A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry

Obama's Speech - condensed version

Posted: Sep 9, 2011

http://lockerroom.johnlocke.org/2011/09/09/obamas-pass-this-jobs-bill-remix/

;

Until the prez, or one of those idiots in congress, finally - says no to offshoring, I dont care about - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
the rest. They can all go __________. (Fill in whatever scenario suits your mindset best.)

I doubt the election next year will even be worth turning on the tv to listen to, let alone participate in. It's all come down to just voting for the lesser of 2 evils: Tax everyone (including us poor ppl - the so-called "middle class"), or tax just us. (The so-called "middle class"). It's like, who do you want in the white house and congress next year? Bin Ladin, or Hitler?

Doesn't even matter anymore. Neither changes things. Certainly not my personal situation. Until such time that an actually QUALIFIED candidate is ever run for any office in the future (and I find that highly unlikely to occur), I'm sitting the rest of these so-called "democratic" elections out.

I can think of lots more productive and useful things to do with my time than cast my vote for any of those do-nothing posers.

I totally agree with you. Someone from the - Communications SM

[ In Reply To ..]
Workers of America was on The Ed Show last night, and said the members were disappointed that Obama did not address offshoring. That is my mantra too. The answer to creating jobs here is to do something about offshoring, be it taxing corporations who do it, or rewarding corporations who don't. Everything else is just nonsense IMO.

I thought the same thing too - Conservative MT

[ In Reply To ..]
Why aren't they talking about stopping offshoring? Creating jobs won't mean much if they are in other countries. Perhaps we should all bombard both republicans and democrats with emails and letters about this. It is about time they wake up and I'm to the point that I don't care who suggests it....crat or pub.....it needs to be brought up and dealt with.

I too feel like I'm always voting for the lesser of 2 evils. I feel that Obama has dropped the ball and will vote against him come 2012. If we get a new president, I will see how that person does and if I'm not happy...they will be out on their butt next time around as well. We need to show these politicians that incumbants are in deep doo doo and if they wanna keep their job....they are going to do right by us or they too will be out on their butts.

Jobs for Americans is what he is talking about. sm - oldtimer

[ In Reply To ..]
Did you not listen to president Obama's speech, read it? Here is a small part of how he plans on putting AMERICANS back to work, incentives and tax breaks for hiring the long-time unemployed for one.

"The purpose of the American Jobs Act is simple: to put more people back to work and more money in the pockets of those who are working. It will create more jobs for construction workers, more jobs for teachers, more jobs for veterans, and more jobs for the long-term unemployed. It will provide a tax break for companies who hire new workers, and it will cut payroll taxes in half for every working American and every small business. It will provide a jolt to an economy that has stalled, and give companies confidence that if they invest and hire, there will be customers for their products and services. You should pass this jobs plan right away.

Everyone here knows that small businesses are where most new jobs begin. And you know that while corporate profits have come roaring back, smaller companies haven’t. So for everyone who speaks so passionately about making life easier for “job creators,” this plan is for you.

Pass this jobs bill, and starting tomorrow, small businesses will get a tax cut if they hire new workers or raise workers’ wages. Pass this jobs bill, and all small business owners will also see their payroll taxes cut in half next year. If you have 50 employees making an average salary, that’s an $80,000 tax cut. And all businesses will be able to continue writing off the investments they make in 2012."

I'm to the point where we just do what Obama - wants so that way

[ In Reply To ..]
When our debt goes up and little jobs are created by this, he won't have anyone to blame because he told us to pass the bill. I still want to see where this is going to be paid for because it doesn't appear that Obama has that figured out at all. Regardless of whether or not he wants to create jobs for Americans, it won't matter if we don't change some things to keep companies and jobs in the US. Aren't you an MT? You know our jobs are going to India, etc. Obviously we still have a problem with offshoring and I didn't hear anything in his speech specifically directed towards offshoring.

Yes, I am an unemployed MT and an Obama supporter. nm - oldtimer

[ In Reply To ..]
.

99er who supports Obama here. Living wage will never be - on GOP radar screen.

[ In Reply To ..]
If GOP had their way, I would have ended up starving under a bridge a long time ago after paying into the system since 1971. At least Obama is aware of long-termers and is trying to do something about the latest class of the great unwashed. I never thought I'd live to see the day when Congress would be debating a bill against discrmination against the jobless, which our president supports.

"A bill against discrimination against the jobless" - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
Is this the same discrimination against ugly people too? lol It is my personal opinion that an employer should hire the right person for the job without fear of being sued for discrimination about every little thing. All these lawyers in Washington do nothing but stir up unnecessary lawsuits. OMG...I'm ugly and didn't get hired....DISCRIMINATION!!! OMG.....I'm unemployed and I didn't get hired even though I don't have the skills for this job....DISCRIMINATION!!!

We have turned into a nation of a bunch of big babies.

How does one remain marketable after 144 weeks of unemployment? - x

[ In Reply To ..]
And what is the effect on one's psyche?

Look the change we've seen just in how we do OUR jobs over the last 3 years.

Here's how. - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
99 weeks = 1.9 years. What is the significance of that 144 weeks figure? Where did that come from?

Do you think you would lose your skills in less than 2 years? If you do, you must not have been transcribing for very long. You think your psyche would suffer irreparable damage being jobless for that amount of time? Quite the opposite. Anyone who can survive the uncertainty of this economy and not having a job without having their world crumble out from under them, while watching these clowns in Congress doing what they have been doing, gets stronger, not psyche-challenged. Do you think you would be obsolete? Should other people deem that you are? If they do, does it matter, or is what matters what you know to be true about yourself? If you can maintain that kind of self image, can you or can you not sell it to a prospective employer? In normal circumstances, of course you can, but these days, not if you can’t get your foot in the door.

Somehow, I don’t think “marketability” is a problem.

Wanna talk change over 3 years? Try 40: Manual typewriter, correcting Selectric, mag tape, mag card, Wang TSP 1200 and OIS, Lexitron VT, Vydec, Xerox SIS, WordStar, Displaywriter, WordPerfect, Lotus WordPro, DOS, Unix, OS/2, Word versions 3.1 through 2007 (2010 upgrade pending compatibility with MTSO requirements), Windows 3.1, 95, 98, ME, XP and 7, DictaBelt (horrible), compact, mini- and microcassettes, Edisette, Dictaphone, Lanier Voicewriter, Dragon, Meditech, Vianeta FTP, PrecyseNet MT and QA proprietry, P6 VR/ASR, eScription, ChartNet, Emdat, Chartscript.com MT, Chartscript.net QA, BeyondTXT, Encore, DEP DocQScribe MT, DEP DocQment Ovation Workstation MT and QA, DEP DocQmanage, CQuence MT VPN, CQuence Voice Exchange VR/SR, and Bayscribe.

BTDT. I've bent over backwards and stood on my head to be flexible and adaptive. I trained on 13 accounts and worked on 7 different platforms MTSO before last. I think I have sufficiently demonstrated an ability to make smooth transitions between advancing technologies, roll with the punches and pretty much do whatever is thrown at me. I doubt I could ever lose the skills, not even if I wanted to. After being out of work for 2 years, I still have nights where I find myself literally transcribing in my sleep (dreams/nightmares, take your pick). That is how much a part of me it is.

I’ve been doing acute care MT of all specialty work types, diagnostics, radiology, pathology, psyche, forensics, genetics research and drug trial studies since 1971. I stayed out of transcription for 4 consecutive years while rendering what turned out to be terminal care for my mother. Getting back in the saddle was no problem at all, because somebody gave me a chance to prove myself, and I made it my business not to disappoint. The reference letter she provided me suggests that I didn’t.

After all that, I became just another casualty of outsourcing/offshoring. When ads started popping up with pay rates of 7 cpl and less (a 50% pay cut in 5 years) and VR/ASR rates that cut that in half, I drew the line with MTSOs, since that does not represent a living wage for me when half the time all I would see was NJA on my last 2 jobs. I have held temp positions to transition skills into related environments and been sending out 30+ resumes every week, but with that recent “unemployed need not apply” thingy, glutted job market and being over 60 years old, planning to work until I drop dead, I am pretty much running on empty. My story certainly is not unique. The bill to amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is needed and I very much appreciate Obama giving folks like me a nod last week.

Feel free to belittle me, call me names, assume I sit around all day eating bon-bons and reading Soap Digest, drive my Caddie to the grocery store to buy prime rib, cigarettes and fine wines with my food stamps, sponge off a system I paid into for 40 years and otherwise make me feel like I am lazy and lower than dirt because I’m out of work. None of that will change wrong to right and right to wrong or the realtime politics that destroyed the economy and brought the recovery to a standstill.

Your story is basically the same as mine. If your .. sm - anon

[ In Reply To ..]
resume indicates that you haven't held an MT position for two or more years, it is the perception of the prospective employer that you are rusty. I also planned to never retire but am lucky that I am old enough to collect Social Security.

Happy to hear someone made it past that goal post. - I hve 5 more years

[ In Reply To ..]
now that they changed the full retirement age to 67. Hopefully your stress levels have been reduced to a dull roar. Good luck with your search and thanks for letting me know my boat's not empty. It helps.

Excellent post. Thank you. - nm

[ In Reply To ..]

How would an employer know whether of not they are qualified - if their ad states straight up

[ In Reply To ..]
"unemployed persons need not apply"? I have also seen, "only those currently employed need apply." If you think this doesn't happen, or if you think these are rare isolated incidents, then you haven't conducted an in-depth job search recently. I send out on average anywhere between 5 and 8 resumes daily, 7 days a week, so I search high and low for these leads. During the course of a week, I encounter at least 4 or 5 of these types of ads, sometimes more. One issue I take with this is simply one of missed opportunity, not just for the applicant, but also for the employer who eliminates 95+% of all job seekers before he even gets started. This makes no sense. Consider for moment what that means in terms of wasted talent and resources.

I guess you think your smug ugly comment is a cute little joke, but that happens before people get a chance to get their foot in the door as well. Some employers say in the ad they will not review resumes that don't have photos. It's a neat little tool they use to facilitate discrimination, not only for overall appearance, but also for race, gender, ethnicity, and especially for age. Maybe you think it is perfectly acceptable that the only people given a shot at the position are young, beautiful, skinny, blond, blue-eyed hair-dos who are already employed, but that's not the America I want for my children or for myself. I would venture to say, I doubt seriously I am alone in that sentiment.

Your automatic presumption that unemployed people in this economy don't have skills for the jobs they apply for illustrates beautifully exactly why this kind of legislation is needed. Maybe you are too young to remember the civil rights movements, or maybe you only subscribe to TP versions of history and their distorted perspectives. If so, could be you would like to see us return to those decades. I think I can confidently say with the greatest strength of conviction, on my own behalf and that of the vast majority of my fellow citizens....that will happen over our dead bodies.

Forgot to post this related article link. - sm

[ In Reply To ..]

Congressman files bill to protect unemployed in Civil Rights law; Johnson: ‘All Americans Deserve the Opportunity to Work’

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Rep. Hank Johnson (GA-04) today introduced the Fair Employment Act of 2011 – H.R. 1113 – which would amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to protect against discrimination on the basis of unemployment status.

Congressman Johnson’s bill responds to widespread reports of job listings that explicitly exclude unemployed applicants. Some advertisements stated that applicants “must be currently employed” or stipulated that “no unemployed candidates will be considered at all.” Some ads read, “No layoff candidates considered.”

“Employer discrimination against unemployed job applicants is fundamentally wrong,” said Rep. Johnson, who represents parts of DeKalb, Rockdale and Gwinnett counties in eastern metropolitan Atlanta. “With unemployment at about 9 percent and with nearly 14 million Americans out of work, this discrimination will only prolong the crisis.”

According to a Bureau of Labor Statistics report in February 2011, the national unemployment rate is 8.9 percent. The rates for African-Americans and Hispanics, however, are 15.3 percent and 11.6 percent, respectively.

“Discrimination against the unemployed smacks of days gone by when signs read, ‘women need not apply,’ ‘Irish need not apply’ or ‘no Blacks allowed,’ said Johnson. “I'm going to do all I can to fight for the unemployed.”

In November, 2010, Rep. Johnson sent a letter to U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity (EEOC) Commission Chair Jacqueline Berrien to request an investigation into possible discrimination against the unemployed.

The EEOC held a hearing on the issue Feb. 16, where they identified this troubling trend as growing threat to the unemployed, especially the long-term unemployed.

As Chair Berrien said, “[The] meeting gave the Commission an important opportunity to learn about the emerging practice of excluding unemployed persons from applicant pools.”

Johnson, a member of the Judiciary and Armed Services committees, has 11 cosponsors, including Barbara Lee, Eleanor Holmes Norton, Yvette Clark, Keith Ellison, Raul Grijalva, Jim McDermott, Shelia Jackson-Lee, Ed Towns, Bennie Thompson and Charlie Rangel.

http://hankjohnson.house.gov/2011/03/rep-hank-johnson-fights-discrimination-against-unemployed-with-civil-rights-bill.shtml

The bill amending the Civil Rights ct of 1964
http://hankjohnson.house.gov/issues/Fair_Employment_Act_2011.pdf

Nothing like dangling 4K in - front of an employer

[ In Reply To ..]
to hire someone less skilled for the job just because they have been unemployed longer than someone who is recently unemployed and has better experience because that isn't discrimination at all.

Less skilled? Your answer is in the Here's How post above. - nm

[ In Reply To ..]

Doesn't hiring American workers here - smm

[ In Reply To ..]
mean hiring workers here in the US? What part of that don't you understand. I'm not trying to be sarcastic but hiring American workers means just that. No, he didn't specifically say MTs, but incentives to hire American workers would also be given to transcription companies who hire American workers.

People want - smm

[ In Reply To ..]
to put it down because they don't like Obama. I tried pointing your points out and people get all irate. I think the president is making a good effort to get people back to work in this country. Too many people hear only what they want to hear and twist the rest around. I think it should be passed too. Someone mentioned on one post that what construction worker wants to put windows in schools? Well, if your an unemployed construction worker I bet you would be grateful to be putting windows in schools. Who wants to build road? I bet any unemployed construction worker or any worker would love to be building roads. THEY ARE JOBS.

People need to worry less about getting him out of office and read what he says and push to get this stuff passed. Somebody also said it was just a speech written by a speech writer. Well, I believe all the presidents have speach writers. The writer puts the president's words into a speech.

People say his words don't mean anything unless he does what he says. Well, he needs support of Congress in order to do that and the republicans always put down what he wants to do because it involves sacrafice from the weathy also, and they are doing all they can to make him look bad for election time. We need jobs to get this country going again and I think this is a good plan too. Congress needs to Pass This Jobs Bill!

Do you not pay attention to politics? - lol

[ In Reply To ..]
Both sides put down the other side when they have an idea. You all keep ranting and raving about republicans doing this and yet you ignore it when democrats do the same thing.

I think part of the plan is good. I don't agree with all of it. I still want to know where we are going to get the money for this without adding to our deficit...which is something Obama didn't specify.

I'm not blinded by my own party lines to just say...this whole plan sucks because I don't like Obama. I guess I want more information and not have a bill passed like Obamacare where we had to pass it to find out what was in it.

I think it is reasonable for anyone to question any politician no matter who they are. I want more specific information and there is nothing wrong with that.

As for the construction worker who needs work, I'm sure they would appreciate putting windows into a school, etc. But when that job is done...then what? You going to give them more money for another job to do? We need to support jobs that are ongoing with everyday work so we can bring in more revenue to spend on construction jobs. When a road is repaved, the job is done. When a bridge is repaired, the job is done. I guess I don't get what some of you don't understand about that.

Okay, no party talk here - smm

[ In Reply To ..]
First of all, some of the money will be coming from workers paying taxes because they are working instead of collecting unemployment. Another bit of money will be coming from taking away loopholes from the big corporations and they will actually be paying taxes. They will get incentives for hiring Americans, which will put more money back to the government in workers paying taxes. Welfare people will be put to work on jobs, which in turn will remove them from the welfare system eventually and they will be paying taxes. The tax rate will increase for the very wealthy. The construction worker who will be putting windows in schools will be paying taxes instead of collecting unemployment. Even if it is a temporary job, he will have a job and be working. I don't know about you, but most construction jobs and road repair jobs take quite awhile to do, so even though they are temporary, they will help jumpstart the economy by getting people back to work. The president said this is a start. We need to do things to get the economy started again. I think this plan offers that. He said there is a lot of work still to be done but this is a start. Is sitting around doing nothing helping?

Well, lol, they may be temporary but at least it's - a start. NM

[ In Reply To ..]
x

There is NO JOBS BILL... - x

[ In Reply To ..]
It hasn't even been put on paper yet. Just a collection of sound bite suggestions.

I'd like to see Boehner call a vote on this bill on Monday and see if anybody can even a find a copy of said legislation.

It will be presented to congress in bill form - this week. nm

[ In Reply To ..]
.

Do we really want a repeat of this? - I don't.

[ In Reply To ..]
Timothy Conley of the University of Western Ontario and Bill Dupor of Ohio State 'found that despite the influx of all that federal money, highway construction jobs actually plunged by nearly 70,000 between 2008 and 2010.' Indeed, the researchers found that the stimulus actually 'destroyed or forestalled' a whopping one million private sector jobs by crowding them out with make-work public jobs and programs.

Could you explain this further please? - NM

[ In Reply To ..]
x

If a company has been hesitant to hire... - x

[ In Reply To ..]
how is a small tax credit going to entice them to do so?

What is the cost of hiring a new employee, including benefits?

It'd have to be a heck of a tax credit.

My husband runs a business - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
and he said this tax credit is a joke and will do little to entice his company to hire more people especially since Obamacare is going to cost them more money.

Guess it is who you talk to - smm

[ In Reply To ..]
I just read an article that Obamacare is helping small businesses to give their employees benefits that they couldn't do before. Oh well, guess the jokes on them and their employees.

Oh...you read an article? Well I guess that - proves everything

[ In Reply To ..]
and Obama should be praised. I've read many articles that have said just the opposite so please excuse me if I find the article you read to be a load of crap....not to mention what my husband deals with. When you see how things work in small businesses first hand, some of these articles should be used to wipe your butt with because they aren't based on real facts or reality.

It's Obama's bluff, and the Republicans can't call it. - hmm

[ In Reply To ..]
If they "pass the bill," they will alienate the segment of their constituency that has begged Washington to quit spending.

If they don't "pass the bill," and the economy continues to tank, Obama can point the finger and say it's the Republicans' fault.

I don't understand why Obama now has to travel around the country to "sell" his bill when he just commandeered a joint session of Congress and pre-empted the NFL to sell it on national TV. Does the idea sound better from a podium in Virginia than it did in DC?

In person is always better. A president who hides....sm - VTMT

[ In Reply To ..]
behind a TV camera and doesn't meet with his constituents is useless.

Hopefully, with the 9/11 ten-year memorial this weekend people will remember how we can all pull together for the good of our country and stop the bickering.

I personally feel that if - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
Our government would stop spending more money than we have and just leave other stuff alone...the economy will right itself in the end. The more spending the government does, the more antsy businesses get because someone is going to have to pay for the spending and the democrats continue to promote raising taxes with Obama wanting those who make $250,000 or more paying higher taxes. That doesn't instill much confidence. All these regulations the government has instituted has hurt as well.

Take the car industry for example. First the government wanted safer cars so they were built heavier with more safety issues. This made vehicles heavier and gas mileage go down because of the weight. This also added to the price. Now government wants more fuel efficiency because we need to go green. These regulations are going to make the price go up even more. This hurts car dealerships. In this economy people don't want to spend thousands more on a vehicle because of government regulations.

I'm just so fed up with all politicians. I personally feel that we should NOT extend unemployment, we should put taxes where they were during the Clinton administration for everyone, back off on some of these regulations, drill here in our own country and for government to butt the he!! out.

I get it, you believe in driill baby drill and the he11 with - the unemployed etc. nm

[ In Reply To ..]
.

Out of all I said all you got was drill baby drill? - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
Drilling here would at least create some jobs as well as lessen our dependency on foreign oil. I would repeat what I said earlier since you missed most of what I said but you would just ignore it again.

Regulations - smm

[ In Reply To ..]
are put in place to protect people and the earth we live on. You want those removed? They protect the food we eat, the water we drink and the air we breath. You think we should just back off and ruin the planet more! You seem so worried about those poor people that make $250,000 a year than you do our planet and our safety. Is there something wrong with going green. Haven't we messed up the planet up enough?

Wow, yeah lets get rid of all the government inspectors and the ones who carry out all these regulations so we can destroy ourselves. If you ask me, we need more people to do these jobs so we don't have food recalls every week, oil spills all the time, lakes closed because of all the poisons that are being dumped in them. I saw a program on recently about the fisherman in the gulf who are pulling up nothing but fish with disease and sores all over from the oil spill. Their jobs are about ruined along with our prescious ocean, but BP is still making record profits and did not fix their mess. This is disgusting.

Sheesh....did I say ALL regulations should - be done away with?

[ In Reply To ..]
Uh...No..I didn't. So before you get your panties into a major bind perhaps you should look at the big picture and realize that SOME regulations are hurting businesses right now and are stiffling economic growth. Some regulations are necessary....others are just more bothersome than actually being effective.

Well, - smm

[ In Reply To ..]
you mentioned the one for improving gas mileage, so we'll stick to that one. Why do you not believe that we should strive for better gas mileage?

I never said we shouldn't strive for better - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
gas mileage but that should be left up to the consumer. However, that isn't the case. Consumers used to want the bigger, safer, gas guzzlers and so that is what car companies made. I personally enjoyed driving a Hummer. Most fun I've ever had driving a vehicle!

Now that gas prices have gone up partly because we won't drill here and partly because we have devalued our dollar, people want smaller cars that have better gas mileage. That isn't so bad but now you have government sticking its nose into the car industry and making gas mileage regulations that will make the cost of cars go up. Not everyone is going to be able to afford those. So dealerships are going to have these cars that are too expensive for the regular Joe to afford in these tough economic times and what will they buy.......a used smaller car with better gas mileage. So all these new and more expensive cars because of government regulations will sit on the lot and not get sold while dealerships run out of used cars that are more fuel efficient and then where will those dealerships and their employees be? Where will those factory workers who make trucks and SUVs end up? As for these electric cars...where do you all think the electricity to charge those cars come from? That energy doesn't come from a bunch of hamsters running wheels 24/7. No....fossil fuels and we are back to why we should drill in our country and reduce are dependency on foreign oil.

Also, let us not forget that these smaller - smart cars

[ In Reply To ..]
wouldn't get a family anywhere because there is no room for kids...let alone kids who are still in car seats. So they won't be buying the newest cars anyway because of lack of room for the family. Just saying....sometimes too many regulations does more harm than good.

Do you realize - smm

[ In Reply To ..]
that the oil we drill here does not stay in this country? All the oil from everywhere is distributed all over the place. Please do some research on that, don't take my word for it.

Drilling here has nothing to do with the gas prices. That is decided by OPEC. Again, please do research on that.

If you cannot afford a car that gets better gas mileage, how do you afford a Hummer?

I didn't say I couldn't afford - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
it but I doubt I'd pay the extra money for one when I could get a car that gets decent gas mileage cheaper. Also, I need a bigger vehicle for my family and prefer vans. As for the Hummer....that was a demo I was driving for about a week and it was a lot of fun. So I didn't pay for it at all.

As for your OPEC comment...yes OPEC does have a factor into the price of crude oil because that is foreign oil we are dependent on. If we drilled for oil and kept it in our own country, that wouldn't be a factor.

However, You cannot ignore that supply, demand, inflation, and taxes also contribute to the price of fuel. Also, the devaluing of our dollar makes the price go up as well since we need more of our dollars to pay for it. Besides, democrats have continually tried to get fuel prices higher so we would consume less.

I never said fuel was a simple and easy solution as there are many factors...but certainly becoming less dependent on foriegn oil is a must. I'm for looking into greener ways as well but right now I have yet to see an alternative fuel source that is feasible and not more expensive.

How about natural gas? nm - VTMT

[ In Reply To ..]
.

There are pros and cons to natural gas. - just like anything else

[ In Reply To ..]
I am no tree hugger. I don't believe in global warming. However, I'm not one for destroying our environment either. I don't think I'd have much problem with natural gas if we had a better way of extracting it. I've heard some major concerns about fracking though.

Please read again - smm

[ In Reply To ..]
It doesn't matter how much oil we drill, we do not get to keep it here. It gets distributed here and other countries. It is kind of like everybody's oil goes into a big pot and everybody buys from that pot. We do not keep our oil.

I understand that they are a long way from not using gas burning cars at the moment, but we have to put money into developing these things. It will take time, but the more we ignore it, the worse we will be. It will also be like computers or VHS recorders, when they first came out, the price was high, then it lowers as it becmes more common.

Over-regulating is the issue. - ..........

[ In Reply To ..]
From EPA’s carbon crusade to light bulbs to Obamacare, hyper-regulation has weakened the industrial jobs engine.

Some regulations are necessary for safety but there comes a point where too many regulations cripple business and in doing so cripples job growth.

No reason to start screaming and throwing fits like you did in your reply. Over-regulating is a major factor in the lack of job growth and to ignore that is harmful to our economy.

Of course Cuba continues drilling in the Gulf. - x

[ In Reply To ..]
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/05/cuba-gulf-oil-drilling_n_845283.html

And they've explored letting China drill there, too.

Same ocean. Same water. Our restrictions on drilling won't hamper them in the least.

Please see message. - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
You wrote:

"I don't understand why Obama now has to travel around the country to "sell" his bill when he just commandeered a joint session of Congress and pre-empted the NFL to sell it on national TV. Does the idea sound better from a podium in Virginia than it did in DC?"

Yes, in fact, I believe the idea sounds better from a podium in Virginia than in DC, since the Republicans do nothing but block anything Obama, he needs the help of the constituents of these lawmakers that would prefer to continue to say no, no, no.

Well - smm

[ In Reply To ..]
Well, why is it that the articles you read are true and the ones I read are a load of crap? Why should I believe what your husband says. I don't know him, maybe he runs a crappy business.

I guess we'll just to have to agree to disagree.

Well thanks for not being rude and insulting - my husband.....

[ In Reply To ..]
Oh wait...you did insult my husband. My husband is a good business man. He has kept his store going by cutting back as much as he can to offset the decline of sales. Now that sales have gone up a bit, he is still cutting back because the economy is so uncertain and he doesn't want to overextend himself should things take a turn for the worse. Perhaps if you actually ran a business you might have an actual clue how things really work...but obviously you don't.

Well, - smm

[ In Reply To ..]
I really did not mean to insult your husband, I was just trying to make a point because you seemed to say that what I read is crap and that these other business people are wrong about their claims. Perhaps it has to do with the type of business and so forth, I don't know, but I did read that many businesses are finding that they are doing better with Obamacare.

As far as running a business, I have run a business in the past and yes it is hard work and yes, I know the economy is hurting a lot of businesses. I had a janitorial business years ago and the economy put me out of business. Things were bad and I lost accounts that I had for many years because when the economy gets bad, companies always get rid of the janitors first. But we have to do something to try to create jobs and help uninsured people out. The healthcare reform is a new thing in this country. I am sure that it will need tweaking, but as for me, a person who went without insurance for many years because I could not afford it and made too much to get it from the state, I am glad that something is being done. I am on my husband's insurance now, but was in that place before where I did not have insurance and it is a scary place to be. Perhaps you could write your representatives and give some suggestions on constructive changes that could help. I write them a lot and we all need to

That's what I figured... - .

[ In Reply To ..]
A tax "credit" and a tax "cut" are 2 different things anyway.

Obama is proposing a tax credit of between $4,000 and $9,600 per worker.

and cutting the small business payroll taxes by half. nm - oldtimer

[ In Reply To ..]
.

I worry that companies will fire current workers - and hire new ones SM

[ In Reply To ..]
just for the incentives. It's a greed thing, just like always.

The incentives would be for those companies that - ADD to their workforce. nm

[ In Reply To ..]
.

Thanks for telling the truth on this board. - nm

[ In Reply To ..]

I agree that it seems to not matter anymore, but - the repub social SM

[ In Reply To ..]
issues agenda does not fly with me, so I will not vote republican.

If you want to go back to Bush (on steroids), go ahead - and vote Republican. sm

[ In Reply To ..]
As for me, that was a L-O-N-G 8 years of terror, one way or the other, that many Americans won't forget for a long, long time.

The Republicans have made it clear that they have nothing but contempt for poor-lower middle class and middle class people in this country.

I won't vote against my own best wishes, but if you want to, you have that right.

Similar Messages:

Jan 31, 2012
I saw all of this unfold live - from beginning to end. This footage is condensed, but in no way retouched, other than some captions. It proves what I was saying earlier, and also proves that the mainstream media (bought & paid for by Big Biz, just like the Mayor of Oakland and the Oakland P.D.), is going out of its way to paint a completely different picture than what actually happened. Remember: You can no longer make judgements about ANYTHING that happens in this c ...

Jul 20, 2016
. ...

Jul 16, 2012
The official transcript relates: There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me — because they want to give something back. They know they didn’t — look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Le ...

Sep 08, 2011
My fellow Americans.....this isn't my fault. I inherited this from Bush. Although I'm well into my first term, this still isn't my fault. Now congress is to blame. I want to spend...I'm sorry...I mean...invest money in public sector jobs because the unions contribute to my campaign and I want to make sure that I support union jobs while making things harder in the private sector. Republicans are evil. The rich...even though I'm rich... ...

Apr 29, 2011
http://factcheck.org/2011/04/factchecking-obamas-budget-speech/ ...

Sep 07, 2012
Michael Tomasky (left): Speech was dull, pedestrian, overconfident. Charles Krauthamer (right): Empty, meaningless, deceptive. Numbers pulled out of thin air as empty promises - e.g., he's to create x number of (teaching, green, whatever) jobs but not the slightest idea how. And even Jon Stewart is beginning to make fun of the Democrats' mindless adoration of Obama. My review: Who wrote this speech - Howdy Doody? ...

Nov 26, 2012
By not doing so, it comes across as endorsement: "A painting that features President Obama posed as Jesus Christ crucified on a cross is on display at a community college art gallery in Boston. "The painting by Michael D’Antuono is part of a larger exhibit called 'Artists on the Stump – the Road to the White House 2012.' It’s on display at the Bunker Hill Community College Art Gallery until Dec. 15th. "The painting is called 'Truth' – and shows the preside ...

Jan 30, 2014
"Record-low ratings for Obama's State of the Union address: Fewer than 33.3 million Americans watched President Obama's State of the Union address on television last night, the lowest turnout since President Clinton's final State of the Union address in 2000, according to newly released Nielsen ratings. Viewership for Obama's State of the Union addresses has been in decline since 2009, when he drew 52.4 million television viewers. 48.0 million watched on tele ...

Nov 22, 2014
By Ramesh Ponnuru "I count three ways President Barack Obama's speech on immigration last night contradicted itself. First, there was the absolutist language he used to justify his policy -- coupled with restrictions that aren't compatible with such language. The argument Obama made for his policy of offering legal status to millions of illegal immigrants was highly moralistic: We're not supposed to rip apart families, we can't deny people "a chance to make amends" and ...

Apr 22, 2011
Some very interesting info in this article. President Barack Obama misrepresented the House Republicans’ budget plan at times and exaggerated its impact on U.S. residents during an April 13 speech on deficit reduction. Obama claimed the Republicans’ "Path to Prosperity" plan would cause "up to 50 million Americans … to lose their health insurance.” But that worst-case figure is based in part on speculation and assumptions. He said the GOP plan would repla ...

Sep 20, 2012
Both of them need to just go live there - in a cave - together. ...

Feb 13, 2013
I know some posters won't like this article, but instead of disliking right away -----stop----take your time to read the whole thing, then think about it -----then reread and think about it some more before commenting in the negative. Ten Key Quotes From President Obama's State of the Union Address Guy Benson Political Editor, Townhall.com Feb 13, 2013 12:01 AM EST President Obama rehashed many familiar themes this evening, calling on Congress to act on a ...

Aug 16, 2012
For the simple fact so many posters on this board claim Romney has no budget. Maybe it was another Obama "composite". Maybe Debbie Wasserman Schultz is dropping the ball on getting out the info to the devoted few (she did an interview on 08/12 slamming Romney budget). What do they know that the devotees on this board do not? Are these 2, Obama and DWS, lying again/still, or is it posters so consumed with getting out misleading info they are not following their l ...

Jul 25, 2013
http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/14098/ ...

Jan 01, 2014
Obama Secretly Signs No Free Speech Bill Long gone may the days be where the people of the United States have the right to express themselves freely under the First Amendment. Obama just signed a bill into law secretly that allows for Secret Service to arrest anyone publicly protesting within their vicinity. The bill turned law, H.R. 347, has passed through congress with little objection from either side, or the American public. This could be on account of ...

Nov 29, 2014
Leaving aside passages in which he quoted a Chicago pub owner and a letter from a citizen from Georgia, President Barack Obama used the first person singular—including the pronouns “I” and “me” and the adjective “my”—91 times in a speech he delivered in Chicago Tuesday to explain his unilateral action on immigration. But as often as Obama used “I,” “me” and “my” in Chicago this week, it was no match for the ...

Dec 10, 2014
While there are plenty of Bible verses to mention while discussing immigration, President Obama on Tuesday quoted one which isn't so great, mainly because it's not real. "The good book says don't throw stones at glass houses, or make sure we're looking at the log in our eye before we are pointing out the moat in other folks eyes," Obama said during a speech in Nashville. One problem, though: The Bible never mentions glass houses. In addition to his b ...

May 25, 2010
FoxNews.com edits out applause during Obama’s West Point speech. In his commencement address to graduating West Point cadets on Saturday, the President outlined his upcoming national security strategy that is focused on international cooperation to meet the nation’s security challenges. He also praised American troops for their performance in Iraq. “A lesser Army might have seen its spirit broken,” he said, adding that “through their competence and creativity and co ...

Jun 15, 2014
I especially like the mocked message to the UC Irvine students. Link: http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/2014/06/hundreds_of_uc_irvine_graduates.php ...

Nov 21, 2014
Maybe because the majority of Americans do not want amnesty for millions of illegal aliens; the majority want our current immigration laws enforced, and they want this president to abide by them. Link: http://www.inquisitr.com/1625168/obama-immigration-speech-all-major-television-networks-snub-president-white-house-not-pleased/ ...

Oct 20, 2016
I would suggest that not only our leaders but every citizen of USA should pay attention to this advice. How scary is that? It is a sad day when a Communist Leader makes more sense than our LEADERS here in the U.S.A., but here it is! Vladimir Putin's speech - SHORTEST SPEECH EVER. Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, addressed the Duma, (Russian Parliament), and gave a speech about the tensions with minorities in Russia: "In Russia, live like ...

Jan 23, 2013
January 22, 2013 Obama Speech Leaves G.O.P. Stark Choices By JONATHAN WEISMAN WASHINGTON — President Obama’s aggressive Inaugural Address on Monday presented Congressional Republicans with a stark choice over the next two years: accommodate the president’s agenda on immigration, guns, energy and social programs and hope to take the liberal edge off issues dictated by the White House, or dig in as the last bulwark against a re-elected Democr ...

Apr 14, 2011
As I have tired to explain before, one of the consequences of \"union busting\" is that wage and benefit slashing will happen at all levels of employment. Here is an example of the \"whittling\" away of wages in the private sector. Big tax breaks but no living wage. The wage might seem adequate to you, but you need to remember that these jobs are in a city where rent is probably $1,000 per month, with higher car insurance, heating and general cost of living. ...

Feb 19, 2013
Colorado Democrat: Women Don’t Need Guns If They ‘Feel Like They’re Going To Be Raped’ Chill, women, says Colorado Democrat Rep. Joe Salazar. While arguing for the disarmament of college students, Salazar says that even if women feel like they’re going to be raped, they may not, so who needs a firearm for protection? From Revealing Politics: Said Salazar: “It’s why we have call boxes, it’s why we have safe zones, it’s why we have the whistles. Because you just don’t ...

Mar 09, 2011
Franken is speaking now. He used Willie Sutton's reasoning (you know-why do you rob banks? Because that's where the money is.) He states H.R.1 doesn't rob the banks where the money is. Question: What money? There is none, nada, Nyet. Guess he didn't get the memo either. ...

Jun 20, 2016
I hope the reason was because of the outcry. After all, didn't Obama promise to be the most transparent administration ever? ...

Dec 11, 2014
This summary was written by a Purdue engineer. Of the 2,400 pages of ACA, aka, ObamaCare legislation, it can be condensed to 4 sentences...... As humorous as this sounds... every last word of it is absolutely TRUE! 1. In order to insure the uninsured, we first have to uninsure the insured. 2. Next, we require the newly uninsured to be re-insured. 3. To re-insure the newly uninsured, they are required to pay extra charges to be re-insured. 4. The extra charges are required so that the origi ...

Mar 11, 2011
written in English and pay attention to the Terms of Collective Bargaining section, starting on page 2. This document is quite readable compared to the full text I posted yesterday. http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/mar2011/madi-m11.shtml ...

Apr 26, 2012
from protection under the law against battery, stalking and sexual abuse. Their fighting-fire-with-fire/dueling proposals strategy just might end up burning down that house-of-cards case they are trying to build to attract more women voters. It's not as though expanding the act is something new. Each time the act was reaffirmed, new specific categories were added as needed. The first time it was elderly and disabled women; the second time, female teens were included. ...

Nov 10, 2016
Luke 12:40 - Be ye therefore ready also: for the Son of man cometh at an hour when ye think not. i am a Christian, raised by a very strict religions mother. We were raised on the King James version (each has their own). I learned very young of the rapture at a Baptist church (ever seen the film, scare you?) I learned over the years to not worry, live life the best I can. I feel as long as I believe in Jesus everything will be okay, no matter what happens. My ...