Ed Jenkins, so then according to your post you will then be voting for a worse scumbag, namely repugnant republican Rick Scott, if you don't vote for Chris, you will be voting for this piece of garbage, a typical do nothing republican who does not care about anything other than greed, when a democrat as you claim to be does not vote, you are voting then for the republican party, the party of greed over people, the heartless party, the pretenders that have never done a thing for this country yet always taking credit they don't deserve and demonizing those who do deserve it ...think again and hope you come out and vote

Pete, please backup your opinions so we can discuss ....

In addition, lets add the fact that we live in a Chartalist Monetary System, where the US has a monopoly on issuing currency, therefore we are monetarily sovereign...and as such we can never go Bankrupt lets then examine this article plus this article Biggest GOP lie> "Gov needs to live within its means" U.S. MonetarySystem101-Chartalism: We have a Chartalist Monetary System US Media, MSM, rightwing media, leftwing media, Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Libertarians do not acknowledge our present Monetary System yet keep us uninformed by making us think we still operate under commodity based money such as the gold standard or some other form of limited federal reserve. Federal Budgets do not need balance only reflect National priorities on spending, but on a Chartalist System there can be no Fiscal Crisis. http://mahilena.typepad.com/blog/2013/03/us-monetarysystem101-chartalism-we-have-a-chartalist-monetary-system.html

“Good Job Mitt”: Romneycare Is Making Massachusetts Healthier and its certainly working and liked by the citizens In newly released research, Charles Courtemanche and Daniela Zapata ask perhaps the most important question about the Massachusetts health-care reforms: Did they improve health outcomes in Massachusetts? The answer, which relies on self-reported health data, suggests they did. The authors document improvements in “physical health, mental health, functional limitations, joint disorders, body mass index, and moderate physical activity.” The gains were greatest for “women, minorities, near-elderly adults, and those with incomes low enough to qualify for the law’s subsidies.” Some of those results are a bit odd. Although it’s possible to tell yourself a story about how the Massachusetts health reforms affected the body mass indexes of the newly insured, you have to stretch a bit. But most of them make perfect sense. The reforms led to more people having insurance, which is to say more people having more opportunities to see a doctor and get early and/or regular treatment for ailments. That led to improvements in health. If that hadn’t led to improvements in health, it would be the worth of going to the doctor and getting timely medical care that would be called into question. And if going to the doctor and getting timely medical care isn’t worth doing, the Massachusetts reforms are pretty far down the list of practices and policies we need to rethink. The researchers end by asking whether the Massachusetts reforms provide a good guide to what will happen under the Affordable Care Act. “The general strategies for obtaining nearly universal coverage in both the Massachusetts and federal laws involved the same three-pronged approach of non-group insurance market reforms, subsidies, and mandates, suggesting that the health effects should be broadly similar,” they write. “However, the federal legislation included additional costcutting measures such as Medicare cuts that could potentially mitigate the gains in health from the coverage expansions. On the other hand, baseline uninsured rates were unusually low in Massachusetts, so the coverage expansions — and corresponding health improvements — from the Affordable Care Act could potentially be greater.” I’d add one point to their discussion: The national reforms, unlike the Massachusetts reforms, included major investments in comparative-effectiveness research, electronic health records, accountable care organizations and pay-for-quality pilots. If any or all of those initiatives pay off, they could dramatically improve our understanding of which treatments work and force the health-care system to integrate that new knowledge into everyday treatment decisions very quickly. If that happens, medical care could become substantially more effective than it is now, which should also improve health outcomes. Quality improvements like that could, for the already insured, be the largest payoff from the Affordable Care Act. http://mykeystrokes.com/2012/03/13/good-job-mitt-romneycare-is-making-massachusetts-healthier/

"“A Window Into The Future”: Mitt Romney Won’t Enroll In Medicare And Doesn’t Want Anybody Else To Either Mitt Romney hasn’t explained his announcement yesterday that he won’t be enrolling in Medicare despite turning 65, but as Jonathan Cohn points out, Romney is at least practicing what he preaches. Romney supports Paul Ryan’s plan to turn Medicare into a voucher program, a plan that would effectively end Medicare as we know it, and Romney is putting his money where his mouth is by deciding against enrolling. Romney’s decision is a window into the future that he promises to deliver. Instead of a Medicare program that directly provides coverage, Romney wants seniors to obtain coverage from private insurers. Depending on their income and personal wealth, a portion of that coverage would be subsidized, but the guaranteed coverage of Medicare would be eliminated. The fact that Romney was able to forego the Medicare system without penalty or punishment puts the lie to the notion that government health care programs are tyrannical. That’s an important fact to point out, because even though any senior who doesn’t want Medicare coverage could walk away from the system, just like Mitt Romney did, the overwhelming majority of them don’t—and that’s a testament to the effectiveness of Medicare. But even though Medicare works, Mitt Romney wants to end the program as we know it. He wants Medicare to be transformed into a voucher provider, subsidizing private insurance plans instead of directly covering medical care. For 99 percent of Americans, it would be a radical overhaul, raising costs and making it difficult if not impossible to find insurance. Given his means, Romney would do fine in such a system. That’s basically the system he’s living in now, but it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize most people can’t afford what he can afford. And if Medicare were privatized as he proposes, that’s exactly what he would force every American senior to do. If you’re only concerned about personal benefit, Medicare might not turn out to be the best deal in the world for someone like Mitt Romney, who is fabulously wealthy and doesn’t need the coverage. But even the Mitt Romneys of the world are better off living in a society where senior citizens have the security of health care coverage that Medicare provides. If we were to adopt Mitt Romney’s proposal to turn it into a voucher system, Medicare would no longer provide it’s greatest benefit of all: the peace of mind that comes with knowing that every single senior citizen has the health care coverage they need. http://mykeystrokes.com/2012/03/14/a-window-into-the-future-mitt-romney-wont-enroll-in-medicare-and-doesnt-want-anybody-else-to-either/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+mykeystrokes%2FEPBb+%28mykeystrokes.com%29

CBO: Health reform to cut deficit by $50 billion more than we thought I’m getting a lot of e-mails quoting articles like this one, by John Ransom, that say something like, “In a wholly predictable development, it turns out the cost for Obamacare will end up being twice the original price that the Democrats said.” But let’s back up. The occasion for this dust-up is a set of updated cost estimates for the coverage provisions of the health-care law. The new estimates reflect a couple of factors. The Congressional Budget Office lists them: - An increase of $168 billion in projected outlays for Medicaid and CHIP; - A decrease of $97 billion in projected costs for exchange subsidies and related spending; - A decrease of $20 billion in the cost of tax credits for small employers; and - An additional $99 billion in net deficit reductions from penalty payments, the excise tax on high-premium insurance plans, and other effects on tax revenues and outlays—with most of those effects reflecting changes in revenues. You’ll notice something about the above list: It appears to add up to a net reduction in the cost of the health-care law. And, sure enough, here’s CBO: “the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA will have a net cost of just under $1.1 trillion over the 2012–2021 period—about $50 billion less than the agencies’ March 2011 estimate.” You would get the opposite impression reading Ransom. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/cbo-health-reform-to-cut-deficit-by-50-billion-more-than-we-thought/2011/08/25/gIQAXgPSES_blog.html

@lizzwinstead DeMint: "We won't default if we don't raise debtceiling" // It's a liberal hoax like climate change! #GOP #WhatAreTheyOn? Demint and conservatives are pushing it big time they do not care if they destroy America...and they call themselves Patriots!

@carrolltrust #Conservative #Party #Central #Office FILES Biggest #Bahamas #Tax #Evasion #Fraud #PHOTOS!! http://conservativepartyfraud.blogspot.com

@ghostdansing Ghost Dansing Constitutional Myth #5: Corporations Have the Same Free-Speech Rights as Individuals - The Atlantic: http://bi… (cont) http://deck.ly/~M7ZzR

The non-partisan CBO said if tax cuts enacted since 2001 continue to be extended, the country’s debt could be nearly twice the GDP by 2035. Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/world-business/us-budget-office-warns-on-debt-explosion-20110623-1ggeo.html#ixzz1QDaYp0yBUS CongressionalBudgetOffice warns on debt explosion http://t.co/TC8wwqi

The Path to Prosperity: Republican Bedtime Story ..Since the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, America lost millions of jobs and had a record high unemployment rate...higher than that at the height of the Great Depression The Path to Prosperity: A Republican Bedtime Story http://bud-meyers.blogspot.com/2011/05/path-to-prosperity-republican-bedtime.html

The evidence is in: the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts failed to achieve the promised goals beyond a shadow of a reasonable doubt. The Republican leadership is like the doctors who believed bleeding cured the sick. When physicians bled George Washington, he got worse, so they increased the treatment until they bled him to death. Our government, the basis of our freedoms, is spewing red ink, and the Republican solution is to spill ever more. Those who ignore evidence and pledge blind faith in policy based on ideological fantasy are little different from the clerics who made Galileo Galilei confess that the sun revolves around the earth. The Capitol Hill and media Republicans differ only in not threatening death to those who deny their dogma. How much more evidence do we need that we made terrible and costly mistakes in 2001 and 2003? http://www.tax.com/taxcom/taxblog.nsf/Permalink/CHAS-89LPZ9?OpenDocument

The evidence is in: the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts failed to achieve the promised goals beyond a shadow of a reasonable doubt. The Republican leadership is like the doctors who believed bleeding cured the sick. When physicians bled George Washington, he got worse, so they increased the treatment until they bled him to death. Our government, the basis of our freedoms, is spewing red ink, and the Republican solution is to spill ever more. Those who ignore evidence and pledge blind faith in policy based on ideological fantasy are little different from the clerics who made Galileo Galilei confess that the sun revolves around the earth. The Capitol Hill and media Republicans differ only in not threatening death to those who deny their dogma. How much more evidence do we need that we made terrible and costly mistakes in 2001 and 2003? http://www.tax.com/taxcom/taxblog.nsf/Permalink/CHAS-89LPZ9?OpenDocument

The Path to Prosperity: Republican Bedtime Story ..Since the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, America lost millions of jobs and had a record high unemployment rate...higher than that at the height of the Great Depression The Path to Prosperity: A Republican Bedtime Story http://bud-meyers.blogspot.com/2011/05/path-to-prosperity-republican-bedtime.html

The Social Construction of Religion SACRED CANOPY - PETER BERGER recommended reading http://www.colorado.edu/ReligiousStudies/chernus/2400/Readings/SummariesOfTheSacredCanopy.htm

Is the economy doing better or worse under the Obama Administration? The Short Answer is “Better.” http://t.co/71kkIeV

The Conservative Lie to Get Elected Then Steal From The Poor http://www.oreilly-sucks.com/repubnews/republies.htm

The Bush Tax Cuts Are the Disaster that Keeps on Giving http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/06/bushtaxcuts_anniversary.html

10 Biggest Conservative Lies About Liberals 1.Liberals Want Big Government Again with the big government! Government exists to ensure our health and happiness, protect us in case some crazy country decides they want to take our land, and make sure people aren't getting away with murder because "he had a killing coming." I don't know about you, but knowing I won't lose my house if I'm unemployed for a little bit or have a major illness in the family is a big part of my health and happiness. That security, and the protection from murderers -- local and foreign. If you call that Big Government, well, I just hope you're able to maintain your food, clean water, and carbon flow after the ATF storms your compound to protect those kids on their fourteenth birthday/wedding day. 2.Liberals Want to Steal Your Money and Give It to the Poor This whole idea that liberals are out to Robin Hood all the rich folks is really a matter of perspective. If you're a gazillionaire, and you want to keep that extra million, you may feel that taxes for social services is ripping you off. But if you're not a gazillionaire and need to send your kid to public school, you might want stop yer bitchin' about your portion of the tax load. It's actually FOR you, and your child. This is not a "redistribution of wealth"; it's to ensure America retains that superpower status we've come to enjoy. Education is one of the most effective ways to bolster and maintain our nation's economic, political, and international stability. We're only as strong as our weakest link, so give it up patriots, or you might be speaking Chinese in a decade or so. 3.Liberals Are Socialists Let's just define socialism, shall we? Merriam-Webster says: 1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods 2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state We don't do this in our country. Making sure Americans have proper health care, public schools, and roads to get to the aforementioned doctors and schools is not socialism. It's being responsible to its citizens. As long as the 7-Eleven offers franchises that are privately run, we do not live in a socialist society. Please learn the difference, so we can stop having this tired argument. Thank you. Good night. 4.Liberals Are Atheists While some politicians try to blur that whole church and state issue, real Americans know that our Founding Fathers were incredibly clear that no one should be forced to worship in a way they do not choose. But we're talking about proving there are millions of liberal Christians here, not that whole pesky "Is America a Christian nation?" BS. For some thought-provoking reading on Christianity from a fab liberal, check out Godspam. Or, you know, get to know about 50% of the people in your congregation who voted for Obama. 5.Liberals Want Everyone to Be on Welfare Welfare is complicated. And good liberals know that if the money would be spent on early childhood education, drug rehabilitation, and sex education we'd be able to reduce welfare funding dramatically. However, since these "radical" ideas of giving people a great head start and keeping them out of jail, off the pipe, and free from unexpected pregnancies are rejected on a regular basis -- we need a safety net for those who fall through the cracks. Something I suspect about conservatives: If they had to watch a mother of five starve herself and her children because welfare was a thing of the past, they'd be supporters of a system as well. 6.Liberals Hate White Men I'm married to a white man, and I have it on good authority that many other liberals are as well. In fact, since almost 75% of Americans are white, unless we hate the majority of men (we don't), this is the easiest lie to refute. 7.Liberals Think Homosexuals Deserve "Special Treatment" One of my favorite crazy comments that gets thrown around is how liberals are always looking for that special treatment. You know, because women want some special treatment in making the same salary as men for the same job. Just like homosexuals want the special treatment of partner health benefits, being able to visit their dying partner in the hospital, and not being taxed more heavily than the straight couple across the street. 8.Liberals Love Abortion I don't know anyone who says, "Oh, I just love me some abortions! Abortions are the best thing -- I think I'll schedule myself for five!" And I know a lot of liberals. However, I do know people who believe that again, we do not have a perfect system where everyone can learn about birth control, or have perfect birth control that is 100% effective, nor a complete absence of rape, incest, nor hardcore coercion to do it without a condom. For these moments, as difficult and sometimes as horrifying as they are, women deserve to choose what happens inside their own body. But it doesn't mean any of us are happy about it. 9.Liberals Hate Conservatives Must I trot out Mary Matalin and James Carville? Please don't make me, as I don't find either of them to be particularly loving and I hope they will forgive me if I'm not surprised when HuffPo announces the couple's split. With that said, if you don't know even one couple that lives in a mixed household, you must live in San Francisco. 10.Liberals Have Crazy, Possibly Illegal, Sex Okay, that one is true. ------------------------------------- written by by April Peveteaux order modified by me http://thestir.cafemom.com/

Global crisis: failure of extreme capitalism - Australian PM http://t.co/dUP7ZrA @jazgar Paul Ryan (extreme capitalist) Admits His Refusal to Compromise on Tax Increases Rooted in “Belief”, “Doctrine” http://bit.ly/mbbJ2U #tcot #p2 See my Post on Ayn Rand by pressing next a couple of times for more about Paul Ryan and AynRand Thanks to teaparty capitalist extremists Middle-Class America, Fading Fast http://bit.ly/lJWamY

Reagan "Trickle Down" economics was a "Trojan Horse" A TRICK to really give tax cuts to the rich with the disguise of cuts FOR EVERYONE http://www.rationalrevolution.net/war/trickle_down.htm

Trickle-Down Economics: The 4th Conservative/Reagan Failure capitalismfailure http://arran.wordpress.com/2007/04/13/trickle-down-economics-the-4th-conservative-failure/

Beyond Extreme Capitalism -- The Blended Value Investment Philosophy http://www.intentblog.com/archives/2006/08/beyond_extreme.html

FREE MARKET FALLACIES http://www.flora.org/flora/archive/mai-info/fallacy.htm

Horatio's Perspective: The De Facto Fallacies of Capitalism, Freedom, Free Markets and the State of the Union http://t.co/a0zOu0E