OK Health Care Freedom Amendment, Sta...

OK Health Care Freedom Amendment, State Question 756

Created by CitizenTopix on Oct 11, 2010

1,604 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

asdf

Cushing, OK

#22791 Jul 11, 2012
Factcheck.org - completely unbiased source

You can read the rest here. I'll give you the summary part.
http://factcheck.org/2012/06/obamas-outsource...

The truth about Romney's Bain outsourcing

Summary

Obama accuses Romney in a series of TV ads of being a “corporate raider” who “shipped jobs to China and Mexico,” asking if voters want to elect an “outsourcer in chief.” But some of the claims in the ads are untrue, and others are thinly supported.

Bain Capital, the venture capital firm founded by Romney in 1984, is the focus of the Obama campaign’s attacks. There is no question that Bain invested in some companies that helped other companies outsource work and that some of that work went overseas. That was the core business for Modus Media and SMTC Corp.— two outsource companies featured in a June 21 article in the Washington Post that has been the basis of recent Obama TV ads. Bain also invested in U.S.-based companies that sold goods manufactured here and abroad, and some of those companies closed U.S. facilities and eliminated U.S. jobs.

But after reviewing numerous corporate filings with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, contemporary news accounts, company histories and press releases, and the
evidence offered by both the Obama and Romney campaigns, we found no evidence to support the claim that Romney — while he was still running Bain Capital — shipped American jobs overseas.

One TV ad, called “Come and Go,” claims that Romney “shipped jobs to China and Mexico.” But two examples cited by the Obama campaign occurred after Romney left Bain. There’s no clear evidence that a third company shipped jobs to China under Romney.
A second ad called “Revealed” mocks Romney’s tough talk about cracking down on China’s trade practices by saying “all he’s ever done is send them our jobs” and citing the Washington Post article. But the newspaper article contained no examples of U.S. jobs being shipped to China while Romney was working at Bain.
The “Come and Go” ad casts Romney as a “corporate raider,” but that term, loaded with negative connotations, is simply inaccurate. Bain didn’t engage in hostile takeovers when Romney was at the helm.
That ad also repeats the claim that as governor of Massachusetts, Romney was “outsourcing state jobs to India.” But it wasn’t the state that outsourced contracts. Rather, Romney vetoed a measure that would have prevented the state from doing business with a state contractor that was locating state customer-service calls in India.
asdf

Cushing, OK

#22792 Jul 11, 2012
http://factcheck.org/2012/07/no-end-to-end-me...

Democrats are still hammering an old, and since replaced, GOP proposal, claiming it would “end Medicare,” and cost seniors $6,000 more a year for their health care. The newest Republican budget, proposed by Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, keeps traditional Medicare — unlike his plan from 2011 — and the increased cost claim is no longer applicable to it.

The latest string of “end Medicare” claims comes from the liberal Patriot Majority, a 501(c)(4), a nonprofit advocacy group, that was founded by a Democratic strategist, and that does not have to disclose its donors. Its ads, which began airing June 18, support Democratic Reps. John Barrow of Georgia, Ben Chandler of Kentucky, David McKinley of West Virginia and Jim Matheson of Utah. Another late June ad, from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, echoes the Medicare theme, attacking Rep. Rick Berg, who is running for the Senate seat being vacated by Sen. Kent Conrad in North Dakota. The ad says Berg voted for “essentially ending Medicare.”

House members voted along party lines on the Ryan budget last year (which included the Medicare proposal), with all Democrats and only four Republicans voting against it.

Battle-Tested Claims Never Die?

Democrats have jumped on Ryan’s budget proposal since he first presented it in 2011. His plan called for a massive change to Medicare — stopping the current Medicare system in 2022 for new beneficiaries and instead launching a so-called “premium-support” system, where seniors would pick from a choice of private plans on a new Medicare exchange with the help of government-provided subsidies. Claims that this would “end Medicare”— claims that were usually accompanied by images of elderly individuals — left the false impression that the Ryan plan would get rid of any kind of insurance program for seniors.

Furthermore, this plan didn’t pertain to the seniors pictured in the attack ads — they would remain on traditional Medicare, with only new beneficiaries in 2022 and beyond joining the private system. The claim made our list of the “Whoppers of 2011,” and so far, Democrats are making a good case for its inclusion in our 2012 list. A Democratic super PAC used the claim again in an Iowa congressional race in February, and now Patriot Majority and the DSCC are joining in.

The Patriot Majority ads say that “some in Washington want to end Medicare” and that the lawmaker featured in the ad “opposed those who’d increase costs on seniors by $6,000 a year.”

But the ads dig up that old claim about Ryan’s 2011 proposal. It’s true that an analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found that seniors on the private plans would pay more than they would under traditional Medicare. And the CBO analysis indicated that a 65-year-old in 2022 could pay about $6,000 more than he or she would for the year under traditional Medicare. The government subsidies would increase with the rate of inflation, which critics argued was not much when dealing with health costs that, for years, have risen much faster than the general inflation rate. Ryan did say that low-income beneficiaries would get more money from the government to help cover costs, but the details on how much and who would qualify were not yet fleshed out.

But Ryan’s new plan, released this year, is more generous in terms of what it would provide for subsidies, and it keeps traditional Medicare as an option for all beneficiaries, both current and future.
asdf

Cushing, OK

#22793 Jul 11, 2012
Continued from last post

Here’s a quick rundown of the latest Ryan plan:

For seniors who are now in Medicare, nothing changes. They can stay with the traditional program as it is.
Beginning in 2023, 65-year-olds would have their choice of insurance plans — private and traditional — on a new Medicare exchange. A premium-support payment, like a subsidy, would be sent to the plan of their choice.
If the chosen plan costs more than the premium-support, the senior would pay the difference.
The Medicare eligibility age would be slowly raised to 67 by 2034.
All plans on the Medicare exchange would offer a base level of benefits, and they would be regulated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
The premium-support payments would be tied to the second-cheapest plan, which can’t grow more than gross domestic product plus 0.5 percentage points. If the cost does grow faster, Congress would be required to step in and take some action to keep costs down.

CBO didn’t conduct an analysis that shows what seniors might have to spend out of pocket under the latest plan. But it said that “beneficiaries might face higher costs,” adding that there was uncertainty in making such predictions. CBO said that both the Ryan plan and current law could lead to the same consequences —“reduced access to health care; diminished quality of care; increased efficiency of health care delivery; less investment in new, high-cost technologies; or some combination of those outcomes. In addition, beneficiaries might face higher costs, which could in turn reinforce some of the other effects.” And some of the effects would be greater under the Ryan plan because government spending is lower. But there was no estimate of seniors paying $6,000 more, or any other amount, under the latest GOP plan.

The ads ignore the updated Ryan plan, choosing instead to highlight an old, and misleading, claim. The ads feature images of seniors, who wouldn’t be affected by either of Ryan’s proposals — the changes to Medicare wouldn’t be put into place until 2022 or 2023, and would only affect new beneficiaries at that time.

The Patriot Majority ads also say these lawmakers “fought against raising the eligibility age for Medicare” and “prevented a new Medicare doughnut hole.” Those are both references to the Ryan plan, which raises the eligibility age and repeals the Affordable Care Act provisions that slowly closed the gap in Medicare prescription drug coverage, known as the “doughnut hole.”

‘Essentially’ Out of Context

The DSCC ad throws in the line that North Dakota Rep. Berg voted for “essentially ending Medicare.” But the line is a reference to an April 4, 2011, Wall Street Journal article, and it’s not the full quote from the newspaper.

The Journal actually said that the old Ryan plan “would essentially end Medicare, which now pays most of the health-care bills for 48 million elderly and disabled Americans, as a program that directly pays those bills”(our emphasis added). And that’s true of the old Ryan plan, which would end traditional Medicare for future beneficiaries (those who turn 65 starting in 2022). But as we explained above, the latest Ryan plan even keeps traditional Medicare as an option for future seniors.
asdf

Cushing, OK

#22794 Jul 11, 2012
Factcheck's report on Obama and Romney's falsehoods about Obamacare

http://factcheck.org/2012/06/romney-obama-uph...

Factcheck: Obama Twists Romney’s Economic Record
Obama campaign ad takes aim at Romney's time as Massachusetts governor.

http://factcheck.org/2012/06/obama-twists-rom...

Factcheck Stretching on Romney’s Fees

http://factcheck.org/2012/06/stretching-on-ro...

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#22795 Jul 11, 2012
No matter how it is spelled out,

Romney get 90% of his donations from the ultra-rich while Obama gets 47% of his donations from the ultra-rich.

Obama has to look out for that 53% grassroots who donate to him, as well as the 47%.

Follow the money. Their allegiance is where their money is. Romney has little room for grassroots people.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#22796 Jul 11, 2012
Justaminute wrote:
Dusty
Your against gays using the word 'marriage?'
Your okay with them but this is just a line too far. Then you are in fact not giving them equal rights with you.
==========
Gay men have "equal rights" to marry a female, just as does Dusty.

Male marrying male is asking for a special right for humans that is abnormal, unnatural.
Justaminute

Oklahoma City, OK

#22797 Jul 11, 2012
asdf

You couldn't find any sources but the ones that took a measure "CBO looked at 2007 through 2009" in what the wealthy were paying in taxes? What happened in that time period? Oh yeah, we were at the start of our financial meltdown. It's quite a bit different now the rich own about 83% of the nations wealth and yet pay 70% in taxes. They can afford to pay 13% more. They didn't suffer under the Clinton tax rates. That's what we want to return too.

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#22798 Jul 11, 2012
Justaminute wrote:
Dusty
Your against gays using the word 'marriage?'
Your okay with them but this is just a line too far. Then you are in fact not giving them equal rights with you.
It's just that using a race as a stereotype to play jokes off of makes liberals to not feel like laughing. Especially right now in what we are dealing with the craziness in wingers with our first black president. Especially on a political board in Oklahoma that doesn't seem to hardly have any black posters. Especially in a state that was famous for their race riots and intolerance of blacks. In a state that the President didn't carry one county.
So if we were in a comedy club in LA surrounded by Blacks and listening to Chris Rock or watching him on TV together and laughing is one thing. But on this particular blog with people who are more than willing and often do love to cast out their racist dog whistles love to latch on this. In this particular place and this particular time I feel it just feeds them.
This is exactly what irritates me to death about you far left liberals. You claim I'm not for giving gays equal rights because I want to retain the world marriage to mean a man and a woman. Somewhere, sometime, someone made up a word to describe a union between a man and a woman. It was called marriage. Someone, somewhere, sometime a word was made up to describe the one with the external genitals and it was called man. Yet the one with the internal genitals were called woman. You can support (and I do) equal pay for equal work. You can support a woman's right to vote, to own her own home, to drive a car in Saudia Arabia. But she is still called a woman. How absurd would it be for women to claim they do not have equal rights with men unless they are allowed to call themselves men? The issue is equal rights in those things that men are allowed to do, not in the usurping of a word, i.e. the word man.

To claim that I deny gays equal rights because I wish to retain the word marriage for a man and a woman is to say I deny equal rights to men for them not being allowed to call themselves women and to women for not being able to call themselves men.

If you wish to get beyond the names of men and women then you use the word people. If you wish to get beyond the heterosexual word marriage and whatever word the gays used otherwise, then you would use the words civil unions because that's what they all are on the bottom line just as we are all people.

This is not a perfect world, there is no way to please everyone, there has never been and there will never be. YET while some like me support legal protection of civil rights for all, you liberals name call me, attack me and defile me worse than I have ever defiled a gay person in my entire life simply because I wish to retain the word marriage for a man and a woman. You make no distinction between myself and Packing Heat who thinks gays are sub humans.

You extremists on both sides are your own worst enemies. Those of us in the center who do not follow a party line rhetoric use common sense and everyday logic. I worry about this nation's financial situation. About overpopulation. About the ultra rich picking the bones of the middle class if Romney is elected. I worry about the situation that the ultra rich are intent on turning this country into the socioeconomic equivalent of another Mexico.

I realize my kind has lost the "marriage" designation battle in the courts of our land. But I will never lose it in my mind. Marriage defines the civil union between a man and a woman. That's my constitutional right to feel that way. But there are bigger issues to worry about. Just not to you extremist liberals who will alienate otherwise sympathetic moderates on other issues, because just like right wingers, you never compromise on ANYTHING. If Obama loses it won't be because of him. It will be because you libs won't give an inch and moderates are sick of you people.

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#22799 Jul 11, 2012
Justaminute wrote:
Dusty
It's just that using a race as a stereotype to play jokes off of makes liberals to not feel like laughing. Especially right now in what we are dealing with the craziness in wingers with our first black president. Especially on a political board in Oklahoma that doesn't seem to hardly have any black posters. Especially in a state that was famous for their race riots and intolerance of blacks. In a state that the President didn't carry one county.
So if we were in a comedy club in LA surrounded by Blacks and listening to Chris Rock or watching him on TV together and laughing is one thing.
You continue to duck the reality of equality. Chris Rock doesn't just do his thing in a comedy club in Los Angeles. He plays all over the country. The public decides if he is worthy of supporting. I doubt he could fill a large venue in Oklahoma. But that's Oklahoma's problem not Chris Rock's. If you watched much of Rock on Utube you would see that his audience in the early days was almost all black. Today it's strongly mixed. His humor is very funny to my mind. And pretty darn accurate observations most the time. I support Chris and other black and minority comedians to say what they think is funny. If I find a comedian not that funny as I think Dave Chappelle stinks out loud I simply do not watch him. I don't think Adam Sandler is funny any longer and won't waste my money on him. Not because he's Jewish but because I'm tired of his schtick. Will Ferrel, to my knowledge is white and I can't tolerate his drivel.

But the issue of equality is not race but equality. If Chris Rock can talk about white people (and he should be able to) And George Lopez (my favorite stand up comdeian) can talk about both whites and Latinos, then any white comedian should be able to talk about other races.

You want to penalize the nation for rednecks. You want minorities to have freedom of speech but white guys don't. That's just wrong. Everyone should be held accountable for their own speech but that accountability should be by society, not by government, not by laws, not by "outraged liberals" on a political agenda. Hold the rednecks responsible for the laws they break of violence and physical abuse. I'm from the sticks and stones may break my bones but words never hurt me contingent. I'm more worried about equal rights for minorities in job hirings, home loans, redlining, disproportionate prison sentences and so on. I don't take offense when someone jokes about my having thin lips. You shouldn't take offense if someone says most black people have thick lips. Chris Rocks speaks to it. So should I be able to without you left wing zealots getting all worked up.
Justaminute

Oklahoma City, OK

#22800 Jul 11, 2012
Dusty,

Your world did not end when Barney Frank and his husband got married last week.

As more and more research is funded and shows that being homosexual is something that it's a condition that a person is born with this, the marriage brouhaha will be in the dustbin of history were it belongs.

Extremism is in the eye of the beholder. Many would say you are an extremist on equal rights for gays.

So if you think I am an extremist because I want equal rights for gay Americans, I'll just have to live with that.

Oh, and Dusty, centrism is not always the right place to be. During the battle for civil rights the centrist position was separate but equal.

That's why I don't believe Americans should be able to vote whether another citizens can have the same rights as they do.

It was us libs that put Obama up there in the first place Dusty.It was us libs that marched against the war in Iraq while you moderates went along with it.

Your either for equal rights for all or your not, there is NO moderate or central position in a yes or no answer, some times you have to choose.
Justaminute

Oklahoma City, OK

#22801 Jul 11, 2012
ASDF

We could change Medicare in one fell swoop by having Universal care for all. It would be simple we could have Medicare for all.

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#22802 Jul 11, 2012
Justaminute wrote:
Dusty,
Your world did not end when Barney Frank and his husband got married last week.
As more and more research is funded and shows that being homosexual is something that it's a condition that a person is born with this, the marriage brouhaha will be in the dustbin of history were it belongs.
Extremism is in the eye of the beholder. Many would say you are an extremist on equal rights for gays.
So if you think I am an extremist because I want equal rights for gay Americans, I'll just have to live with that.
Oh, and Dusty, centrism is not always the right place to be. During the battle for civil rights the centrist position was separate but equal.
That's why I don't believe Americans should be able to vote whether another citizens can have the same rights as they do.
It was us libs that put Obama up there in the first place Dusty.It was us libs that marched against the war in Iraq while you moderates went along with it.
Your either for equal rights for all or your not, there is NO moderate or central position in a yes or no answer, some times you have to choose.
Absolute nonsense. Moderates put Obama in office and Moderates will either return him to office or turn him out. Liberals do not have large enough base to elect a dog catcher nationally. Neither does the far right.

Barney Frank as far as I'm concerned is a pedophile or at the very least a pedophile enabler. After his little situation with his apartment being used as a party place for underage boy prostitutes, nothing else he's done as a politician or a person matters to me. He should be in prison. As an older man I love children, particularly the little girls. But I am NEVER alone with a minor. NEVER. I know what people think and I know my life would be branded if ever accused. So I take precautions. Frank is not above me. He did the inexcusable. So don't ever bring him up to me again. I'd just as soon they took him out back and shot him for his role in pedophilia.

And if you want to call me an extremists over the word marriage you're an idiot. All that I believe is negated by one single disagreement over a single word to you. That's outright stupidity. Narrow minded and bigoted on your part. You hate white men. You always have made that clear. So you're a bigot.

Worse you alienate those who can help you with a larger issue. Such as socialized medicine which I support. But when people like you extremist libs can let it go over a single word and name call moderates do you really think we're going to simply ignore all your hate and bile to join you with larger issues? You cut your own throat. Over and over again. Liberalism hasn't had a large base since the 1980's. You're not powerful. You're dependent on us moderates and you need to develop some political acumen.

Oh and on the separate but equal issue? Black and Latinos want equality but they're not willing to give up a single aspect of their "separatism". The most "separatists" in California are the minorities. Martin Luther King was not a separatist. La Raza and the NCAAP of today are. Blacks and Latinos fight constantly all over the nation. They HATE each other. You Liberals play right into the hands of the Ultra rich. They keep you working for them with your stupid views just as much as they do the right. YOUR kind keeps America from uniting against the Ultra rich. You're just as much at fault as the far right.
Justaminute

Oklahoma City, OK

#22803 Jul 11, 2012
ASDF

Well Romney could let us take a look at how far his Bain holding go if he would simply release his tax records.

And what is it that Romney is for, he's been running since 2008 and has hardly taken a position on anything that he hasn't changed his mind about. So far since he's been in political life he's been on both sides of the issues. And can we trust him to really take a stand on something and stick to it? He could really debate himself since he has taken both sides of the issues. Can he stick to something? Or is he just an empty slate like a robot, it just depends on who is programming him? Thanks but no thanks.
Justaminute

Oklahoma City, OK

#22804 Jul 11, 2012
Well Dusty it won't be the wishy washy middle that decides gay rights, it'll probably be the Supreme Court. After all, does the Constitution say that we all have equal rights or not. It's as simple as that. Yes or No, there is no middle answer or maybe.

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#22805 Jul 11, 2012
Justaminute wrote:
Well Dusty it won't be the wishy washy middle that decides gay rights, it'll probably be the Supreme Court. After all, does the Constitution say that we all have equal rights or not. It's as simple as that. Yes or No, there is no middle answer or maybe.
You really can't debate issues can you? The word marriage is not a right. It's a word just like the words man and woman as I illustrated and you choose to ignore just like extremists do on both sides when faced with a rebuttal that they can't get around. EVERYTHING is not "a right" just because one side or the other thinks it is. Equality under the law amounts to equal protection of the law. It doesn't say anywhere in the constitution that equal rights allows a man to call himself a goat and demands everyone else subscribes to it. Marriage is a word to describe a civil union between a man and a woman. If you want to have a civil union with a goat and demand all the rights that go with a civil union for you and that goat I'm all for it. But I won't call it a marriage.

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#22806 Jul 11, 2012
Justaminute wrote:
Well Dusty it won't be the wishy washy middle that decides gay rights, it'll probably be the Supreme Court. After all, does the Constitution say that we all have equal rights or not. It's as simple as that. Yes or No, there is no middle answer or maybe.
LOL the last time someone called moderates "wishy washy" to myself was a right winger doing it. Funny how you two extremist sides think you're the only answer to everything. You're just EXACTLY the same kind of people. Wanna be dictators all name calling everyone else. Got some bad news for you. The majority of the voters in America are moderates. Have been for a long time.
Packing Heat

United States

#22807 Jul 11, 2012
Coming this summer to a theater near you will be one of the most important and politically explosive films of the decade, 2016 Obama’s America. It is the movie Liberals really don't want you to see. Too Damn Bad because love him or hate him, you will at least know him!

Synopsis of 2016: Obama’s America
2016 Obama’s America takes audiences on a gripping visual journey into the heart of the world’s most powerful office to reveal the struggle of whether one man’s past will redefine America over the next four years. The film examines the question,”If Obama wins a second term, where will we be in 2016?”

Across the globe and in America, people in 2008 hungered for a leader who would unite and lift us from economic turmoil and war. True to America’s ideals, they invested their hope in a new kind of president, Barack Hussein Obama. What they didn’t know is that Barack Hussein Obama is a man with a past, and in powerful ways that past defines him, who he really is, how he really thinks, and where he really intends to take America and the world.

The new trailer is now available for you to view here:
http://www.dineshdsouza.com/news/may2016updat...
Packing Heat

United States

#22808 Jul 11, 2012
Justaminute wrote:
<quoted text>
ASDF

Well Romney could let us take a look at how far his Bain holding go if he would simply release his tax records.

And what is it that Romney is for, he's been running since 2008 and has hardly taken a position on anything that he hasn't changed his mind about. So far since he's been in political life he's been on both sides of the issues. And can we trust him to really take a stand on something and stick to it? He could really debate himself since he has taken both sides of the issues. Can he stick to something? Or is he just an empty slate like a robot, it just depends on who is programming him? Thanks but no thanks.


Hey Justaminute, thank you for your kind words the other day. I know you are a sweet gal with a kind heart but that does not mean I will compromise with you or anyone so we are clear. I'm sure I could like you personally but understand I hate your guts politically, ROFLMAO. This is our cyber-war, LOL.

You may think that Romney's not the best representative the Republicans could have selected but... I truly believe he will be the perfect partner to help absolutely wreck the entire Progressive Liberals Agenda and roll-back every single thing Obama shoved through and for me that would be GREAT! Completely erase any thought of any kind of socialized medicine for ever and lock up without trial forever anyone bringing up the subject again. It should be the death penalty for those that advocate that bullshit but I'll settle for life in prison and you can have your socialized medicine there and Dusty will get free rectum exams from his cellmate, LOL. Is that what they call prison socialism? LOL

And Romney won't burn the flag, bow down to anyone for that matter, will not practice the fiscal irresponsibility that Obama has expanding entitlements for liberal friends and supporters. I know Romney has the ability to turn around this financial debacle that the Obama regime has gotten us into. You won't like all the things necessary to recover from Obama's debt, but someone with Romney's background can do it, like killing Obamacare Tax, bring the spending level back to where it was before the Obama Regime and then cut entitlements from that level, lower taxes and abolish inheritance taxes again and generally things Republicans and I like and I really don't give a damn if liberals like it or not, screw you people.

But, on the minus side, He never was an "Acorn Community Organizer", does not associate with communists or terrorists like Obama with Bill Ayers etc. nor did he attend a church whose pastor and mentor of 20 years called for God to damn America. Just so we're clear about Obama is a goddamn fool. The following information about Willard that is any of your goddamn business is readily available on-line. If it is not then figure its none of your damn busines and mind your own. Your not voting for him anyway. If those that support him want to know then we will ask, stay out of our damn business, you're not voting for him anyway.
Have a nice day Justaminute, LOL.
asdf

Cushing, OK

#22809 Jul 11, 2012
Packing Heat wrote:
Hey Justaminute, thank you for your kind words the other day. I know you are a sweet gal with a kind heart but that does not mean I will compromise with you or anyone so we are clear. I'm sure I could like you personally but understand I hate your guts politically, ROFLMAO. This is our cyber-war, LOL.

You may think that Romney's not the best representative the Republicans could have selected but... I truly believe he will be the perfect partner to help absolutely wreck the entire Progressive Liberals Agenda and roll-back every single thing Obama shoved through and for me that would be GREAT! Completely erase any thought of any kind of socialized medicine for ever and lock up without trial forever anyone bringing up the subject again. It should be the death penalty for those that advocate that bullshit but I'll settle for life in prison and you can have your socialized medicine there and Dusty will get free rectum exams from his cellmate, LOL. Is that what they call prison socialism? LOL

And Romney won't burn the flag, bow down to anyone for that matter, will not practice the fiscal irresponsibility that Obama has expanding entitlements for liberal friends and supporters. I know Romney has the ability to turn around this financial debacle that the Obama regime has gotten us into. You won't like all the things necessary to recover from Obama's debt, but someone with Romney's background can do it, like killing Obamacare Tax, bring the spending level back to where it was before the Obama Regime and then cut entitlements from that level, lower taxes and abolish inheritance taxes again and generally things Republicans and I like and I really don't give a damn if liberals like it or not, screw you people.

But, on the minus side, He never was an "Acorn Community Organizer", does not associate with communists or terrorists like Obama with Bill Ayers etc. nor did he attend a church whose pastor and mentor of 20 years called for God to damn America. Just so we're clear about Obama is a goddamn fool. The following information about Willard that is any of your goddamn business is readily available on-line. If it is not then figure its none of your damn busines and mind your own. Your not voting for him anyway. If those that support him want to know then we will ask, stay out of our damn business, you're not voting for him anyway.
Have a nice day Justaminute, LOL.
Actually you being up a good point Heat. If you want to see how socialism works, take a look inside of a prison. Prisons are small socialist societies. There are several prisons and probation offices in the area where I live and they are a major employer around here. I know a lot of corrections employees past and present that say this and try ro tell people you do not want socialism on a larger scale. Ask an inmate how it works out for them, especially in healthcare and food. They're criminals and we're not. I won't accept it
Justaminute

Oklahoma City, OK

#22810 Jul 11, 2012
Packing Heat wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey Justaminute, thank you for your kind words the other day. I know you are a sweet gal with a kind heart but that does not mean I will compromise with you or anyone so we are clear. I'm sure I could like you personally but understand I hate your guts politically, ROFLMAO. This is our cyber-war, LOL.
Heat,

Abolish inheritance taxes, why, the person that made that money and paid taxes on it is dead. And it's crazy to think that they don't have another vehicle to move their money another way. Like the Walton kids, aren't they always on the list of the world's richest people?

Sorry that financial debacle started with you guys. No matter how you much you want to rewrite history.

That's what you want to give us Heat without the ACA, the death penalty for having a pre-existing condition.

That's why we laugh at you Republicans. You waste money holding symbolic Obamacare repeals and trying to pass even more anti-abortion legislation. Talk about money and time wasters.

So if you pasty, faced white guys have a majority with out the rest of us, go for it.

Your party just represents the rich and you have your perfect candidate.

Lower taxes? Ha ha Lower taxes on the rich, higher taxes on the rest of us. Why should you care Heat, you said your weren't paying any now.

It was a sad day for you guys, now that you can't blame ACORN anymore.


Well since the President is going up in the polls and the old Mittster is going down, I'm pretty sure you guys will be singing the minority blues. Especially all those efforts you guys are putting into making sure that we all don't vote.

According to the latest poll, Obama is up over Romney by 6.

And no, I don't plan on staying out of shining the light on Richy Rich Romney and the whole gangsta Republican party. Feeling the Heat, Heat? LOL

Didn't you just love the Romney/NAACP photo op? I loved the blank look on Romney's face when he got booed for saying that he was going to do away with Obamacare. It was priceless. Just like what your face is going to look like when Obama wins the election in 2012.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Sallisaw Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Sarah Gish 21 hr toofunnynottocomment 19
liquor by the drink (Apr '09) Aug 18 CalicoCat 107
muldrow smokeshop harrassed Aug 18 Your The Boss Boss 13
football program (May '15) Aug 17 Facts are facts 12
Cyrus and ben james? Aug 13 Curiouscat 1
Mckaylee James! Aug 13 Curiouscat 1
The DA slacking on the job (Feb '17) Aug 7 OINK OINK OINK PIGGY 7

Sallisaw Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Sallisaw Mortgages