeon to remove my wife's gall bladder. During the procedure, he nicked a bile duct. 24 hours after being discharged, I had to call an ambulance to take her to the ER. The nicked bile duct was discovered.

The Surgeon was called in. He met me in the ER waiting room and demanded a $5,000 deposit to go in and fix what he screwed up or he was was refusing to do it.

Long story short, an ER nurse overheard the conversation, called the head of his practice, and when he arrived, the Surgeon was discharged from the practice in front of God and everyone in that ER waiting room. Ten minutes later, my wife was taken to the OR and the damage was repaired by another Surgeon.

Surgeons are not required to operate on anyone. Had someone not intervened my wife would have likely died. It does happen, even in this country, every single day of the week.

Haven't you ever seen those donation jugs by registers in convenience stores, where an attempt is being made to raise funds for a life saving operation for someone's kid? ER's will stabilize someone, but they are on their own shortly thereafter mosat of the time.

Here, in the Chattanooga area, there are many options for the poor and we do have Erlanger, one of the finest medical institutions in the country for those without insurance. But in many areas of the country, people are not so lucky. The demand overwhelms the availability of medical professionals willing or able to be in a position to provide health care to those without the funds to pay for it.

"You would be surprised at what I know and understand."

Oh...trust me, you have surpised me many times. You're filled with delusions of grandeur.

"But understand this alpo, obama only controls himself. The House and Senate are still in control of the people. The House by a majority and the Senate by filibuster. Most statehouses are controlled by the people and not by Progressives/obama."

You're going to witness a very big difference in how the President is treated, this time around. It's already started. The unification (i.e. stonewalling) of the Republican Party is already starting to crumble as we type.

"Raise taxes on the "wealthy". I am good with that. It will mostly affect high toned Progressives and the slugs of Hollywood. Will see how that goes."

It's going to affect anyone who makes more than $200,000 a year...period, and it's high time too.

November 24, 2012 at 2:24 p.m.
ricardo said...

In 1986, Congress passed EMTALA which requires hospitals to treat anyone, regardless of immigration status or ability to pay. Any care provider that receives payments from the federal government cannot turn away a patient for emergency treatment. While this placed an undue burden on care providers, it was the right thing to do. BTW, this particular rape of the medical system was carried out by a Republican president (you may know him).

November 24, 2012 at 2:42 p.m.
dude_abides said...

357, Jon, that would be 357.

Speaking of Republicans maneuvering themselves out of their own jockstraps:

"Republicans' soul searching following the 2012 election could shortchange social conservatives, who say they're hardly to blame for the party's difficulties at the polls. The snapshot analysis as for why Republican nominee Mitt Romney and a slew of downballot GOP candidates fell short on Nov. 6 has centered on changing demographics — an increasingly diverse electorate, but also softening views toward hot-button social issues. Republicans have always likened their party to a three-legged stool, one leg representing economic conservatives, one representing national security conservatives, and one representing social conservatives — all acting in concert to support the party. And social conservatives are arguing that opposition to same-sex marriage and abortion rights, among other issues, are as intrinsic to the Republican Party’s identity as ever."

November 24, 2012 at 2:53 p.m.
alprova said...

JonRoss wrote: "alprova is a word meister but facts and honesty elude him. His appeal is to lefty dilitantes who get off on words but not reality."

You have no basis for calling me dishonest. How many times have I disproven your assertions over the years? Many, I assure you.

That aside, the facts are indeed on my side when it comes to health care issues facing many people today.

As to your predictions, time will tell who is right and who is wrong.

You're one of many people unwilling to change. You're one of many people too selfish and comfortable in your corner, unwilling to see or care about the problems that people face when it comes to affording basic or necessary health care.

I suppose it would be far preferable for them to just die, so that you can keep your status quo.

It's going to happen with or without your approval, and while many people are thanking God for it, you and other idiots will be shaking your fists, I suppose.

I remind you that despite any and all attempts to do so, the rich, white men are no longer in charge of everything these days. This nation belongs to everyone, and changes are on the horizon that many are not going to like or agree with, but they are going to have to get used to such changes.

What other choices do they truly have? Succession? It'll never happen. Self-deportation? To where? We're one of the last nations to embrace aspects of socialized medical care.

November 24, 2012 at 3:23 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

EMTALA is not and was never intended to be a substitute for health care for the indigent. It was enacted so that we literally do not have people dying in the streets, which should and would be unthinkable in any society that likes to think of itself as civilized. Nevertheless we still have thousands die each year because of inadequate or unaffordable health care.

First-time emergency cases will indeed be treated but ER doctors will simply treat the immediate need, just enough to stablilize the patient, as alprova said, and then he/she will be dismissed. After that they can expect to be hounded by bill collectors or face lawsuits if the ER bills are not paid. And forget about follow-up care if you have not paid the bills from the first visit or unless you pay up-front the next time around. There are countless diseases that require ongoing treatment that ERs will not or are not equipped to treat, and thousands of people die every year because they do not have health insurance to treat their illnesses.

JR's willful ignorance of the unfair, broken state of our health care system is mind boggling. It is typical of the complacency and smugness of so many of those who are fortunate enough to have good jobs, a house, and good comprehensive health insurance. They lack any understanding or empathy whatsoever for those who are not so fortunate (most of the time through no fault of their own). Their attitude is...I'VE GOT MINE, I MUST BE DOING SOMETHING RIGHT. THOSE WITHOUT ARE EITHER STUPID OR LAZY, SO SCREW 'EM. It's sad, unbelievable, and disgusting that anyone can be that dense and willfully ignorant.

November 24, 2012 at 3:31 p.m.
hambone said...

But we can't raise taxes on the " Job Creaters" LOL

J R, relax. No one is going to take your income away from you and give it to one of those lazy 47%ers who don't work. You know who they are, some of them are serving in a combat zone, some of them are like me (retired), some of them are working 40 or more hours a week but still don't make enough to pay income taxes, some of them are disabled and yes a few are gaming the system. (but not as many as you want to think)

The best thing that Obamacare is going to do like it or not is it will make everyone show some responibility for having health insurance. Is that what you're so upset about?

November 24, 2012 at 3:53 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Alpo----dismantle-----Now that's a hoot.

Tax increase on the rich is largely symbolic. I'm ok with it, but it means little.

November 24, 2012 at 3:55 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

JR, what is this "Progressive/Marxist doublespeak" you mention? What have I said that'e even remotely Marxist? You don't even know what it means. You're the one engaging in doublespeak, tossing words around just because they sound good coming off your tongue. And as for dealing in facts...you mean like this comment of yours? - "Not one person has died because of a lack of insurance." Obviously you just ignore the facts of thousands actually dying every year because they don't have health insurance. So what difference do facts make to you anyway? Sir, you "degrade us all," just by showing up and posting your nonsense.

Furthermore, it's funny how you call Obamacare "rape" while it's nothing but Romneycare 2.0. Nobody has called Romney's plan for Massachusetts "rape." All Obama did was give the private insurance companies more business! There are no government "death panels" and no government interceding between doctors and patients. You, sir, are as irrational as they come, with your calling Obamacare "rape." You would be funny if you weren't so friggin' whacked-out nuts.

November 24, 2012 at 4:07 p.m.
hambone said...

I'm sorry J R, I've been mistaken all along.

You are a CERTIFIED LUNATIC !

But Obamacare will cover it !

November 24, 2012 at 4:11 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

JonRoss claims: “Not one person has died because of a lack of insurance. Most anyone can walk into a hospital ER and be treated. You don't rape the system to provide medical insurance for a small number of people.”

Oh, dear . . . You sound like George W. Bush. . . Indeed, just like you George W. Bush was full misinformation. Hospital ERs do not provide ongoing health care services. Hospital ERs are only required to stabilize an urgent medical emergency. If a patient has a life threatening disease like cancer, an ER is not required to provide the patient with the much needed treatment, outpatient care, drugs, or any other supplies. The hospital ER will only refer the patient to a clinic or program where the patient may pay for these services,

November 24, 2012 at 4:47 p.m.
jjmez said...

ricardo said... In 1986, Congress passed EMTALA which requires hospitals to treat anyone, regardless of immigration status or ability to pay


But hospitals do turn uninsured and even under-insured people away, ricardo. Even hospitals receiving federal funds from the government. After all, the poor are the least to likely complain. And most who received at least substandard care don't even know the care was substandard.

November 24, 2012 at 4:49 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

tax'em all at 98%. Free Bubble-Up and Rainbow Stew for all.

November 24, 2012 at 4:50 p.m.
jjmez said...

"ER’s are only required to stabilize an urgent medical emergencies. If a patient has a life threatening disease like cancer, ER’s are not required to provide the patient with the much needed treatment, outpatient care, drugs, or any other supplies. ER’s will only refer the patient to a clinic or program where the patient may pay for these services,"

That's true, mountainlaurel. I once needed an MRI because of an injury to my spine, and normal x-rays didn't show anything. I'd recently lost one job; the one that provided insurance. The other job didn't provide insurance. Due to the fact that I no longer had any medical insurance I couldn't get the MRI. Which with MRIs being so expensive, that was understandable. To make a long story short, I now have permanent damage to my spine and daily constant pain because things healed the wrong way. Now that I have insurance again they want to do surgery, but there's no guarantee I won't end up in a wheelchair. And I refuse to take those heavy duty pain meds. So I live with the pain.

November 24, 2012 at 4:58 p.m.
hambone said...

One thing I hope Obamacare does, but I haven't heard if it does. But I hope it gets rid of the "Out-Of-Network" trap.

November 24, 2012 at 4:59 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

hambone: Obama care will take care of everything. absolutely.

November 24, 2012 at 5 p.m.
hambone said...

Jack said, hambone: Obama care will take care of everything. absolutely.

Ok if I don't take your word for it. Eh, Jack.

November 24, 2012 at 5:10 p.m.

hambone, indeed the posters here are quite demonstrative of the GOP at large. They complain of suffering offenses and incivility while themselves being quite effective models of rudeness and hostility, to the point where I'm thinking more than a few of them are simply trolls who must be trying to make the GOP look bad.

And then I encounter somebody who really does think Obama is the Anti-Christ, that every accusation made about him being a Kenyan Muslim is true, and I begin to think they're sincere again.

There may be some decent conservatives and Republicans out there, but apparently they've been drowned out by the less savory ones, or find themselves bound to join them to get ahead.

harp3339, why is it you consistently ascribe to me an admiration of Obama and an idea of government that I don't possess?

Is it because like the Republican party, you prefer to create an image of a person to rail against rather than deal with them honestly? Such exaggerations and distortions are not true, but are themselves the problem.

You can create the false equivalency all you like of trying to portray both sides of a deficit in honesty and integrity, but it won't make it accurate.

Then again, you attack Obama on the Czars issue, as if that had any veracity to it, while pretending you're somehow not kow-towing to the Republican party-line just by bringing it up.

Maybe you ought to show some honesty with yourself. If you're going to criticize Obama, at least stick to criticisms that are accurate, not GOP messages.

Also, I don't know why you're worried about a permanent solution, it's not like they can't change things again later. Laws aren't written in stone.

This is not a deficit, but an advantage.

People who want things set to an absolute and fixed firmament are most often those trying to use it to justify not actually correcting a wrong.

After all, if they can't do anything about a problem, then they're not responsible for it, no matter what injustice occurs.

I can understand the desire for having some regular expectations, but I just don't weigh it very highly when it comes to the law since I find it more likely to be a source of abuse.

November 24, 2012 at 5:10 p.m.
daytonsdarwin said...

JonRoss said...

"I too have had many difficult events occur in my life but I have NEVER demanded that my neighbors give up their freedoms and income to help me."

Littlejohnnyrossy, you mean your bankruptcies didn't cost your creditors? Your bankruptcies didn't mean your neighbors lost money you owed to them? You mean they didn't have to work harder because of your inadequacies?

So, littlejohnnyrossy, when can those you bankrupted against, who did lose freedom and money because of you, when can they expect you to pay them back for their loses?

How-a-bout December 24, just in time for Christmas? Let us know and we'll be there to take your picture handing them the cash (no checks, please).

November 24, 2012 at 5:23 p.m.
ricardo said...

Jack_Dennis said..."hambone: Obama care will take care of everything. absolutely." November 24, 2012 at 5 p.m.

Now you're learning BJ. See, elections do have consequences.

November 24, 2012 at 6:17 p.m.

Unless somebody can prove to me that the taxes they pay are far in excess of the benefits they receive from the operations of government (and yes, the rich do benefit from the government's actions), it seems to be a silly quibble.

You might as well resent jury duty. Or conscription, which is still legally on the table.

But yeah, how much money in profits does Wal-Mart make off SNAP?

November 24, 2012 at 6:18 p.m.
acerigger said...

Here is a link to a site that will answer a lot of questions for a lot of people,please pass it along to friends & relatives who would stand to benefit.

http://www.enrollamerica.org/

November 24, 2012 at 7:57 p.m.
alprova said...

JonRoss wrote: "alprova you seem frightened and irrational."

You Sir are the authority on the subject of irrationality. I have nothing at all to fear anymore. Romney lost and he will run for President no more.

"Was there nothing in obama's taxpayer funded goody bag for you during the last election ?"

Nothing that isn't already in place today, nor was I expecting anything but the same kind of tax breaks and credits granted my business, thanks to ObamaCare, as well as continued access to health care coverage.

You see, for providing health care coverage to my employees, I receive a 100% tax deduction for the cost of their premiums, PLUS an additional 35% tax credit for the cost of what I pay on behalf of my employees. In one year and one month, that tax credit rises to 50%.

Also thanks to ObamaCare, I am now fully insured for my health care expenses, where I was virtually unable to be insured before.

PCIP has been a Godsend to me. I now pay $383 dollars, DOWN from $445.00 a month (yes...my premium dropped) for health care coverage with prescriptions, with a $2,000 deductible for medical expenses and a $500 deductible for prescriptions.

Thank the Lord, my health is stable at the moment, but should I wind up in the hospital, I no longer have to inform them that I am uninsured.

I have dropped a line of thanks to President Obama and many members of Congress for assisting people in my circumstance, none of which are Republicans, for every single Republican voted against the PPACA.

And that's okay, for it will continue to go into effect as it exists today.

November 24, 2012 at 8:39 p.m.
alprova said...

hambone wrote: "The best thing that Obamacare is going to do like it or not is it will make everyone show some responibility for having health insurance. Is that what you're so upset about?"

That's exactly what some people are upset about. I remember well, the outrage when Georgia passed the mandatory automobile insurance requirement. Some of the same kind of arguments erupted way back then too.

In 1927, Massachusetts was the first state to require automobile insurance. Today, 47 states have compulsory automobile insurance requirements on their books. Coincidentally, Massachusetts set the example for ObamaCare too.

Isn't it interesting how history repeats itself so often?

November 24, 2012 at 9:22 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

yeah, Alpo. MA is a state to be admired.

November 24, 2012 at 9:59 p.m.
fairmon said...

happywithnewbulbs said... Unless somebody can prove to me that the taxes they pay are far in excess of the benefits they receive from the operations of government (and yes, the rich do benefit from the government's actions), it seems to be a silly quibble.

This is not to suggest I give a rip if the wealthy are taxed more until bracket creep puts more and more in higher tax brackets with tax revenue increasing. It will do little now but when inflation ignites the debt will look like much less, the deficit reduced and the debt paid in cheaper dollars.

I would hope with over 40 cents of each dollar spent being borrowed money that most would benefit to some extent. The rich benefits is only more if you include deductions etc. and other items not typically viewed as benefits. Most would be more than willing to give up many of their so called government benefits.

In my opinion, those hell bent that the wealthy pay more are simply jealous, want to see them punished for having all that wealth and possibly get a little more teat for themselves without being asked to contribute. Who knows, if there is more for government to spend some of us may land one of those cushy over paid secure government jobs with a good pension.

November 25, 2012 at 12:14 a.m.
fairmon said...

I have dropped a line of thanks to President Obama and many members of Congress for assisting people in my circumstance, none of which are Republicans, for every single Republican voted against the PPACA.

Are you not going to thank those among us that are paying higher premiums next year and will pay even higher premiums in 2013 as a result of Obamacare?

I have no objection to the goodies upfront and certainly not the objective of everyone having health care coverage. The total bill is unnecessarily complicated with disproportionate benefit to insurers and pharmacutical companies which is understandable since they assisted in writing most of it and will benefit it. Without triggering an already worn out discussion we will check the popularity when the OMG I didn't know that was in there phase kicks in between now and through 2015.

Alpo said....And that's okay, for it will continue to go into effect as it exists today.

I assume you mean the employer provided cost etc. Other parts will continue to go into effect which will make the as it exist today statement inaccurate for many with individual coverage just as some misunderstand the misleading "you can keep what you have if you like it and it will not change" statement by concluding it meant their employer provided coverage. Some few even thought they could keep what they had at the same cost.

November 25, 2012 at 12:40 a.m.
alprova said...

Harp3339 wrote: "I assume you mean the employer provided cost etc. Other parts will continue to go into effect which will make the as it exist today statement inaccurate..."

Had I added the words "as proposed," you might not have been so ready to challenge my statement. Harp, ObamaCare is a work in progress. It is being tweaked as we speak. It will undergo numerous revisions as it all goes online in various stages.

I have no doubt that if employers revolt in providing health care coverage for their employees, that changes will be made to coerce them to rethink that strategy.

Several Republican Governors have already declared that they are going to refuse to set up insurance pools for residents in their respective states. The HHS is going to step up to the plate and offer coverage and cut the states out of funds they were going to be alloted to pay for setting them up at the state level. Personally, I think that there are a few Governors who are being rather short-sighted and they will pay a political price for disregarding and discounting the PPACA based on hype.

"...for many with individual coverage just as some misunderstand the misleading "you can keep what you have if you like it and it will not change" statement by concluding it meant their employer provided coverage."

As I have pointed out many times in the past, it would be foolish for anyone who works for an employer to believe that the statement applied to them as individuals. Employer sponsored coverage is always at the behest of the employer. Once the insurance pools are in place, there will be lots of affordable choices for employers and/or employees to choose from, which will be very attractive to both, and that employer paid premiums will become advantageous to them as well.

If employers want to give up the tax deductions that will go to whomever pays the premiums for coverage, so be it. I think you will find that the smart employers will change their minds eventually and decide to offer to pay for those premiums.

Right now, the Chicken Little's are in full force, and we know how that turned out in the proverbial story.

"Some few even thought they could keep what they had at the same cost."

Harp my friend, by January 1, 2014, I believe in my heart that you will have health care insurance choices that you do not have today, and at rates that will indeed be pleasing to your checkbook.

The rate increases of today are a result of the old system still being in place for most of the nation. You're wrong to blame ObamaCare for rising premiums currently. As I pointed out earlier, I've been in an ObamaCare sponsored plan for less than a year and my premiums have DROPPED by $60 a month.

November 25, 2012 at 2:14 a.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.