Ann Romney "happy to blame the media" for Mitt losing the election

[2centsworth]

LOL calling it the ignorant vote when he and Ryan were out campaigning for zeroing out capital gains. And LOL at ing about the 47% when they're not paying federal tax since it would have looked bad had Bush only given tax cuts to the rich. Bible thumping dip thinks Ryan wouldn't put his medicare destruction bill back on the table with President Neocon there to sign it. Yeah, Mitt picked him for his boyish looks.

Show me where Mitt said Capital Gains should go to zero for anyone making over $200k.

You're a math Wiz. Which is the bigger cut, 15% to 10% or 39% to 36%?

Ryan's Medicare voucher plan is based on Stanford University Professor's Dr. Victor Fuchs' voucher idea. http://healthpolicy.stanford.edu/people/Victor_R_Fuchs I posted this many years ago.

[2centsworth]

He was really sharp when he called Obama an anti-war government nigg*r in that speech.

more evidence of how the Obama won the ignorant vote

[Clipper Nation]

He was really sharp when he called Obama an anti-war government nigg*r in that speech.

And who could forget his genius move of claiming he was insulting "blah people" instead of "black people"? Truly stimulating stuff, tbh...

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

at lumping a doctor and economist in with the likes of Frothy, Rick Perry, and Bachmann

That wasn't my intention

I disagree on Santorum. You may not like his perspective, but I've never heard anyone argue moral agenda more articulately. Plus, the guy was just as sharp, if not sharper, than Newt on foreign policy.

His method of arguing moral agenda was the same slippery slope fallacy dominionists use saying that legalizing gay marriage will lead to stuff like legalizing beastiality. There's nothing especially articulate about it.

He also wasn't sharp on foreign policy. The clip where Ron Paul completely destroys him on Iran became a youtube sensation. His views on foreign policy were regurgitated neoconservative fear mongering about the Islamic boogeyman.

[ElNono]

Ryan's Medicare voucher plan is based on Stanford University Professor's Dr. Victor Fuchs' voucher idea. http://healthpolicy.stanford.edu/people/Victor_R_Fuchs I posted this many years ago.

IMO, doesn't matter whose idea it was, if vouchers don't adjust with the cost of healthcare, they're a scam. Ryan's plan specifically had them adjusted to the CPI, which raises at a much lower rate than healthcare costs.

There's also the fact that there are people 50 and younger that have been paying into the current Medicare system for years, and promised they'll have it when they retire. To me, any new system would need to start when new contributors enter the labor force.

[2centsworth]

IMO, doesn't matter whose idea it was, if vouchers don't adjust with the cost of healthcare, they're a scam. Ryan's plan specifically had them adjusted to the CPI, which raises at a much lower rate than healthcare costs.

There's also the fact that there are people 50 and younger that have been paying into the current Medicare system for years, and promised they'll have it when they retire. To me, any new system would need to start when new contributors enter the labor force.

I favor voucher because they put the power back in the hands of the consumer. No longer a 3rd party payment system. Consumers would have some skin in the game, which would help contain cost IMO.

[ploto]

My goodness - you all sound like a bunch of women who got dumped months ago and won't get over it.

[spursncowboys]

As you eat chocolate and listen to Justin Beiber

[baseline bum]

more evidence of how the Obama won the ignorant vote

So tell me how the "anti-war goverment nigg---" sentence ends any other way, smart guy.

Show me where Mitt said Capital Gains should go to zero for anyone making over $200k.

You seem to have a point there from reading more about his proposal

You're a math Wiz. Which is the bigger cut, 15% to 10% or 39% to 36%?

Which dollar saved has higer marginal utility?

Ryan's Medicare voucher plan is based on Stanford University Professor's Dr. Victor Fuchs' voucher idea. http://healthpolicy.stanford.edu/people/Victor_R_Fuchs I posted this many years ago.

You want a cookie for posting a stupid idea?

[baseline bum]

I favor voucher because they put the power back in the hands of the consumer. No longer a 3rd party payment system. Consumers would have some skin in the game, which would help contain cost IMO.

LOL, works so well now for those under 65.

[2centsworth]

So tell me how the "anti-war goverment nigg---" sentence ends any other way, smart guy.

common sense would tell you he didn't call Obama a ******, but believe what you want. He may have used the word rdly somewhere, but huge difference. If you can post the quote where he calls Obama a ******, I'll take it back.

You seem to have a point there from reading more about his proposal

cool of you to admit.

Which dollar saved has higer marginal utility?

that's why it was progressive.

You want a cookie for posting a stupid idea?

how would you know if you've never read it. the whole idea is to cover everyone.

[ElNono]

I favor voucher because they put the power back in the hands of the consumer. No longer a 3rd party payment system. Consumers would have some skin in the game, which would help contain cost IMO.

Market will bear pricing guarantees you're going to be leaving people behind. Oftentimes, a lot of people behind. These are people that mostly are at an age that they can't work anymore. I don't think them "having some skin in the game" matters. They're either going to be able to afford it or be left out without care. IMO, that's not a solution for cost. Especially if the vouchers are not indexed with the actual care cost, because then you'll be moving more and more people to the "can't afford" line.

I personally don't like the for-profit middle-men either, though.