Romney/Ryan: Say Goodbye to Seniors and Boomers

How does it feel
To be Without a Home
Like a Complete Unknown
Like a Rolling Stone

To be on your own
With no direction home
Like a complete unknown
Like a rolling stone ?

Ryan/Romney FAIL!

Congratulations, President Obama. You just got the vote of the boomers and Seniors. [More...]

The U.S has 308 million people.
*40 million: Age 65+
*78 million boomers ((born between 1946 and 1964)

That's 118 million out of 308 million.

You better be good to me

Medicare and Social Security will become far more important than the economy. We want the benefits we were promised and for which we've worked our ass*s off for 40 + years.

Not a chance a ticket with Paul Ryan will get our vote.

Romney-Ryan FAIL!

< Romney to Announce VP Choice Tomorrow | Saturday Open Thread: Romney's Wrong Turn >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Love the Tina (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by ruffian on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 06:24:59 AM EST
    I ain't got no use for what you loosely call the truth!

    Always been a favorite of mine.

    I hope you are right Jeralyn. I think going all in with Ryan is wrong for both policy and strategy too. I don't see how it even passes the Cheney test of picking someone who could step in and be president.

    Seems like Obama is being served a nice big slow fat one right over the plate. He ought to be able to hit it out of the park. But I am a Cubs fan so I don't count on anything,

    Obama/Biden (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by Politalkix on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 06:33:26 AM EST
    and all Democrats running for office should be able to hit it out of the park but as Ezra Klein says in the Washington Post
    "Joe Biden has a lot of debate prep ahead of him. I've interviewed Ryan three times. Twice on health care (here and here), and once on economics (here). He's very quick on his feet, and he's got a lot of experience explaining his plans to skeptical audiences. He's also a likable and, while I don't know him very well personally, decent-seeming guy. He's repeatedly won reelection in a moderate district. Democrats underestimate his political skills at their peril."

    I get the point, but Biden has been (none / 0) (#4)
    by ruffian on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 06:37:39 AM EST
    debating these issues for 30 years. I'm not worried about his level of preparation.

    I remember (none / 0) (#11)
    by lentinel on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 07:08:58 AM EST
    when Obama picked Biden.

    At the time, Jeralyn said, to the best of my recollection, that she thought it might be a deal-breaker for her.

    Biden was a walking nightmare from the point of view of a civil libertarian - at least in my opinion. He was also on the wrong side of the wars - at least in my opinion.

    Since being elected, Biden has been a good fellow.
    Speaking and stumbling only occasionally these days.

    My favorite line from Biden during the last campaign was when he told us that the election was all about a, "three letter word: Jobs."


    On those issues I don't like him (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by ruffian on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 09:41:15 AM EST
    either, But on old fashioned bread and butter Democratic economics, I think he can hold his own in a debate with Ryan just fine.

    it might have been (none / 0) (#144)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:36:42 PM EST
    had Sarah Palin not come along

    Didn't (none / 0) (#171)
    by lentinel on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 04:52:50 PM EST
    some "Biffs" have something to do with it?

    And I'll leave it up to Towanda (none / 0) (#6)
    by ruffian on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 06:48:23 AM EST
    to correct me, but I'm not sure handily winning a district in Janesville WI even means he would be able to win a statewide election in Wisconsin.  I'm from northern Illinois originally, near Janesville. Moderate there is not like moderate in Chicago.

    Slightly misquoted the lyrics (none / 0) (#3)
    by ruffian on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 06:36:15 AM EST
    Oh well, not bad with no cheating at 7 something am!

    I changed them (none / 0) (#146)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:37:54 PM EST
    now that it's noon

    No, I meant my own quoting of Tina's song! (none / 0) (#175)
    by ruffian on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 06:14:24 PM EST
    Did not catch anything wrong with yours. I would not even think of double checking your Dylan!

    Ryan (none / 0) (#8)
    by lentinel on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 06:59:51 AM EST
    I don't see how it even passes the Cheney test of picking someone who could step in and be president.

    It's amazing that a choice like Ryan could make Romney seem relatively acceptable. Ryan would be stepping in for Romney - who is already a twit.

    That's the one thing these pols have going for them.
    The perceived specter of someone worse waiting in the wings.


    I know this election is about the economy (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by ruffian on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 06:42:05 AM EST
    But that is only true as long as both sides can be assumed to have a baseline level of competence on foreign policy. Has anyone ever heard Paul Ryan utter a word about foreign policy? Mitt has already demonstrated he can't be let out of the USA.

    this is going to be interesting. I expect a lot more meaningless photo-ops on battleships.

    A bolder pick than I had (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by brodie on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 07:03:46 AM EST
    anticipated 5 months ago but also a hopeful sign for Dems that the Romney camp felt they were slipping too far behind and would need someone more than just bland and not a negative.

    And I'm confident Biden with his forty years in politics has seen the slick talking young and overconfident types before and will be able to cut through the smooth stream of verbiage and tell the public about what a radical danger it is to the established social safety net.

    I'm also surprised Romney announced this right now, as it's still the Olympics and the summer doldrums.  It also gives Biden and the Dems a few more weeks to prep for him and even begin to unload on his social Darwinian policies before the GOP convo.

    Romney is in trouble.. (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by magster on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:49:32 AM EST
    ... something like 64% in a CNN poll said he favors the rich over the middle class. The last 3 national polls show a slide. Only CO has a recent favorable poll to Romney out of the swing states. He's crying uncle on Bain and taxreturngate. Coulter and Rush are calling for a funding boycott. His summer has been Dukakisian. He needs a game changer now.

    What's funny is I think this just makes it worse, picking Mr. End Medicare As We Know It. Plus, how long before a reporter asks Romney whether he looked at Ryan's tax returns as part of the vetting process, and just adds a new wrinkle to that whole issue.


    Good points (none / 0) (#103)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:30:12 PM EST
    Romney may have insisted on seeing more tax returns for VP candidates than he's willing to reveal himself!

    I agree this seems to make almost all of Romney's problems with otherwise potentially persuadeable voters worse.


    You know what (none / 0) (#111)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:34:02 PM EST
    CST said about Romney a while back? That he was the GOP version of John Kerry. Heck, that was an insult to John Kerry because he would have never made the bad pick for a VP that Romney has made.

    John Edwards (none / 0) (#138)
    by Sweet Sue on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:10:59 PM EST
    You might want to rethink that statement.

    Kerry's (5.00 / 2) (#149)
    by cal1942 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:42:07 PM EST
    John Edwards pick was 4 years BEFORE Edwards decided he couldn't get caught cheating on his wife.  

    Edwards was a good pick in 2004.  

    Kerry's problems in 2004 were his own.


    and his message of economic fairness (5.00 / 3) (#163)
    by DFLer on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 02:26:45 PM EST
    resonated. Two Americas...more than ever today.

    Kerry's problems in 2004 (5.00 / 4) (#186)
    by sallywally on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 09:54:02 PM EST
    were a result of the Republican Ohio Secretary of State handing the state to Bush through a variety of nefarious means that suppressed the African-American, student, poor, elderly votes. Not the elderly in wealthy districts, of course. Those districts had more voting machines than they could use.

    It's odd all the way around (none / 0) (#20)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 08:57:48 AM EST
    The only thing Ryan gets him is more of his own base.  He can't win on just his base, and I have to assume his campaign knows that. So WTF?

    That's (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 09:02:28 AM EST
    my thinking too. This does nothing to broaden Romney's appeal and actually hurts him. The only thing it does IMHO is that it changes the position of some of the base from voting against Obama to voting for Romney but I would surprised if any of this changes Romney's electoral numbers. Maybe Romney thinks it is going to pick up the Catholic swing vote? Kind of hard to think that a Randian is going to appeal to many of these people.

    Ryan gets the Eddie Munster fans (5.00 / 4) (#50)
    by Towanda on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:49:27 AM EST
    for Romney.

    I mean, really, that's exactly what Eddie would look like, all growed up.


    Ryan = Eddie Munster (none / 0) (#61)
    by sallywally on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:12:01 AM EST
    Yes, exactly! Creepy.

    Well, maybe it's Romney's (none / 0) (#23)
    by observed on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 08:59:58 AM EST
    way of spreading the blame.
    On a different note, this move jars with his "please don't hit me" truce offer yesterday.

    They (none / 0) (#29)
    by Politalkix on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 09:06:27 AM EST
    think that older voters will not vote for BHO just because of a visceral dislike for him while Ryan will be able to peel off younger voters.

    rep. ryan brings in the (none / 0) (#74)
    by cpinva on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:32:22 AM EST
    pseudo-intellectual vote. all the "deep thinkers" who don't feel they're sufficiently represented, rep. ryan is one of their own.

    of course, the first thing romney did, after bringing rep. ryan out on stage, and introducing him as his vp nominee selection, was immediately stick a shiv in ryan's back. as ryan staggered a bit from the unanticipated blow, romney attempted to distance himself from the new vp nominee's budget, the one he's actually been running on these past several months.

    this is romney's "i was for it, before i wasn't for it, sort of." moment.

    the entertainment possibilities are endless.


    The last time (none / 0) (#153)
    by cal1942 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:45:16 PM EST
    a GOP candidate made a BOLD VP pick it was McCain choosing Sarah Palin.

    With (5.00 / 6) (#12)
    by lentinel on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 07:32:03 AM EST
    a Romney/Ryan ticket, since it is so far to the right, Obama might be tempted to move a wee bit to the left. On the other hand, he and Biden could just stay where they are and appear to be liberals - drones and all.

    To me the question is not who will be elected, it seems as if Obama  and Biden are a shoo-in, but whether they will campaign as Democrats.

    Good point - in turning this (none / 0) (#98)
    by ruffian on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:19:45 PM EST
    into a 'get out the base' election, Romney has ceded the middle to Obama-Biden.

    I think Romney is pretty much telling Fox and the tea party it is all up to them now. He gave them their darling.


    Not just Fox (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by Politalkix on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:30:32 PM EST
    The entire MSM loves Ryan and Ryan is a bridge between Wall Streeters and less affluent TPers.Romney has not ceded the middle, he is counting on the MSM and big contributor money to sell Ryan to people in the middle. We cannot get complacent.

    True. You mean the MSM is not in the tank (none / 0) (#119)
    by ruffian on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:40:39 PM EST
    for Obama? I'm shocked to hear that!

    I'm not complacent...just enjoying a morning of fun.


    There isn't enough base (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:31:14 PM EST
    He cannot win -- heck, he can't even come close -- just by turning out his base.  It's a very peculiar move, IMO.

    I know that, and you know that.... (none / 0) (#121)
    by ruffian on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:42:44 PM EST
    but I think in the pseudo-heart to pseudo-hearts that Romney has had with the base leaders lately, they have convinced him otherwise. I really think he sees no other way than to take them up on their boasting.

    At least that is the story I want it to be (none / 0) (#123)
    by ruffian on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:44:31 PM EST
    So that we can take Romney's defeat as a defeat for the Fox/Tea Party base too.

    I don't (none / 0) (#140)
    by lentinel on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:17:09 PM EST
    think that Romney thinks he can win.
    Obama has usurped his base - the right-wing "moderates".
    And Obama will hold the liberals - those who turn out to vote anyway.

    There's nothing that Romney can do between now and November to change things. Obama holds all the power. He can be cool, or he can start a war. He holds all the cards.

    So he picks Ryan to further ingratiate himself to the party - for his possible economic or political benefit somewhere down the road.

    Maybe I'm completely wrong - and Romney really thinks he has a chance and Ryan can help him win. But my gut tells me otherwise.


    It's a Hail Mary pass (none / 0) (#176)
    by ruffian on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 06:19:42 PM EST
    The only chance he has is making the base super orgasmic. I don't think it will be enough, but I guess the thought of going down with the ship with Pawlenty was too much for the second consecutive GOP nominee.

    The (none / 0) (#193)
    by lentinel on Sun Aug 12, 2012 at 04:09:23 AM EST
    one way I see things slightly in flux is the state of the economy.

    People have gotten used to the high unemployment.
    Biden's mantra about "J O B S" didn't pan out. So they are unlikely to go there again.

    But if the market tanks before the election, that could really make people nervous and they might flock to the Republican. And Ryan could be a factor at that point.

    On war with Iran, on Israel's "pre-emptive" strike, on targeted killing, on detention without charge or trial, on busting up medical marijuana dispensaries - maybe on immigration - it seems to me that O. and R. are virtually twins. (Rhetoric aside.)

    So the reality of a truly lousy economy hitting the fan could change things.


    Let's vote like its 1964 (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by Politalkix on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 07:54:12 AM EST
    From a poster, "oldliberal" at Daily Kos

    Goldwater: I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.  Let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

    Romney/Ryan:  I would remind you that extremism in the defense of wealth is no vice.  Let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit money is no virtue.

    Let's hope the American people are voting like it's 1964.

    Not just for the Presidency but for the House and the Senate

    No (5.00 / 3) (#14)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 07:58:40 AM EST
    they're not going to go down like it's 1964 but this really hurts Romney's chances in my opinion. Romney has actually given Obama some ISSUES to campaign on now instead of making it about personalities and Romney's time at Bain.

    Discussions (5.00 / 2) (#16)
    by Politalkix on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 08:11:57 AM EST
    regarding Romney's time at Bain and his tax returns are essential to any meaningful debate regarding economic and taxation policy. They provide graphical illustration regarding why trickle down economics does not work and why regressive taxation policies for the superrich do not lead to investments or jobs for the vast majority of Americans.
    The right wing MSM is trying to brain wash people that discussions regarding Romney's tenure at Bain and his tax returns are not discussions regarding ISSUES. Don't fall for it!

    IMO (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 08:24:49 AM EST
    the Bain stuff just comes off more as personal but the tax returns I do think are relevant.

    The irony is that Obama has a White House full of Univ of Chicago trickle down economists.


    Bain (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Politalkix on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 08:47:48 AM EST
    is about offshoring of jobs and gutting of retirement plans and benefits for the common American worker and profiting like bandits for the superrich. These are POLICY ISSUES, not personal issues.
    BHO's economc advisors are very much the same as Clinton's economic advisors. Were HRC the President, she would also have the same economic advisors. They highlight where the Democratic Party has been on economic policy since Bill Clinton became President by campaigning as a "New Democrat" (not saying that there is nothing to critisize about Democratic Party's economic vision for the last 2 decades).

    No (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 08:58:08 AM EST
    they are not the same. There was a wider range of views in the Clinton economic team that there is with Obama although he did have some Univ of Chicago people too.

    Agree - they're policy issues (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by sallywally on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:25:18 AM EST
    and the Repubs - and the MSM - are portraying the Bain stuff as frivolous and negative and going on about ads they say accuse Romney of MURDER, but when he put people off health insurance, salaries and pensions it was an absolute that someone would die because of it. What did he think would happen?

    And it's everyone's fear - no money, no health insurance and cancer strikes.

    By the way, does anyone want to call for the removal of the CBS "reporter" who is infatuated with Romney - Jan Crawford? She could hardly contain her glee when reporting the VP pick this a.m.


    I think the IRA would resonate more (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by observed on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 09:05:34 AM EST
    with voters.

    "Let's vote like it's 1964" (none / 0) (#71)
    by magster on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:29:46 AM EST
    Isn't that a lyric to a Prince song?

    Ryan the college aid liar (5.00 / 3) (#17)
    by Dadler on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 08:16:31 AM EST
    When he lied to some college kid, who had asked him a desperately important question about student aid, Ryan talked how the kid needed to work three jobs just like he, Ryan, did.  A bald faced, sociopathic lie. Ryan paid for college with SS bennies from his late father. That was enough to let me know Ryan is just another one of those guys, who if he weren't a pol, would be burying dead bodies in his back yard.

    A pathological liar without a shred of empathy in his body.  

    These are literally the most wretched examples of human waste this country can produce...because they SHOULD know better, and DO, but lie anyway.

    Seriously, they might as well put a serial killer on their ticket, you'll get the same emotional depth in a human being.

    Ryan is a guy, like so many other sociopaths these days, who literally believe money matters more than people. He is as easy to ass-kick in a debate as a five year old. That is, for a pol with actual imagination and creativity in their heads. Sadly, the Obama ticket, as "preferable" as they are, has zero of these vital qualities.

    But we'll all pull the lever, once again, for the lesser of two evils. Progress, I tell ya.

    This is not a defense of Paul Ryan (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:34:02 AM EST
    I am not sure of the accuracy of Paul Ryan receiving SS benefits from his deceased parent to go to college on.  He is five yrs younger than I am, and my first year to college was the first year that those of us who were receiving SS benefits due to a deceased parent no longer received those benefits after turning 18.  Maybe he knew of a loop hole that I didn't.  If so that tells me a lot about him because the rest of us were SOL.

    It's accurate. (none / 0) (#49)
    by Towanda on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:47:24 AM EST
    This has been vetted in his local media for some time now.

    I went and read on it (5.00 / 3) (#55)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:55:44 AM EST
    They say that he saved two years of benefits, from when he was 16 to 18 and that was what he went to school on.  It's nice that his mother didn't need the money I guess.

    I'm going to have to figure out how (none / 0) (#52)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:50:07 AM EST
    He did that.  Because I was told by the Social Security administration that there was none for me.

    His father died when he was 16 (none / 0) (#53)
    by Democratic Cat on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:54:42 AM EST
    and he told an interviewer that he saved the social security payments (I think he would have received them until he was 18 years old) and used them to pay for college.  So he could still have used the money to pay for (part of) college, even if he didn't get payments after he was over the cut-off age.

    This is the day Romney conceded the election (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by andgarden on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 08:59:30 AM EST
    I feel like we're getting punk'd or something.

    Lucky Romney didn't choose Bob McDonnell. That would have been scary.

    And the day that ALL Democrats (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by christinep on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:34:24 AM EST
    Are also united.

    Boy, ain't that the truth (5.00 / 2) (#112)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:35:04 PM EST
    Talk about ginning up the base-- just not the base he wanted to gin up.

    That's (none / 0) (#26)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 09:04:56 AM EST
    what I think too. I guess Romney has lived in a bubble for so long that he just does not have a clue and apparently his advisers don't either.

    I disagree. He looks like a (none / 0) (#28)
    by observed on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 09:06:26 AM EST
    beaten man to me now, compared with several months ago.

    There's some reporting out there (none / 0) (#110)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:34:01 PM EST
    don't know if it's true or not, that his advisers were all against picking Ryan and he insisted on it.

    This (none / 0) (#114)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:36:49 PM EST
    would make absolute sense though. Romney has always been the boss and never listened to his "underlings" i bet and hence another disastrous decision. This will all come out after the election I'm sure.

    Ryan's introduction this morning: (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by Angel on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 09:45:59 AM EST

    "The next president of the United States!"  

    Across the country (5.00 / 3) (#41)
    by samsguy18 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:20:29 AM EST
    Hospital based or hospital affiliated physicians have been given their contracts In July. The implementation of the ACA and the healthcare act as it stands will not bode well for Doctors healthcare workers or patients...especially those covered by Medicare.
    Doctors  are expected to sign their contracts without  proposed reimbursement details. . I would welcome a universal single payer plan.....underpaying physicians cutting hospital reimbursements .....which are creating  countrywide healthcare lay offs and decimating  Medicare  is not a solution.
    This  will be a disaster for everyone !

    I worked at Ohio State's medical center (3.00 / 4) (#78)
    by sallywally on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:46:59 AM EST
    for 25 years. The doctors whined about Medicare all the way to the bank, and drove their Mercedeses and Porsches to get there.

    Sallywally ......Typical negative comment (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by samsguy18 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:32:24 PM EST
    ..my car is eight years old and yes there are one or two individuals I know who do drive such vehicles...for the most part many are buried under a mountain of debt after a 4 year undergraduate degree...4 years of medical school...a one year internship ...a 3 to 4 years of residency and then for some a 2 year fellowship...and if you want to be an academic maybe two years of research.....the minimum work week for most doctors is 60 hours....give me a break ! I can assure you for the most part  we do what we do because we love what we do....it certainly isn't for the money....There are doctors who work the system like any other profession....however  we do deserve to be paid a fair amount.

    Not impressed samsguy18 (3.00 / 4) (#132)
    by Politalkix on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:53:09 PM EST
    Compare that with the situation for physicists, mathematicians and many other professions where folks have to spend many years going through undergraduate programs, Ph.Ds, post docs without ever getting compensated as doctors. Many of these rocket scientists are much smarter than doctors and work harder than them while getting paid much less. Doctors work the system through the AMA and political lobbying  to maintain their high compensations (they even restrict the number of medical graduates, medical graduates that can practise in this country, etc). These kinds of protections are not available to people from other professions.
    Doctors in other countries do not get paid as highly as doctors in the USA, yet the health care system is better for the average person in many countries than it is here. I am not denying that there are many dedicated doctors (same is true for any profession), however please spare us your crap about getting "paid a fair amount".

    FYI...the AMA (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by samsguy18 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:37:06 PM EST
    Represents 20% of the doctors in this country...the professions you named do not carry the same responsibility nor do they work the hours.......btw you better hope when you have a critical ill family member the doctor looking after them is  very smart....Canadian doctors are better paid in some  specialties and their malpractice is minimal. And yes we deserve to be paid fairly !

    Politalkix....one more thing (none / 0) (#151)
    by samsguy18 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:43:35 PM EST
    I don't see many leaving the USA for Medical treatment in other countries ....I see the reverse ! I have worked in other countries  have you ?

    Have a close friend (none / 0) (#162)
    by CoralGables on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 02:19:52 PM EST
    that works for a hospital in Michigan and lives across the border in Sarnia. She was very blunt in saying she has the best of both worlds...gets paid in America's health care system while her family is cared for in the Canadian health care system.

    Emergency healthcare in Canada is excellent (none / 0) (#166)
    by samsguy18 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 02:50:23 PM EST
    As well as elective if you can access it....the problem is when you have an elective condition and you are not  critical.....there are waiting lists for many procedures....a hip replacement  patient can be on a waiting list for 18 months....if you're experiencing pain and your not mobile 18 months is a long time...there are many small towns where there are not enough doctors .....there are long waiting lists for just obtaining a family doctor/primary care...hospitals are on a rotating temporary closure schedule on their emergency rooms and beds ....I am surprised your friend doesn't work at the  University of Western....it would be a closer commute than Michigan

    Waiting? (5.00 / 6) (#188)
    by womanwarrior on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:25:59 PM EST
    Don't fool yourself that we are better than the Canadians.  Call your primary in April to get a check up in October here in the states.  Wait three to five hours in the emergency room? And we pay a lot more than other countries do and they have better care in some areas.  Look at our infant mortality rate compared to others.  I appreciate all the doctors I have had, especially those that saved my life, but we really need to do better for everyone in this country and stop paying it all to the fat cats in the insurance companies instead of to the doctors and health care professionals.    

    Yes, (none / 0) (#165)
    by Politalkix on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 02:48:49 PM EST
    a lot of people do leave the USA for medical treatment in other countries because of the price tag for treatment here. These numbers keep growing every year. The medical care available to the very rich is very good in the United States but it is broken for the rest.
    Doctors in other countries also have the same responsibilties but work for much less. You must also be living in your own bubble if you think that professionals in many other fields do not work more than 60 hrs per week at the minimum. Your posts are the kind that gives a bad name to doctors (even though there are many dedicated ones who have chosen the profession to help people and not because of the money).

    How many do you know personally ? (none / 0) (#167)
    by samsguy18 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 03:10:35 PM EST
    The medical care  we give is the same for everyone who comes through the door...rich or poor.....
    We are very good and very committed to our patients poor or rich....

    Take it easy, samsguy18 (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by NYShooter on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 03:19:38 PM EST
    I grew up in a home with a doctor, and a PhD physicist. Yes, the PhD works hard also, but the pressure is topical, certainly not the same as the life & death necessity under which the doctor works.

    I don't know of any discipline that requires the all consuming dedication that is required of doctors. After all those years of study, including the years of "hands on" post-grad work, (internship, residency, etc) what most people don't understand, or, lets say, appreciate, is that only buys them a ticket to enter the profession. The "real" work is just beginning.

    The part about my father (the doctor) that will have my undying respect forever was watching him tackle the workload after he got his "ticket" and started practicing. The tremendous workload, being on duty 24/7 is only the beginning. It seemed every "off day" was consumed by traveling to seminars, lectures, symposiums, and other work related events.

    And, then the study, my Lord, the constant, never ending study. Manuscripts, periodicals, reports, stacked from floor to ceiling in his study! I'm sure the public has no understanding as how doctors stay current on the dizzying onslaught of new developments. New treatments, medications, therapies.....every one, life & death critical to fully comprehend.

    Finally, my little ode to the medical profession in no way is meant to rate one avocation over another.
    All are important, and for the good practitioners, all are demanding. For most of them, they improve our quality of life. For those in the medical profession, it's their calling to see that we have a life to improve.      


    Thank you ..... (5.00 / 4) (#170)
    by samsguy18 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 03:58:41 PM EST

    While I don't expect people to understand my life...I know the majority of physicians in this country will always  do their best for all their patients....

    Agreed. (5.00 / 2) (#199)
    by KeysDan on Sun Aug 12, 2012 at 10:52:24 AM EST
    However, please permit my modification as follows: "...I know the vast majority of physicians in this country will always do their best for all their patients" A problem for patient care, in my view, is not so much unconcerned physicians, as it is the inherent conflict of interest in for-profit health care institutions.

    Yes you are right.... (none / 0) (#200)
    by samsguy18 on Sun Aug 12, 2012 at 11:15:59 AM EST
    It  is a big problem......the for profits and some of the organizations who represent some Over paid  specialties ( my opinion ) are very resistant to proposed reforms around the fee structure..insurance regulation and quality tied to patient outcomes...unfortunately they have the money to push their political agenda.... The AMA makes millions on the reimbursement codes....simplifying the codes would affect their bottom line......There are many who feel the same as I do....quality healthcare is a right and we need reform.

    NPR had a very interesting and (5.00 / 1) (#201)
    by oculus on Sun Aug 12, 2012 at 12:53:53 PM EST
    informative piece re the billing formulas.  Closed shop and lots of trickle down.  

    I'm totally in favor (none / 0) (#127)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:47:36 PM EST
    of paying physicians extremely well, but they're not entitled to live like sports stars.

    gyrfalcon...I totally agree (none / 0) (#137)
    by samsguy18 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:10:26 PM EST
    To be honest there are some who do  unecessary procedures..tests etc....they can make a ton of money driving procedures instead of treating patients medically....the system doesn't pay for prevention or non invasive treatment...the irony being the outcomes with medical treatment many times is better. Standardization of fees ..regulating insurance companies...tort reform ( where I live there is an estate section in the middle of our town occupied mostly by corporate and malpractice lawyers) would actually increase the quality of medicine......I wish patients in this country would become better educated about healthcare....the guys with the money are able to market themselves ......uneducated patients are easy to influence.

    You cannot seriously expect (5.00 / 6) (#174)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 05:50:58 PM EST
    anxious sick people to decide whether or not to have this or that test or take this or that drug the way they choose a loaf of bread at the supermarket.

    Sorry, the responsibility for ethics is on you guys.

    If I had my way, I'd make medical education largely paid for by us, the taxpayers, so docs didn't come out with the gigantic burden of debt.  Then I'd put every single doc on a (very generous) salary and remove the incentive to buy a Mercedes by doing bad medicine.

    (Both my grandparents were physicians.  They went bust during the Depression because they were treating their patients for free and buying their drugs for them, and the bank forclosed on them as a reward.)


    No certainly not (none / 0) (#177)
    by samsguy18 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 06:48:42 PM EST
    Patients when they are anxious and ill are very vulnerable ...Knowing where to go to get the best care can be confusing in this country especially when you are sick.....patients  need to get informed about what who and where to go if necessary before they get sick Patients and their families should always ask questions about their diagnosis and the recommended treatments . In many cases I encourage my patients to seek a second opinion. My hope is that the cost of Medical education will be at least subsidized.....I believe there are many young men and women who want to apply to medical school and are scared of the huge debt load...I have a fellow who is married to a resident...their combined debt load right now is over 600000.
    Your grandparents were good people.....for me the most frustrating and destructive change that has occurred in medicine over the last 15 to 20 years is it has been taken over by the MBA's .

    How do patients (5.00 / 2) (#183)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 08:36:36 PM EST
    get informed though? I just had cancer last year and everyone said find a good surgeon. I relied on my family practice doctor to refer me to one and he did. Ended up the guy did not know much and did not even call me back with the results of the surgical biopsy. My fp doctor apologized over and over again but I told him it wasn't his fault. I guess this guy won't be getting any more referrals but that did not help me. I ended up going to another surgeon who was actually excellent and knew what the heck he was doing but now I am stuck with the bills from two surgeries. And the treatment afterwards I am still paying for. Too many people think if you have insurance you're going to get care. The doctor wants me to have another test but I'm not going to do it because I can't afford it.

    There are sites on line you can access (none / 0) (#187)
    by samsguy18 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:10:51 PM EST
    That will give you a list of names in your area...it is always safe to call a university based hospital...if you contact the specific department they will give a list of names or direct you to  a web site. Once you have a set of names you can google  them ...health grades etc will give you some ratings and info. The us news and world report has a good list they publish yearly ranking all the hospitals and specialties. There are specific guidelies for a number of specialties.you can access some of this info by contacting organizations like the american heart or the american cancer association.Many patients feel uncomfortable asking questions....patients especially those with big problems need to make a list of questions before the appointment takes place ...The insurance companies sometimes have their own referral network. I hope this helps

    And low-income, low education (5.00 / 2) (#197)
    by gyrfalcon on Sun Aug 12, 2012 at 09:05:39 AM EST
    people, never mind recent immigrants without language skills, are supposed to do this how?

    It's good advice, I guess, for her, but nonsense as a general prescription.


    Actually for immigrants (3.50 / 2) (#198)
    by samsguy18 on Sun Aug 12, 2012 at 09:38:55 AM EST
    There are programs set up by their consulates that will help....As well many academic centers do have their own referral  help centers.....Just because someone is low income or hasn't been able to get  what we may define as an education  certainly doesn't lmean they don't have the intellect and ability to get what they need....

    This "R&R" ticket (5.00 / 3) (#46)
    by KeysDan on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:40:41 AM EST
    should not be misconstrued by the Obama campaign as "rest and relaxation." I think this was the smartest choice for Romney given where he is in the polls, but more importantly, when he is with his base. Ryan is the darling of the right wing, but also, runs very well with the punditocracy (who think he is a Nobel laureate in economics). Even Bill Clinton gave encouraging words to Ryan at a Pete Peterson Forum. And, the ticket has good optics--they look plastic but the pair could be molds for the top of a same-sex wedding cake. Of course, the more the electorate gets to know Ryan, the less they will like. Also, he will need some gymnastics to satisfy the right on his vote for TARP and the bailout of GM and Chrysler. But, he does have some of the pliability of Romney, jettisoning his one time idol, Ayn Rand, in the face of some Catholic criticisms (objectivism is atheistic, he now notes) for the safer Thomas Aquinas. Ryan was high school prom king and voted best brown-noser, so he will work well with Mittens. And, Ryan's nomination will assuage the likes of Ann Coulter, and probably save Andrea Saul's job.

    Yeah hopefully (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by Left of the Left on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:49:29 PM EST
    the campaign doesnt see it like so many here do that they just won the election. I wish that were true but I doubt it's an automatic lock now.

    Unfortunately, both parties have been selling the deficit nightmare and that we have to get spending under control. Thats been one of the biggest mistakes of his first term. Couple that with the press liking Ryans plan because (in their comfy retirement secured eyes) it's a serious plan that deals with entitlements- because everyone has to sacrifice. So say the talking heads.

    But this does open the door for Obama to tack left, whether he takes it or not we'll see. I hope he does and the country rejects Ryanomics. If you ask me this race just started and got a bit more interesting.


    Good points all, Dan. (none / 0) (#91)
    by shoephone on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:05:57 PM EST
    Romney was in no (none / 0) (#128)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:49:28 PM EST
    trouble with the base.  None.  They don't like him a lot, but they'd vote for almost anybody to get Obama out.

    What he has done, though, is electrified the Dem. base, which has been much less enthusiastic up until now.


    Don't agree. (none / 0) (#136)
    by KeysDan on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:01:34 PM EST
    True that the base was never wild about Mitt, as was seen by the plateau he reached with Republican primary voters, but he seemed, to me at least, to be reaching the scornful stage with his base, after his European trip and, then, touting Romneycare, to counter the Obama PAC ad. I hope that naming Ryan will electrify the Democratic base, because that is what Ryan is supposed to do for the Romney-shy Republicans.

    Scornful or not (none / 0) (#160)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 02:05:44 PM EST
    (and most of that was pundits like Eric Erickson, not the rank and file), there's been zero evidence that GOP voter enthusiasm -- and certainly not fund-raising -- has dropped meaningfully.  Their enthusiasm is based on hatred of Obama, not love of the Mittster.  

    anything to back up (none / 0) (#158)
    by Left of the Left on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 02:02:31 PM EST
    the dem base claim? this doesn't really change much of what was expected by the base from Romney, does it? If it crystallizes things for them I guess it could, but I dont see what this pick (or any of them) changes for the dem base.

    Republicans are raising the white flag (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by kdm251 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:43:52 AM EST
    I think this pick was made with an eye towards running Ryan in 2016, Romney may not know it yet, but everyone else is in on the joke

    If Ryan's message doesn't sell now (none / 0) (#83)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:53:08 AM EST
    why would it sell in 2016?

    The right wing is so far gone (5.00 / 2) (#130)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:51:13 PM EST
    they think the harder right they go, the more popular they'll be with the voters.  If Romney loses, it'll be because he was too squishy, in their minds.  Look for an even more bizarre primary season in 2016.

    Like you and the Far Left (none / 0) (#202)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 12, 2012 at 12:54:25 PM EST
    the Right and the Far Right will vote for their party's nominee.

    I am not sure it will ever sell (none / 0) (#92)
    by kdm251 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:07:14 PM EST
    I don't think it's so much about the message as the person, Sarah Palin was probably the front runner for the nomination until she showed that she was far more interested in being a reality start.  Paul Ryan will probably overshadow mitt and doesn't seem like he will go the reality star route, which should make him the favorite for 2016 nomination.

    It will be interesting to see how long before Mitt and Ryan start melting down, two spoiled rich guys that have probably never had any honest feedback in their entire lives should make for some lively TV


    Romney may know it subconsciously (none / 0) (#100)
    by ruffian on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:22:00 PM EST
    He introduced Ryan as "the next president of the United States."

    Obama did that (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:51:43 PM EST
    with Biden, too, if I remember right.

    you (none / 0) (#159)
    by Left of the Left on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 02:04:37 PM EST
    remember right

    I feel a little bad for Romney right now (none / 0) (#113)
    by kdm251 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:36:20 PM EST
    Romney is starting to seem like the kid that has lots of cool stuff and no friends, and every now and again the popular kids go over to his house and drink all his parents liquor and have sex in his parents bedroom.  The slip of the tounge regarding the "next president of the united states" may be his first glimpse of the stains on the sheets.

    He getting even more frenetic (none / 0) (#126)
    by ruffian on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:46:52 PM EST
    too, as he rushes to bring out toy after toy. Mitt, keep some dignity, man!

    But, ruffian, he Romney long ago gave away (none / 0) (#164)
    by christinep on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 02:32:36 PM EST
    Whatever passed for "dignity.".

    Romney Pride (5.00 / 3) (#56)
    by Stellaaa on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:59:04 AM EST
    If he is so proud of his choice, why is it leaked on Friday night an the announcement is made on a Saturday morning before 7:00 am in the west coast?   Quite a contrast to the McCain announcement  

    Interesting (none / 0) (#57)
    by CoralGables on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:05:16 AM EST
    that Romney chose to name his selection while the Olympics are still in progress. Perhaps trying to squeeze in time on the Sunday talk shows? Those will be opposite the Gold Medal basketball game for the USA. It comes off as close to a Friday night news dump as one can get other than Friday.

    Methinks (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by Politalkix on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:28:31 AM EST
    Romney would rather talk about VP choice than tax returns on Sundays. But the good part about this is that it does not have to be either this or that. It can be both. So let it be Medicare and tax returns....

    Stellaaa! (none / 0) (#133)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:53:49 PM EST
    Great to see you again.

    It is odd.  Carl Cameron on Fox was just reporting that it took most of the Romney campaign people by total surprise, including the crew that was down in Virginia doing advance for the pre-scheduled event.

    Makes you wonder if something is up, or it's just Mittens being "decisive" and CEO-ish.


    Feels like (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by NYShooter on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:31:39 PM EST
    John McCain's "Sarah" moment to me.

    Leak (5.00 / 2) (#168)
    by Stellaaa on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 03:18:15 PM EST
    It leaked out last night, the McCain people did not leak Palin  

    I need some election talk.  


    Whoever it was who said.. (5.00 / 3) (#62)
    by desertswine on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:13:40 AM EST
    that Romney can't even stand up to his own right wing was really on the mark. Of course if Romney has a spine in him, it has yet to be seen.

    Ooops (5.00 / 3) (#65)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:16:12 AM EST
    Ryan?  Even I may be voting for Obama over this....(I was going third party).

    Our choices now (5.00 / 3) (#66)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:19:14 AM EST
    Catfood commission or catfoodier commission.

    Well, now that we know who both are... (5.00 / 2) (#179)
    by unitron on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 08:17:15 PM EST
    ...we can start calling them Gordon Gekko and Captain Catfood.

    Hahaha.... oops..... (none / 0) (#155)
    by desertswine on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:49:07 PM EST
    I'd say welcome aboard... (none / 0) (#67)
    by magster on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:22:17 AM EST
    except I don't want to scare you off.

    Do you live in a swing state?


    I'm not aboard (none / 0) (#70)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:29:42 AM EST
    This doesn't mean I'm coming back.  I don't want you to welcome me.  

    I'm not an Obama supporter, or a fan.  I will never be. I am on individual health insurance, and Obama has done more to destroy my economics than any president ever has.  Thus, I'm not a Democrat anymore.  I have no intention of supporting Obama in any way other than (still maybe) a vote.

    I don't want either of these guys.  I just suddenly want one a whole lot less, because he's going to even further my destruction.

    As I said, catfood and catfoodier.

    And nope, sorry, I don't live in a swing state.


    Good thing I withheld saying it then... (none / 0) (#72)
    by magster on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:31:08 AM EST
    There's no way WA will ever go for Romney (none / 0) (#101)
    by shoephone on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:22:10 PM EST
    (just look at how poorly McKenna did in the gubernatorial primary) so you're pretty safe not voting for u-no-who for prez if you don't want to.

    PPP tweeted that... (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by magster on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:41:01 AM EST
    Florida opposed Ryan budget by 16 points, and North Carolina opposed it by 23. PPP's WI poll however improved Romney's deficit from 7 to 1 with Ryan being the hypothetical VP.

    And yet... (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by shoephone on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:58:02 AM EST
    Floridians elected Rick Scott. Hypocrisy abounds in the swamp state...

    True, but experience (none / 0) (#134)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:55:25 PM EST
    can be a very good teacher.

    Yep (none / 0) (#82)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:51:37 AM EST
    Romney just lost the election like I said. If Ryan's plan is that unpopular in NC then Romney will not carry NC either. I imagine there's going to be a whole lot of people sitting home all across the south in November though not enough for Obama to carry a state like GA.

    Romney puts to use Bain skills (5.00 / 3) (#77)
    by Stellaaa on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:45:42 AM EST
    Ok, now I get it.  What did Romney do at Bain:  Buy existing companies and proceeded to borrow against the assets.  Since he never created anything, he bought the Ryan brand and now will proceed with the best practices in his business.

    Selling off the last of America's assets.  What do they call it, Creative Destruction.  

    For your enjoyment: Paul Ryan Watch blog (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by Towanda on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:33:48 PM EST
    can be found here.  Lots of fodder for fun for months to come.

    And mark your calendars -- and stock up on popcorn -- for October 11, the Biden-Ryan debate.  

    On Ryan Watch (5.00 / 2) (#129)
    by shoephone on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:49:51 PM EST
    Most interesting recent article is the one by Howie at Down With Tyranny, who brings up this curiousity: Steve Israel and the DCCC have been letting Ryan slide to reelection by tamping down any Dem opponents. WHY? is the obvious question? And what does that say about the Dems commitment to pushing back on him now?

    I have heard that (none / 0) (#185)
    by Towanda on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 08:51:20 PM EST
    for years here.  I do not get national Democratic strategies, not at all.  His district is moderate (see: state Senator Dale Schultz, another longtimer there) and was winnable -- after all, Ryan and Feingold had the same Janesville base (until Feingold moved to Madison . . . and lost touch with Wisconsin).  But the Dems have allowed it to go Repub for eons, even well before Ryan.  

    And with the economic devastation in Janesville under Dubya, it could have been turned.

    Was there money in it for the Dems?  Ryan was quite dirtied in the roadbuilders scandals here.


    For me, not for thee (5.00 / 4) (#148)
    by Sweet Sue on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:40:16 PM EST
    Let's not forget and let's keep smushing it into the faces of libertarians that Ayn Rand was on Social Security and Medicare in her old age.

    The GOP Ticket (5.00 / 2) (#154)
    by Dadler on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:45:26 PM EST
    You couldn't get a worse ticket if you were back row of the L.A. Coliseum for a hair metal concert in the 80's.  Seriously, I'd rather sit courtside for a synchronized sneezing competition.  The Rorschach Test results for these guys would be summarized with the statement: "Keep subjects away from small children, pets and all levers, wheels, or pulleys of power. Also, hide your PIN codes."

    If "we" lose to these clowns, we'll have no one but our own clowns to blame.

    "hair metal." Must google. (none / 0) (#172)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 05:13:11 PM EST
    Ah. The beloved Bon Jovi. (none / 0) (#173)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 05:15:21 PM EST
    Lol (5.00 / 1) (#157)
    by Sweet Sue on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:57:07 PM EST
    Seriously, I'd rather sit courtside for a synchronized sneezing competition

    The cartoon (5.00 / 2) (#194)
    by lentinel on Sun Aug 12, 2012 at 04:11:06 AM EST
    above, with the bus, makes me think that Romney and Ryan are driving the bus over all the people that Obama threw under it.

    Today Romney has made the election (2.00 / 4) (#34)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:00:27 AM EST
    about policies.

    Obama can continue to do the personal stuff.. The lies about his tax returns the lies about the lady dying because Romney told her insurance.

    But that doesn't hide the U3 of 8.3% a U6 of around 13%, 1 in 6 being in poverty, a housing crisis that hasn't gone away, food prices soaring because we are using corn to make ethanol in pursuit of a failed energy policy, gasoline prices soaring because Obama wants high prices...etc.

    All of these things exist.

    No one can deny them.

    And none of you can tell me the solution to a single one of them.

    Soaring poverty and unemployment, (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by observed on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:11:06 AM EST
    wealth concentration, record profits for big business----why would a Republican want to change course from success?

    Today (5.00 / 5) (#45)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:38:06 AM EST
    Romney just lost the election. Paul Ryan is selling austerity yet when George W. Bush was president and president that doubled the national debt btw, Ryan voted 94% of the time with George W. Bush. Obama has to be literally salivating at Romney's choice.

    Obama is going to peel the bark off this little twerp. Obama might really stink at actual governing but Romney just handed Obama the perfect election foil.


    Husband says your insights (none / 0) (#47)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:43:47 AM EST
    Are a winner to run on, him being an indie

    Thanks (5.00 / 2) (#54)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:55:39 AM EST
    I got a bunch of information on Ryan from the independent voter network and there's almost nothing positive about Ryan there.

    Even some of the Republicans here are saying it's 1996 redux. And the last they thing they want the campaign to be about is entitlement "reform".


    No (2.33 / 3) (#81)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:51:22 AM EST
    The last thing the Demos want is this to be about entitlement reform... like putting the work requirement back in welfare.

    That (5.00 / 5) (#104)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:30:20 PM EST
    is another conservative lie. The governors even the GOP governor of Utah wanted the welfare laws changed so they could spend more time helping them find jobs instead of doing paperwork and their requests were granted. honestly, conservatives are the most gullible bunch of people on the earth. You guys will fall for any scam. No wonder those infomercials keep on rolling. There's a rich environment out there for people to be scammed.

    Ryan is a Social Darwinist who believes that people who can't afford medical care should die, people who can't afford food should starve and the wealthy are more beloved by God. Also he mandates that his staffers read Ayn Rand. Objectivism is what the Church of Satan was based on. This is really rich. Conservative Christians have been convinced to buy into satanism. Like I said the more you look, the crazier what they are saying is.


    You should be embarrassed (5.00 / 5) (#125)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:45:48 PM EST
    to post such drivel.

    Just read a Yahoo article (none / 0) (#60)
    by nycstray on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:08:09 AM EST
    about 'who is PR' and the comments were all about keeping their Mitts off of folks "entitlements". Comments on Yahoo are usually pretty out there, but not what I cruised over this AM. There was also a "you first" vibe about cutting Congressional bennies before they touch our SS/MC.

    Let's just hope O doesn't come out and play Mr. Reasonable, re his Grand Bargain and how he would be better for SS reform :P


    Interestingly (5.00 / 2) (#122)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:43:59 PM EST
    neither can Romney (or Ryan).  Every single thing they want to do would make all of those problems worse.

    What lies about the tax returns??? Huh? (none / 0) (#39)
    by Angel on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:16:02 AM EST
    He hasn't released his returns so we don't know what's in them.  Even some major GOP players are saying he should release them.  Jim, keep on livin' in that fantasy world of yours if it makes you happy.

    He released 2010 and 2011 (2.00 / 4) (#80)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:49:50 AM EST
    and we saw he gave 40% his income to the governments and charity.

    You want more??

    How about Obama's college transcripts????


    How about you hang out at redstate? (5.00 / 2) (#84)
    by magster on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:55:05 AM EST
    The college transcript scam is part of the birther conspiracy.

    Even the 2010 returns Romney released are abridged. THe 2011 return won't come out til this fall because Romney got an extension.


    Oh Jim. As Reagan said, (5.00 / 4) (#90)
    by shoephone on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:03:58 PM EST
    "There you go again."

    That tactic didn't work the first 85 times you tried it, so, why would it work now?


    The object is to (5.00 / 5) (#124)
    by jondee on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:44:52 PM EST
    passive-aggressively annoy..

    He hasn't persuaded anyone about anything in ten years here..


    Well, I've only been commenting here (5.00 / 3) (#143)
    by shoephone on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:35:13 PM EST
    for five years, and, indeed, his irritatomater has been on full throttle ever since. But the most successful trolls alter their punches now and again. Jab, left hook, uppercut. It makes for less boredom. With our resident troll, it's just a lot of flailing around without ever really landing any punches.

    If the repetitiousness continues, we're just going to have to start referring to him as "Ol' 40% Jim."


    False Equivalence Watch (5.00 / 2) (#184)
    by Repack Rider on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 08:49:07 PM EST
    How about Obama's college transcripts????

    I'm not aware that Barack Obama's father started an unbroken tradition of presidential candidates releasing transcripts.  As we know George Romney originated the tradition of releasing tax returns.  Maybe someone other than Mitt could be the first in 40 years to violate his father's gesture of honesty, but...

    George must be so ashamed.

    When I see Barack Obama, I see a guy who is a ton smarter than Mitt Romney, and I don't need to see a transcript to know that.  I also see a guy who is a ton more compassionate.  I may disagree with Mr. Obama politically, but he's not running against Jesus, he's running against Mitt Romney, who is a sociopathic buffoon.

    BTW, when did Mitt release his own birth certificate and grades?


    If he really gave forty percent to charity (none / 0) (#94)
    by kdm251 on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:11:08 PM EST
    One of the weird things about romneys tax returns is that most his charitable contributions are to the Mormon church, an institution he has considerable control over.  Anyone else see the potential for a tax scam?

    And most of the Mormon church's donations... (none / 0) (#180)
    by unitron on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 08:24:43 PM EST
    ...are to his campaign or PACs that support him, so it all evens out.

    Okay, I don't really know who or what the Mormon church donates to, but if what I said is right would anybody be surprised that it's true?

    (as opposed to being surprised that I got something right)


    Romney is a fraud who cares nothing about policies (none / 0) (#59)
    by magster on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:07:43 AM EST
    and only about what gets him elected. Mr. Etch-a-Sketch only cares about two issues, his own money and his own power. Your comment is an eye-roller.

    The only reason he picked Ryan was because of the very real danger that he was going to lose the money and support of the tea party after his spokeswoman's defense of Romneycare.


    Medicare and Social Security (1.00 / 5) (#85)
    by gadfly on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:56:53 AM EST
    are fast becoming unsustainable, so someone has to take on the task of converting these Ponzi schemes to some viable, enduring program. If you check out the FDR's intent on Social Security, there was no promise to return payroll deductions to workers (let alone welfare recipients) in excess of their contributions. Paul Ryan's proposal (note we are talking proposal) maintains current benefits to available to today's seniors and proposes changes among younger workers to right the ship over time.  

    Some honesty among liberals is required to get any of these changes made, so the predictable bashing begun instantly by the left has obviously been planned for some time. In the near future we will need solutions not emotions to right the good ship America.

    BTW, this senior(I am older than the boomers) is voting for a the R & R guys.  

    LOL (5.00 / 5) (#88)
    by shoephone on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:59:31 AM EST
    Thanks for a good laugh on a lazy Saturday morning.

    Gee, you're kidding . . . (5.00 / 5) (#93)
    by nycstray on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:10:23 PM EST
    BTW, this senior(I am older than the boomers) is voting for a the R & R guys.  

    Would have never guessed . . . .  Oh, and enjoy your "Federal Benefit Check".


    Difficult to understand your (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by KeysDan on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:38:59 PM EST
    interpretation of FDR's intent, but social security was signed into 8/14/35; taxes were collected as of January 1937 and the first one-time lump sum payments were made the same month. Regular monthly payments occurred in 1940. Moreover, the 1935 law contained the first unemployment compensation program, and support to the states for various health programs and the aid to dependent children. But you are right about Ryan's Medicare deconstruction plan, the coupon book would not start until the present 54 year olds reach 65, and would not directly affect those currently on Medicare--directly. But, Medicare would be indirectly affected, in all likelihood, during the dismantling of Medicare.

    I'm so tired of this lie, and I wish I knew (5.00 / 6) (#178)
    by Anne on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 07:24:12 PM EST
    why it was that conservatives want to perpetuate it.

    Here - chew on some facts for a change:

    The New England Journal of Medicine reports that Medicare and Medicaid spending has decelerated in recent years, and not just because of the Great Recession. The public programs have seen their cost growth slow significantly compared to private health insurance. And this is expected to continue for the coming decade.

    This is so important because, as Paul van de Water of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities explains, the public debate has focused on transforming Medicare and Medicaid in the coming years, constraining cost in the very programs that are the most cost-efficient. If anything, the opposite should be true, and more and more of the system should be converted into public programs to increase the risk pool, allow for greater bargaining leverage on prices, and provide stability.

    These data belie the claim that spending for Medicare and Medicaid is "out of control" and that the programs must be fundamentally restructured by adopting Medicare premium support or converting Medicaid into a block grant.

    Medicare and Medicaid spending per enrollee will grow at rates of 3.1 percent and 3.6 percent, respectively, over the next ten years -- well below the projected growth rate of 5.0 percent for private insurance and somewhat less than the growth of gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. (See figure.) John Holahan and Stacey McMorrow of the Urban Institute, a nonpartisan research organization, base these estimates on the latest projections of national health expenditures prepared by the Office of the Actuary at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

    Republican plans - and that of the likes of Erskine Bowles - betray their real agenda by focusing on "runaway health costs" in Medicare and Medicaid, when the real runaway costs come from private insurance (and yes, this ends up affecting the budget because of the large employer deduction on health care plans).

    Sarah Kliff tries to pinpoint the cost growth and when, precisely, it slowed. But while we can argue about that, we cannot argue this fact: the cost growth in Medicare and Medicaid, relative to private insurance, is much lower. So any reasonable look at the data would suggest that even if your prime objective was to bend the cost curve, your goal should be to increase Medicare and Medicaid rather than creating a lasting market for private insurance.

    Seriously, the last people I'm going to take advice from about honesty are conservatives.


    And, just imagine (5.00 / 3) (#181)
    by NYShooter on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 08:25:37 PM EST
    the eye popping money we would save if we got rid of the unbelievable betrayal of the "no negotiating prices" in Part D, Prescription Drugs benefits of Medicare?

    Older, but not old enough? (5.00 / 5) (#182)
    by unitron on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 08:27:44 PM EST
    "BTW, this senior(I am older than the boomers) is voting for a the R & R guys."

    Are you old enough to remember what the Great Depression was really like?

    'Cause I'm surprised you'd want to vote for another one.


    Older like I am - (5.00 / 2) (#189)
    by sallywally on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:40:43 PM EST
    and so too old to be affected by Ryan's "changes" in the safety net?

    We almost certainly would be affected anyway, and even if we were not, why would we want to throw those behind us under the bus?

    Anyone who thinks Medicare and SS should be dismantled should refuse to take either.


    Have the wealthy pay a little more into each.... (none / 0) (#87)
    by magster on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:58:26 AM EST
    problem solved.

    Lifting the income cap (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by shoephone on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:01:46 PM EST
    is considered !communism! by the winger fools...

    raise the minimum wage to $10.00 (5.00 / 2) (#139)
    by DFLer on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:16:51 PM EST
    that would be an economic stimulus, with most extra
    spent on goods and services.

    Let the games begin... (none / 0) (#7)
    by CuriousInAz on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 06:54:35 AM EST

    Well (none / 0) (#9)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 07:01:19 AM EST
    I'm assuming that Romney has picked Paul Ryan. Romney is a really bad politician it would seem.

    This finally wrung (none / 0) (#15)
    by the capstan on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 08:08:40 AM EST
    a donation out of me!

    Email in answer to (none / 0) (#25)
    by the capstan on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 09:02:32 AM EST
    an in-law's forward bemoaning designation of SS as a 'federal benefit':

    "The immediate and real danger to the older generations' well being is the 3-ton elephant in the room: the Romney-Ryan Republican ticket!"

    the discussion of the greedy/needy seniors (5.00 / 6) (#30)
    by DFLer on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 09:18:32 AM EST
    needs re SS, versus younger workers who now "have to pay for them" always chafes. Where in the discussion is the fact that older workers have been supporting the young and young workers via public education, and other services through property taxes etc., their entire lives, whether they have kids or not?

    Welll...that argument would have more weight (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by ruffian on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 09:43:55 AM EST
    if so many boomers had not been cutting property taxes and gutting schools for the last 30 years.

    Uh, no (4.25 / 4) (#35)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:02:54 AM EST
    School expenditures have been steadily increasing.

    Yet the results have been steadily declining.


    Deflect, deflect, deflect... (5.00 / 2) (#95)
    by shoephone on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:12:47 PM EST
    The subject is Paul Ryan on da ticket.

    Prop 13... (5.00 / 2) (#96)
    by shoephone on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:16:58 PM EST

    "What's a Prop 13? La la la la la la..." sings Jim.

    Results have NOT been declining (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:38:24 PM EST
    That's a collossal myth.  They've been steadily improving according to the only good national measure we have, which is the NEAP.

    With respect, that's (none / 0) (#116)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:37:23 PM EST
    just not true. I know of nobody in this country where property taxes have gone down.  They've continued to rise.  Prop 13 and etc. restrict the rate of rise, not a rise itself.  In my old home town outside Boston, property taxes went up to the maximum legal limit, 2 percent or whatever it was, every single year.

    Point taken. (none / 0) (#135)
    by ruffian on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:56:46 PM EST
    But the elderly at least here in FL do not do themselves any favors by consistently fighting any tax increases that would benefit schools and other services that help the young. If I were in my 20s I would probably feel that the political actions taken in my lifetime have been to the advantage of the boomers rather than myself.

    Of course the way to fight that is to get out there and vote.


    Those are not Boomers (5.00 / 4) (#147)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:38:45 PM EST
    so don't lay that on us, please.  The Boomers are only just starting to enter Medicare eligibility age I think this year.

    Whether my cohort will behave the same way in time I don't know.  But I do know it's scary as hell to be an old person with a fixed income, even a reasonably comfortable one, and see expenses keep going up and the income staying the same.  The truly wealthy have no excuse, but if you've got an ordinary pension, I do understand totally the fear of seeing it being drained away more and more every year by property taxes and etc.


    That's true in nominal terms only (none / 0) (#191)
    by Jack E Lope on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:29:29 PM EST
    ...since any time that the rate of inflation exceeds the maximum growth rate of property taxes, those taxes fall in real terms.

    I think that max-growth-rate is 3% where I live - and with property values decoupled from the tax rates, nominal property taxes did not fall when prices plummeted.

    The deflation that austerity is supposed to bring also gives us rising real property taxes.  

    Inflation decreases our property taxes in real terms.  It appears that you should be clamoring for inflation.


    Ryan's ideas on cutting SS and Medicare (5.00 / 5) (#38)
    by caseyOR on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:12:22 AM EST
    will hurt the Mitt/Paul ticket only if Obama changes his own position on cutting SS and Medicare. Obama is more than ready, he's eager actually, to "reform" SS and Medicare in the form of benefit cuts and raising the eligibility age. Given that, I don't see how he can effectively attack Ryan.

    And let's not forget that Obama is on record declaring that Ryan is a smart guy and a good thinker. IMO, Ryan is not all that smart. His proposed budgets are filled with pixie dust. Still, when Obama had the chance to go after Ryan on his ridiculous budgets, Obama pulled his punches.  

    I think a Romney/Ryan win would be disastrous. I'd feel better about Obama if I didn't suspect that his major problem with a Romney presidency is that a Romney win means Obama loses.

    I still think Obama's campaign slogan (are they still using Win The Future?) should be "Not F*cking Crazy." It gets right to the heart of the matter.


    I agree with this (5.00 / 2) (#79)
    by shoephone on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:47:31 AM EST
    Obama's grand bargaining makes it harder for him to go after Ryan without doing a lot of flip-flopping -- um... Erskine Bowles for Treasury? Lotta 'splainin' to do if that comes to fruition. And Ryan IS articulate, and the media loves him -- any of his appearances on the Sunday morning gabfests will show that. I think it's a big mistake for Dems to underestimate the energy and money he will bring to the camapaign. And we're still three months out from November. Anything can happen between now and then. That being said, this was a Hail Mary Pass by Romney, and it's probably unlikely to land in the end zone.

    Gee, has Obama been advocating (none / 0) (#120)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:41:58 PM EST
    voucherizing Medicare and privatizing SS?  I must have missed that.

    Furious as I've been about Obama's reported willingness to deal away some degree of Medicare and SS, it's not even remotely in the same class as Ryan's big ideas.


    Younger workers aren't paying for the (5.00 / 6) (#40)
    by caseyOR on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:19:41 AM EST
    boomers SS. The whole reason for the SS Trust Fund, which was established during the Reagan years, was to sock our extra SS payments away so that there would be enough money to pay for the boomers.

    Remember, SS withholding doubled during Reagan. Part of the money paid for SS for our parents and grandparents. The other part went into the Trust Fund to pre-pay for the boomers.

    That is the information that needs to get out to everyone. And it is precisely the information that all the deficit fetishists do not want people to know.

    Currently, thanks to the Trust Fund, full SS benefits can be paid until around 2037. After that, if nothing is done, around 80% of benefits  can be paid out. The easiest fix, one that will make SS totally solvent for another 100 years, is to raise the salary cap on SS withholding.


    understand all your point Casey (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by DFLer on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:15:02 AM EST
    I'm was just saying how many frame the complaint.

    Just no respect out there for the folks and/or extended families who spent their BS&T raising the younger gen.


    Mitt's Most Important Announcement (none / 0) (#36)
    by DebFrmHell on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:03:27 AM EST
    to date was that of his running mate.

    "Today's a good day for America, and there are better days ahead," Romney said during a rally in Norfolk, Va. on the USS Wisconsin. "Join me in welcoming the president of the United States, Paul Ryan."

    After listening to both speeches, I think Romney had it right the first time.  Even though I strongly disagree with Ryan, he comes across more of a presidential candidate than his running mate.

    Perhaps Rmoney intends to have Ryan (none / 0) (#190)
    by Jack E Lope on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:13:52 PM EST
    pulling the strings?

    Well, It worked for GeeDubya... (none / 0) (#192)
    by DebFrmHell on Sun Aug 12, 2012 at 03:14:13 AM EST

    My computer is broken (none / 0) (#44)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 10:38:05 AM EST
    The bandwidth is on the fritz, and Romney picks Ryan.  It's going to be a long weekend laughing and screaming mostly all by myself....sigh

    Not to worry, MT... (none / 0) (#73)
    by easilydistracted on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:32:11 AM EST
    I am almost certain there will be plenty more to laugh over once you return to full operational capability. R&R just might be one of those gifts that just keeps on giving.  

    Here's a compassionate conservative (none / 0) (#58)
    by observed on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:05:17 AM EST
    solution to the problem of the elderly, borrowed from a Southern preacher's idea about gays.
    The elderly are a drain on society. We can all agree on that. Furthermore, they are not productive---especially in the most important way, that they cannot have children.
    We've been allowing the elderly to pollute our society for too long. The elderly, who hardly even work a 10 hour week, are a terrible example for the rest of us. I mean, who would get a job, with the example of the elderly showing that you don't need one!
    I propose fencing off all the elderly in some camps, and they let them die off. After the elderly are all gone,
    then we can return to true conservative values of hard work and strip clubs.

    It's made from people!!!!! (5.00 / 3) (#64)
    by DFLer on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:16:01 AM EST
    Soylent Green reference. (none / 0) (#75)
    by easilydistracted on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 11:34:08 AM EST

    I think observed must be thinking of Obama's (none / 0) (#203)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 12, 2012 at 01:21:15 PM EST
    healthcare adviser, Ezekiel J. Emanuel.

    Thus, it seems there is a growing agreement be- tween liberals, communitarians, and others that many political matters, including matters of jus- tice-and specifically, the just allocation of health care resources--can be addressed only by invoking a particular conception of the good.

    Particular indeed.

    it suggests that there can be no principled mechanism to define basic health care services and, therefore, that the efforts to ensure universal access will always founder on the fear that guaranteeing any health care to all citizens means guaranteeing all available services. It suggests we should just give up on a just allocation of health care resources because we can never succeed.

    And what is "just?"

    Procedurally, it sug- gests the need for public forums to deliberate about which health services should be considered basic and should be socially guaranteed.

    Death Panels anyone?

    Substantively, it suggests services that promote the continuation of the polity-those that ensure healthy future genera- tions, ensure development of practical reasoning skills, and ensure full and active participation by citi- zens in public deliberations-are to be socially guar- anteed as basic.

    Want a child? Have your genes tested. Want a child? Don't say or do anything that will offend the people writing and enforcing the rules.

    Conversely, services provided to in- dividuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic and should not be guaranteed.An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia.A less obvious example Is is guaranteeing neuropsychological services to ensure children with learning disabilities can read and learn to reason.

    The challenged child who, at age 9, can only proudly point to his ability to tie his shoes but also offers boundless love is just out of luck.

    And Granny?? Well, too bad. You've worked all your life as a good citizen should and now it is your time to die.



    base (none / 0) (#97)
    by Lil on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:19:25 PM EST
    This is a base election, at this point.  The only chance for Romney now is to motivate the  wingers.  

    It (5.00 / 1) (#196)
    by lentinel on Sun Aug 12, 2012 at 04:23:18 AM EST
    just seems to me that Romney and Obama have the same base.
    The moderate right wingers. Pro war. Pro death penalty. Pro bashing medical marijuana - pro guns - or anti-gun control...

    So that could be a wash.
    Probably more to Obama's favor - since he is a relatively known quantity. Romney is another 4 years of on the job training.

    The far far right (a notch to the right) will probably go Romney.

    The liberals to whom the court is seen as the issue, will go Obama.
    But the fevered youth, the "new Kennedy" people, will be unmotivated.

    There is no far left anymore - if there ever was one.

    To me this election is most uninspiring.

    I just hope, as I have for decades, that we get through whoever's 4 years without being incinerated.


    question: (none / 0) (#99)
    by Lil on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:21:54 PM EST
    Does the President start running against Ryan now?

    He already started in the spring (none / 0) (#102)
    by ruffian on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:26:40 PM EST
    when Ryan's budget was on the table.

    yes (none / 0) (#106)
    by Lil on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:30:51 PM EST
    But I mean does he just pretty much stop going after Romney and try to destroy Ryan?

    No (none / 0) (#161)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 02:09:23 PM EST
    He will tie Romney to his VP's budget, and then go after Romney.

    freudian slip (none / 0) (#115)
    by Lil on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 12:37:10 PM EST
    I actually think Ryan has a better shot at being   the    next president, than he has of being the next   VP.

    As I posted elsewhere (none / 0) (#141)
    by Sweet Sue on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:17:37 PM EST
    Think of the Veep debate graphics.
    One the one side, you have young, Cro-Magnon man bouncing around the stage, babbling about cutting Medicare and Social Security. On the other side, there's ole Grandpa himself, glaring at the little pisher, embodying the fear and indignation of millions of seniors.
    It's going to be a slaughter, don't kid yourself.
    Those who think that Biden is some poor, old, falling down drunk, who can barely find his way to the podium, are delusional. He has the instincts of a shark and he 'll step up to the plate and be the voice of sweet reason as Ryan spouts Randian poppycock.
     Wait and see.
    The Republicans are taking a dive, the question is why?
    I'd better start working to get Rocky Anderson on the Buckeye ballot.

    Agree that Biden (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 01:44:12 PM EST
    is no fool and as sly and dangerous as they come. He didn't get the Democrats to pass so many of the most oppressive crime bills in history by accident.

    My man. (none / 0) (#195)
    by lentinel on Sun Aug 12, 2012 at 04:14:03 AM EST
    (Biden) didn't get the Democrats to pass so many of the most oppressive crime bills in history by accident.

    Where do I sign?


    Thread closed (none / 0) (#204)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Aug 12, 2012 at 03:30:23 PM EST
    comments at 200. New thread here.