Longtime GOP Texas Gov. Perry wins another term

Full story: El Paso Times

Republican Gov. Rick Perry has defeated Democrat Bill White to win a third four-year term as Texas governor.
Comments
18,381 - 18,400 of 22,339 Comments Last updated 6 hrs ago
Texan

Falls Church, VA

#20336 Sep 11, 2013
911/Lest we forget: God bless America. Catch you tomorrow.

“Smarter Than You”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#20337 Sep 11, 2013
Obama tells Russians America will reduce its nukes, whether Russians do or not.Russian reply? Sure, go ahead.Cool with us! Obama has the I.Q. of a hockey puck.
Defiant1

Deer Park, TX

#20339 Sep 11, 2013
Let's remember 9/11/12 when 4 Americans died in Benghazi and we still don't know the truth and can't get the truth out of this lying and corrupt administration.

But in the words of Hillary Clinton, "What difference does it make?". She will make a wonderful President, won't she?.

“Smarter Than You”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#20340 Sep 11, 2013
Defiant1 wrote:
Let's remember 9/11/12 when 4 Americans died in Benghazi and we still don't know the truth and can't get the truth out of this lying and corrupt administration.
But in the words of Hillary Clinton, "What difference does it make?". She will make a wonderful President, won't she?.
I wouldn't let that bitch catch my dog.

“Smarter Than You”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#20341 Sep 12, 2013
Putin has broken off another piece of his foot in Obama's ass, this time in a New York Times op ed piece.Sucks to be Obama.

“Smarter Than You”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#20342 Sep 12, 2013
AFL-CIO sends letter to dems, says Obamacare is"highly disruptive", will destroy health care in America. Another brick in the wall....

“Smarter Than You”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#20343 Sep 12, 2013
The resurgence of the right continues with the recall of anti-gun dems in Colorado, despite being hugely OUTSPENT by left wing maven Bloomberg.....and the beat goes on....

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#20344 Sep 12, 2013
waco1909 wrote:
AFL-CIO sends letter to dems, says Obamacare is"highly disruptive", will destroy health care in America. Another brick in the wall....
Unions thought it was going to be free and now they don't like the Idea that they are going to be paying too for others and taxed.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#20345 Sep 12, 2013
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>Unions thought it was going to be free and now they don't like the Idea that they are going to be paying too for others and taxed.
Incorrect, unions were aware there was a cost associated with the program. Where did you hear they believed it was going to be free?

“Smarter Than You”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#20346 Sep 12, 2013
This president continues his path towards disaster unabated.The Russians consider him a clown.The democrat ideal for America is fast sliding into a morass of half-baked slogans and ignorant machinations.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#20347 Sep 12, 2013
waco1909 wrote:
This president continues his path towards disaster unabated.The Russians consider him a clown.The democrat ideal for America is fast sliding into a morass of half-baked slogans and ignorant machinations.
half baked slogans...like "mission accomplished" or "no new taxes"?

Funny how when bush was in office all the economic indicators were dipping down and they are going in the right direction now.

Keep drinking your kool aid.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#20348 Sep 12, 2013
ActuaIIy wrote:
<quoted text>
Incorrect, unions were aware there was a cost associated with the program. Where did you hear they believed it was going to be free?
Where were you at in 2009 and I remember the unions pushing for the passage of Obamacare bigtime and considered it their top priority and now the unions are hypocrites.

Labor Unions on Health Care: Their True Motives

By: jsherk
9/7/2009 03:01 AM

Unions across the country are campaigning hard for Obamacare over Labor Day weekend. The AFL-CIO has made creating a government run “public plan” their top priority. Yet polls show that most Americans strongly oppose this. So why have the self-proclaimed advocates for America’s workers made government-run health care their top priority?

Union leaders say they are fighting to win “win secure, high-quality health care for all” against greedy and self-interested corporate defenders of the status quo. Many union activists sincerely believe this. But altruism does not explain why the labor movement is spending tens of millions of dollars on this campaign.

http://www.humanevents.com/2009/09/07/labor-u...

CLANCY: Labor unions that pushed Obamacare through want out

Socialized medicine: good enough for us, but not them

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/...

Labor unions primary recipients of Obamacare waivers

9:18 PM 01/06/2012

http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/06/labor-union...

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#20349 Sep 12, 2013
ActuaIIy wrote:
<quoted text>
Incorrect, unions were aware there was a cost associated with the program. Where did you hear they believed it was going to be free?
ActuaIIy wrote:
<quoted text>
Incorrect, unions were aware there was a cost associated with the program. Where did you hear they believed it was going to be free?
Where were you at in 2009 and I remember the unions pushing for the passage of Obamacare bigtime and considered it their top priority and now the unions are hypocrites.

Labor Unions on Health Care: Their True Motives

By: jsherk
9/7/2009 03:01 AM

Unions across the country are campaigning hard for Obamacare over Labor Day weekend. The AFL-CIO has made creating a government run “public plan” their top priority. Yet polls show that most Americans strongly oppose this. So why have the self-proclaimed advocates for America’s workers made government-run health care their top priority?

Union leaders say they are fighting to win “win secure, high-quality health care for all” against greedy and self-interested corporate defenders of the status quo. Many union activists sincerely believe this. But altruism does not explain why the labor movement is spending tens of millions of dollars on this campaign.

http://www.humanevents.com/2009/09/07/labor-u...

CLANCY: Labor unions that pushed Obamacare through want out

Socialized medicine: good enough for us, but not them

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/...

Labor unions primary recipients of Obamacare waivers

9:18 PM 01/06/2012

http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/06/labor-union...
Dang

Lenoir, NC

#20350 Sep 12, 2013
Two cents: "A few weeks ago, I discussed the fact that labor unions have been increasingly vocal about their objections to certain provisions of the Affordable Care Act. Obamacare will “shatter not only our hard-earned health benefits, but destroy the foundation of the 40 hour work week that is the backbone of the American middle class,” wrote three labor leaders in July. Now, according to a report from InsideHealthPolicy, the Obama administration is considering offering insurance subsidies—intended for the uninsured—to labor union members who already have employer-sponsored coverage. Unions seek additional subsidies for multi-employer plans

The issue at hand is the way Obamacare affects multi-employer health plans, also known as Taft-Hartley plans. These plans consist of employer-sponsored health insurance that is arranged between a labor union in a particular industry, such as restaurants, and small employers in that sector. Approximately 20 million workers in the United States are covered under such arrangements, including 800,000 of the 1.3 million members of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, whose leader, Joseph Hansen, signed the letter I described above.

Workers with employer-sponsored coverage don’t qualify for subsidized coverage on Obamacare’s insurance exchanges. Those subsidies are designed for low-income people who aren’t offered coverage from their employers, and have to shop for insurance on their own. But the labor union leaders want those subsidies to also apply to their members with employer-sponsored coverage, even though they already get those benefits tax-free due to the employer tax exclusion for health insurance." "WASHINGTON, DC - MAY 20: AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka addresses the National Press Club May 20, 2011 in Washington, DC. Trumka answered questions about what he calls the recent attack on organized labor and working families, and said that the unions would not support politicians, Republicans or Democrats, who remain silent in the face of those attacks.(Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife)"
Dang

Lenoir, NC

#20351 Sep 12, 2013
"Now, according to Rachana Dixit of InsideHealthPolicy, the administration is “working on regulations to address the issue” that people covered under Taft-Hartley plans aren’t eligible for subsidies. But it’s not an “issue” in the sense of being a glitch or a mistake; union leaders are seeking special treatment, and additional taxpayer subsidies, that other participants in employer-sponsored coverage don’t get.

“Democratic aides and sources off Capitol Hill say conversations about unions’ concerns are ongoing, and they say that the administration is working on regulations to address the issue,” Dixit writes.“But, it is not clear if the proposed Department of Labor rule” would satisfy unions’ concerns.“Separately, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi [D., Calif.] said to union members earlier this month that she was still working to resolve their concerns about the law, particularly on the Taft-Hartley plan issue.” Richard Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO, confirmed to Alexis Simendiger of RealClearPolitics that “fixes” to the law were a “topic of conversation among top labor leaders and senior White House officials this week.”“We were talking about health care, and we’ll continue to talk about health care to try to solve problems,” said Trumka. Trumka, James Hoffa, chief of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, and other labor leaders met with President Obama’s chief of staff, Denis McDonough, on Tuesday.

‘Fixing’ unions’ concerns requires an act of Congress

However, it’s not clear what the White House can unilaterally do to address unions’ concerns. The text of the Affordable Care Act is straightforward; if you have gained coverage through an employer-sponsored health plan, you’re not eligible for subsidized coverage in the exchange, because you already get a subsidy through the tax code: you don’t pay income or payroll taxes on the value of your health coverage.If, suddenly, the 20 million people on Taft-Hartley plans were eligible for subsidies, Obamacare’s costs would skyrocket. If half of those Taft-Hartley enrollees gained $5,000 per year in tax credits along with their tax-free health benefits, we’re talking $50 billion a year in additional insurance subsidies for those individuals. That’s more than half a trillion dollars over ten years, accounting for health inflation.

I would say that it’s inconceivable that the White House would seek to impose such a “fix” to Obamacare without the consent of Congress. But, given the other changes that the administration has made to the health law—of similarly questionable legality—we can’t rule anything out. http://www.forbes.com
Bernard Forand

Fort Myers, FL

#20352 Sep 12, 2013
Dang wrote:
Two cents: "A few weeks ago, I discussed the fact that labor unions have been increasingly vocal about their objections to certain provisions of the Affordable Care Act. Obamacare will “shatter not only our hard-earned health benefits, but destroy the foundation of the 40 hour work week that is the backbone of the American middle class,” wrote three labor leaders in July. Now, according to a report from InsideHealthPolicy, the Obama administration is considering offering insurance subsidies—intended for the uninsured—to labor union members who already have employer-sponsored coverage. Unions seek additional subsidies for multi-employer plans
The issue at hand is the way Obamacare affects multi-employer health plans, also known as Taft-Hartley plans. These plans consist of employer-sponsored health insurance that is arranged between a labor union in a particular industry, such as restaurants, and small employers in that sector. Approximately 20 million workers in the United States are covered under such arrangements, including 800,000 of the 1.3 million members of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, whose leader, Joseph Hansen, signed the letter I described above.
and working families, and said that the unions would not support politicians, Republicans or Democrats, who remain silent in the face of those attacks.(Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife)"
It has already been stated over and over again that Obamacare will have their problems as it develops. Even Obama stated himself.
That the Unions want a bigger piece of the pie than the rest of us is nothing new. That has always been their basic negating thrust. What are you going to do ?
Are you going to play chicken little again like you do with the stock markets ups and downs.
Naïve.. All a flutter…


Bernard Forand

Fort Myers, FL

#20353 Sep 12, 2013
Dang wrote:
"Now, according to Rachana Dixit of InsideHealthPolicy, the administration is “working on regulations to address the issue” that people covered under Taft-Hartley plans administration is working on regulations to address the issue,” Dixit writes.“But, it is not clear if the proposed Department of Labor rule” would satisfy unions’ concerns.“Separately, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi [D., Calif.] said to union members earlier this month that she was still working to resolve their concerns about the law, particularly on the Taft-Hartley plan issue.” Richard Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO, confirmed to Alexis Simendiger of RealClearPolitics that “fixes” to the law were a “topic of conversation among top labor leaders and senior White House officials this week.”“We were talking about health care, and we’ll continue to talk about health care to try to solve problems,” said Trumka. Trumka, James Hoffa, chief of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, and other labor leaders met with President Obama’s chief of staff, Denis McDonough, on Tuesday.
‘Fixing’ unions’ concerns requires an act of Congress
However, it’s not clear what the White House can unilaterally do to address unions’ concerns. The text of the Affordable Care Act is straightforward; if you have gained coverage through an employer-sponsored health plan, you’re not eligible for subsidized coverage in the exchange, because you already get a subsidy through the tax code: you don’t pay income or payroll taxes on the value of your health coverage.If, suddenly, the 20 million people on Taft-Hartley plans were eligible for subsidies, Obamacare’s costs would skyrocket. If half of those Taft-Hartley enrollees gained $5,000 per year in tax credits along with their tax-free health benefits, we’re talking $50 billion a year in additional insurance subsidies for those individuals. That’s more than half a trillion dollars over ten years, accounting for health inflation.
I would say that it’s inconceivable that the White House would seek to impose such a “fix” to Obamacare without the consent of Congress. But, given the other changes that the administration has made to the health law—of similarly questionable legality—we can’t rule anything out. http://www.forbes.com
Just as you were so frighten with Syria issue and the down of a market report and I told you to settle down all this has already been anticipated.
Obama’s sword rattling has circumnavigated around the most dysfunctional House of Tea intoxicated politicians in our nations history. Debt is still decreasing at an alarming rate and the Unions will have their day as well.
Negation loopholes were intentionally drawn into the framework of Obamacare to emulate the constitutions elasticity.
Now gather up your feathers and settle down for the night and get some rest. All of these matters are beyond your comprehension and it shows how much it distresses you.
Bernard Forand

Fort Myers, FL

#20354 Sep 12, 2013
America’s inequality;
“Rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer.”
Illumination of this can be viewed within our USA. Increasing wealth, disproportional to the impoverished who are unable to maintain an
equitable ratio in gains. Impoverished, at their best, stagnation of their share in laborers productivity. Increasingly eroding of their portions of share to their labors productivity. Increasing to the inequality and accelerating negatively to the impoverished.
Three decades of low wages, to the 90%, with a growth of 15%. Earnings increase to the 1% have been cruising at 150% increases as to the 0.1% are racing at 300% Greater acceleration of wealth accumulation has affected the wealth at the bottom.
Middle class bastion of secured wealth accumulation has been severely oppressed. Homes lost their values. Top 1% lost wealth but it was soon recovered. Middle class years later are just now experiencing a strangulated loss gain to their investments if not a total loss. Typical 1% held 225 times the wealth of the typical middle class household. Doubling the ratio experienced as they were in 1962 and 1983.
Prior to 2007 the 1% enjoyed accumulating 57% of the nations wealth. Producing an increase in capital income after 1979 some 7/8 while those in the 95% received less than 3% of the increment.
Consider for an example; Walton’s family of the Wal-Mart empire commands a wealth of 69.7 Billion. Compare this to the total wealth of the 30% of the entire population, of the impoverished within the USA.
“Good” middle class jobs have been eviscerated that required moderate skills, like autoworkers’ jobs, in ratio to the unskilled laborers. Where in at the top greater skill levels were required.
Polarization of the labor force. Collapse of good jobs has been in affect for the last 25 years. Wages have gone down, increasing disparity of inequality in favor of the 1%. Creating a downward spiral for the middle class laborer.
Presently as an example; Single earner of family of two children, in good health, manages to work 40 hours per week,{Presently Average working hours for Americans is at 34 hours} at a wage above minimum {$8.50/hr} Pays S.S. which reduces his earnings to $8.00. Yearly income is $16,640 for 2080 hr’s of labor.
Pays no income tax but his employer charges him $200 a month for health insurance, to cover entire family and employer picks up remaining $550 cost per month of the cost to health insurance. This results in a take home pay $14,240 a year. Luck on his side, finds an apartment for $700 month with all utilities included. Now this reduces yearly earnings to $5,840 to cover all family cost for the year. Add in a car with fuel, insurance and maintenance at $3,000 per year and what remains is $2840. Under $3.00 per individual per day. No entertainment and no buffer zone for accidents or lost of wages.
Many states cut child care. Average monthly child care for two children $1,433 per month to be subtracted from the $2,840 a month families income. Results in $1.30 per, person per day!
Dang

Lenoir, NC

#20355 Sep 12, 2013
"Your ramblings have proven others on this forum correct in their opinions of you. You sound like a half baked philosophy professor who should have TRIED to teach Current Affairs. Really, I read and reread your crap hoping to find the basis and it's just not there. Best of luck to you. "Hermit" signing off."

“Smarter Than You”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#20356 Sep 12, 2013
Obama? Sword rattling? Putin isn't exactly shaking in his boots.Obama's confused attempt to explain his position on tv was a disaster.Putin's foot is wedged deeply in Obama's rectal orifice.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Lone Star Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
TX Who do you support for Commissioner of Agricult... (Oct '10) 6 hr That Fart Guy 530
TX Who do you support for Governor in Texas in 2010? (Oct '10) 12 hr That Fart Guy 17,911
TX Who do you support for Commissioner of the Gene... (Oct '10) 15 hr That Fart Guy 337
TX Who do you support for Railroad Commissioner in... (Oct '10) Sat That Fart Guy 770
Jerry Richardson Aug 30 CounselorJoe 2
TX Who do you support for Lieutenant Governor in T... (Oct '10) Aug 29 That Fart Guy 722
TX Who do you support for Attorney General in Texa... (Oct '10) Aug 28 Gasman 663
•••
•••
•••

Lone Star Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Lone Star People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Lone Star News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Lone Star
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••