WELCOME TO OPINIONS BASED
ON FACTS (OBOF)
&
THINGS YOU MAY HAVE MISSED (TYMHM)
Name
|
Published
|
OVERVIEW
|
Dec. 28, 2010
|
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 1
|
Dec. 30, 2010
|
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 2
|
Jan. 10, 2011
|
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 3
|
Jan. 17, 2011
|
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 4
|
Jan. 24, 2011
|
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 5
|
Jan. 31, 2011
|
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 6
|
Feb. 07, 2011
|
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 7
|
Feb. 14, 2011
|
SPECIAL ISSUE
|
Feb. 18, 2011
|
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 8
|
Feb. 21, 2011
|
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 9
|
Mar. 01, 2011
|
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 10
|
Mar. 07, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 1
|
Mar. 14, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 1A
|
Mar. 21, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 2
|
Mar. 25, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 3
|
Mar. 29, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 4
|
Apr. 04, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 5
|
Apr. 11, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 6
|
Apr. 18, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 7
|
Apr. 25, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 7A
|
Apr. 29, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 8
|
May 02, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 9
|
May 09, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 10
|
May 16, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 11
|
May 24, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART
12
|
Jun. 06, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 13
|
Jun. 20, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 14
|
July 05, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 14A
|
July 18, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 15
|
July 19, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 16
|
Aug. 03, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 17
|
Aug. 15, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 18
|
Aug. 29, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 19
|
Sept. 12, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 20
|
Sept. 26, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 21
|
Oct. 10, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 22
|
Oct. 24, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART 22 EXTRA
|
Nov. 04, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART
23
|
Nov. 07, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART
24
|
Nov. 21, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART
25
|
Dec. 05, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART
26
|
Dec. 19, 2011
|
SS & MORE PART
27
|
JAN. 03, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
27A
|
JAN. 05, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
28
|
JAN. 17, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
29
|
JAN. 31, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
30
|
Feb.
14, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
CL1
|
Feb.
21, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
30 EXTRA
|
Feb.
23, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
31
|
Feb.
28, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
CL2 - 59
|
Mar.
06, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
31 EXTRA
|
Mar.
07, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
32
|
Mar.
13, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
CL3 - 1
|
Mar.
20, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
32 EXTRA
|
Mar.
24, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
33
|
Apr.
10, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
CL 4 - 2
|
Apr.
17, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
34
|
Apr.
24, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
CL5 - 49
|
May
01, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
35
|
May
09, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
CL6 - 19
|
May
15, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
35 EXTRA
|
May
18, 2012
|
.. SS & MORE PART 36
|
May
22, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
36 EXTRA
|
May
25, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
36
|
|
EXTRA II
|
June 01, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
37
|
June 05. 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
37 EXTRA
|
June 07, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
38
|
June 12, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
39
|
June 19, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
40
|
June 26, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
41
|
July
03, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
42
|
July
10, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
43
|
July
17, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
44
|
July
24,2012
|
SS & MORE PART
45
|
July
31, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART 46
|
Aug. 07, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
46 EXTRA
|
Aug. 09, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
47
|
Aug. 14, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
48
|
Aug. 21, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
49
|
Aug. 28, 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
50
|
Sept. 04. 2012
|
SS & MORE PART
51
|
Sept. 11. 2012
|
OBOF & TYMHM
PART 1
|
Sept. 20, 2012
|
OBOF & TYMHM
PART 2
|
Sept. 24,2012
|
OBOF & TYMHM
PART 3
|
Oct. 02, 2012
|
OBOF & TYMHM
PART 4
|
Oct. 04, 2012
|
IN THIS
ISSUE
1.
What a night! What a day after!
2.
The first presidential debate.
3.
Romney told 27 myths in 38 minutes.
4. People do not want to draw Unemployment benefits.
~~~
"VOTE,
AN EDUCATED VOTE"
What is an educated vote? It is one that has been made with as much
knowledge, based on facts, not misinformation, that an individual can obtain.
~~~
WHAT A
NIGHT !
WHAT A
DAY AFTER !
Floyd Bowman
Opinions Based On Facts.
Published 10-4-12
October 3, 2012 was
the night of, what is called, the 2012 Presidential Debate. I watched the entire 90 minutes and some
commentary following. Today, October 4,
2012, I have read many accounts of the debate, talking about who won and, of
course, who didn't win, and why they felt as they did. I have been watching MSNBC tonight with Al
Sharpton, Chris Mathews, and Ed Schultz.
Later, I will probably watch Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O'Donnell. In addition, because I was able to record the
debate, I have watched the entire debate twice.
If you check the
dictionary as to the meaning of debate, you find that "it is a discussion
or dispute about an issue, proposal, etc."
In all the definitions of debate, there is nothing said about winners
and losers.
Any of you, who have
followed me, even for a little while, know that I am a Democrat and a STRONG
SUPPORTER of our President Obama. So,
when I say that President Obama, as I have observed for the past five years, just
didn't show up at the Presidential Debate, you know that it was a big surprise
to me. He just wasn't himself.
Now, he was good and
accurate about his responses and the positions that he took, but I guess you
would say, his body language just wasn't there.
I believe that the plan must have been for him to look and act
Presidential. He did that, but he was
not aggressive or take advantage of putting it to Romney.
If you knew the things
that President Obama has done and tried to do and the obstructionism of
Congress he has dealt with for the past four years, you would know that he was
right on all that he said in the debate.
Now, I am not so
naive' as to think there is not to be a winner and loser in a Presidential
Debate. That is, the nature of our culture. Particularly in this case, there is more
involved than just who won or lost. The bottom line is, that it appears, at least
from pundit, Romney won, not based on substance, but based on style and
perjury. The losers were the American
people.
President Obama was
serious and talked detail answers and points. He talked substance, without any side trips of
the subject. He was very Presidential,
in his demeanor. Having said that, he
was not aggressive in any way. He did
not challenge Mr. Romney on many things that offered him a real opportunity to
call Mr. Romney out about statements that simply were not true and were 180
degrees from what he has been saying for the past year.
Rachel
Maddow has just set up a board showing the results of first debates in the last
six President elections. It showed that
of the six, the challenger won the first debate in five, but lost the election.
With regard to the
performance, last night, by Mr. Romney, and that is exactly what it was, a
performance, showed that he had been well rehearsed, and polished to be an unapologetic
liar.
The next
debate is Oct. 11 and it will be between the two Vice Presidential nominees.
NOW, THERE ARE TWO
MORE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES AND NOT ALL IS LOST BY A LONG SHOT. WHAT WE ALL HAVE TO DO IS KEEP SPREADING THE
WORD AND KEEP THE MOMENTUM GOING.
I KNOW MONEY
IS TIGHT FOR ALL OF US, BUT WE NEED TO MAKE WHATEVER INVESTMENT WE CAN TO OUR
FUTURE. OUR BETTER FUTURE IS WITH
PRESIDENT OBAMA, SO DIG AS DEEP AS YOU CAN AND SEND "OBAMA FOR AMERICA
TRY, EVERY
CHANCE YOU GET, TO MAKE PEOPLE AWARE OF THE "OBSTRUCTIONISM" THAT THE
PRESIDENT HAS ENCOUNTERED ALL FOUR YEARS AND ALL THAT HE HAS ACCOMPLISHED IN
SPITE OF IT.
TAKE
NOTE! IN THE PAST 33 MONTHS, HIS
ADMINISTRATION HAS ADDED FIVE (5) MILLION NEW PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS. YES, THINGS HAVE SLOWED THE LAST COUPLE OF
MONTHS, BUT IT IS STILL GROWING, NOT SLIDING BACK.
~~~
THE FIRST PRESIDENTIAL
DEBATE
Robert Reich
Nation of Change
Published 10,04,12
In Wednesday night’s debate, Romney won on style while
Obama won on substance. Romney sounded as if he had conviction, which means
he’s either convinced himself that the lies he tells are true or he’s a
fabulous actor.
But what struck me most was how much Obama allowed Romney to get away with:
Five times Romney accused Obama of raiding Medicare of $716 billion, which is a
complete fabrication. Obama never mentioned the regressiveness of Romney’s
budget plan — awarding the rich and hurting the middle class and the poor. He
never mentioned Bain Capital, or Romney’s 47 percent talk, or Romney’s
“carried-interest” tax loophole. Obama allowed Romney to talk about replacing
Dodd-Frank and the Affordable Care Act without demanding that Romney be
specific about what he’d replace and why. And so on.
I’ve been worried about
Obama’s poor debate performance for some time now. He was terrible in the 2008
primary debates, for example. Expectations are always high — he’s known as an
eloquent orator. But when he has to think on his feet and punch back, he’s not
nearly as confident or assured as he is when he is giving a speech or
explaining a large problem and its solution. He is an educator, not a pugilist,
and this puts him at a disadvantage in any debate.
Romney stayed on script. If you look at a transcript of
his remarks you’ll see that he repeated the same lines almost word for word in
different contexts. He has memorized a bunch of lines, and practiced delivering
them. The overall effect is to make him seem assured and even passionate about
his position. He said over and over that he cares about jobs, about small
businesses, and ordinary Americans. But his policies and his record at Bain
tell a very different story.
The question now is whether Team Obama understands that
our President must be more aggressive and commanding in the next two debates —
and be unafraid to respectfully pin Romney to the floor.
~~~
ROMNEY TOLD 27 MYTHS IN 38
MINUTES
AT
THE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE
10-3-12.
Igor Volsky
Think Progress / News Report
Published 10 - 4 - 12
Pundits from both
sides of the aisle have lauded Mitt Romney’s strong debate performance,
praising his preparedness and ability to challenge President Obama’s policies
and accomplishments. But Romney only accomplished this goal by repeatedly
misleading viewers. He spoke for 38 minutes of the 90 minute debate and told at
least 27 myths:
1) “[G]et us energy independent, North
American energy independent. That creates about 4 million jobs”. Romney’s plan for
“energy independence” actually relies heavily on a study that assumes the U.S. United States
2)
“I don’t have a $5 trillion tax cut. I don’t have a tax cut of a scale that
you’re talking about.” A Tax Policy Center analysis of Romney’s proposal for a 20 percent
across-the-board tax cut in all federal income tax rates, eliminating the
Alternative Minimum Tax, eliminating the estate tax and other tax reductions,
would reduce federal revenue $480 billion in 2015. This amount to $5 trillion
over the decade.
3)
“My view is that we ought to provide tax relief to people in the middle class.
But I’m not going to reduce the share of taxes paid by high-income people.” If Romney hopes to
provide tax relief to the middle class, then his $5 trillion tax cut would add
to the deficit. There are not enough deductions in the tax code that primarily
benefit rich people to make his math work.
4) “My — my number-one principal is, there
will be no tax cut that adds to the deficit. I want to underline that: no tax
cut that adds to the deficit.” As the Tax
Policy Center
5) “I will not under any circumstances raise
taxes on middle-income families. I will lower taxes on middle-income families.
Now, you cite a study. There are six other studies that looked at the study you
describe and say it’s completely wrong.” The studies Romney cites actuallyfurther prove that Romney would, in fact, have
to raise taxes on the middle class if he were to keep his promise not to lose
revenue with his tax rate reduction.
6) “I saw a study that came out today that
said you’re going to raise taxes by $3,000 to $4,000 on middle-income
families.”
Romney is pointing to this study from the American Enterprise
Institute. It actually found that rather than raise taxes to pay down the debt,
the Obama administration’s policies — those contained directly in his budget —
would reduce the share of taxes that go toward
servicing the debt by $1,289.89 per taxpayer in the $100,000 to $200,000 range.
7) “And the reason is because small business
pays that individual rate; 54 percent of America’s workers work in businesses
that are taxed not at the corporate tax rate, but at the individual tax
rate….97 percent of the businesses are not — not taxed at the 35 percent tax
rate, they’re taxed at a lower rate. But those businesses that are in the last
3 percent of businesses happen to employ half — half of all the people who work
in small business.” Far less than half of the people affected by
the expiration of the upper income tax cuts get any of their income at all from
a small businesses. And those people could very well be receiving speaking fees
or book royalties, which qualify as “small business income” but don’t have a
direct impact on job creation. It’s actually hard to find a small business who think that
they will be hurt if the marginal tax rate on income earned above $250,000 per
year is increased.
8) “Mr. President, all of the increase in natural gas and oil has happened
on private land, not on government land. On government land, your
administration has cut the number of permits and licenses in half.” Oil production from
federal lands is higher, not lower: Production from federal
lands is up slightly in 2011 when compared to 2007. And the oil and gas
industry is sitting on 7,000 approved permits to drill, that it hasn’t
begun exploring or developing.
9) “The president’s put it in place as much
public debt — almost as much debt held by the public as all prior presidents
combined.”
This is not even close to being true. When Obama took office, the national debt
stood at $10.626 trillion. Now the national debt is over
$16 trillion. That $5.374 trillion increase is nowhere near as much debt as all
the other presidents combined.
10) “That’s why the National Federation of
Independent Businesses said your plan will kill 700,000 jobs. I don’t want to
kill jobs in this environment.” That study, produced by a right-wing advocacy organization, doesn’t analyze what Obama has actually
proposed.
11) “What we do have right now is a setting
where I’d like to bring money from overseas back to this country.” Romney’s plan to shift
the country to a territorial tax system would allow corporations to do business
and make profits overseas without ever being taxed on it in the United States
12) “I would like to take the Medicaid
dollars that go to states and say to a state, you’re going to get what you got
last year, plus inflation, plus 1 percent, and then you’re going to manage your
care for your poor in the way you think best.” Sending federal Medicaid
funding to the states in the form of a block grant woud significantly reduce
federal spending for Medicaid because the grant would not keep up with
projected health care costs.
A CBO estimate of a very similar proposal from
Paul Ryan found that federal spending would be “35 percent lower in 2022 and 49
percent lower in 2030 than current projected federal spending” and as a result
“states would face significant challenges in achieving sufficient cost savings
through efficiencies to mitigate the loss of federal funding.” “To maintain
current service levels in the Medicaid program, states would probably need to
consider additional changes, such as reducing their spending on other programs
or raising additional revenues,” the CBO found.
13) “I want to take that $716 billion you’ve
cut and put it back into Medicare…. But the idea of cutting $716 billion from
Medicare to be able to balance the additional cost of Obamacare is, in my
opinion, a mistake. There’s that number again. Romney is claiming that Obamacare siphons off
$716 billion from Medicare, to the detriment of beneficiaries. In actuality,
that money is saved primarily through reducing over-payments to insurance companies under Medicare Advantage,
not payments to beneficiaries. Paul Ryan’s budget plan keeps those same cuts, but directs them toward
tax cuts for the rich and deficit reduction.
14) “What I support is no change for current
retirees and near-retirees to Medicare.” Here is how Romney’s Medicare plan will affect current seniors: 1) by repealing
Obamacare, the 16 million seniors receiving preventive benefits without
deductibles or co-pays and are saving $3.9 billion on prescription drugs will
see a cost increase, 2) “premium support” will increase premiums for existing
beneficiaries as private insurers lure healthier seniors out of the traditional
Medicare program, 3) Romney/Ryan would also lower Medicaid spending
significantly beginning next year, shifting federal spending to states and
beneficiaries, and increasing costs for the 9 million Medicare recipients who
are dependent on Medicaid.
15) “Number two is for people coming along
that are young, what I do to make sure that we can keep Medicare in place for
them is to allow them either to choose the current Medicare program or a
private plan. Their choice. They get to choose — and they’ll have at least two
plans that will be entirely at no cost to them.” The Medicare program changes for everyone, even people who choose to
remain in the traditional fee-for-service. Rather than relying on a guaranteed
benefit, all beneficiaries will receive a premium support credit of $7,500 on
average in 2023 to purchase coverage in traditional Medicare or private
insurance. But that amount will only grow at a rate of GDP plus 1.5 percentage
points and will not keep up with health care costs. So while the federal
government will spend less on the program, seniors will pay more in premiums.
16) “And, by the way the idea came not even
from Paul Ryan or — or Senator Wyden, who’s the co-author of the bill with —
with Paul Ryan in the Senate, but also it came from Bill — Bill Clinton’s chief
of staff.”
Romney has rejected the Ryan/Wyden approach — which does
not cap the growth of the “premium support” subsidy. Bill Clinton and his
commission also voted down these changes to the Medicare program.
17) “Well, I would repeal and replace it.
We’re not going to get rid of all regulation. You have to have regulation. And
there are some parts of Dodd-Frank that make all the sense in the world.”Romney has previously
called for full repeal of Dodd-Frank, a law whose specific
purpose is to regulate banks. MF Global’s use of customer funds to pay for its own
trading losses is just one bit of proof that the financial industry isn’t
responsible enough to protect consumers without regulation.
18) “But I wouldn’t designate five banks as
too big to fail and give them a blank check. That’s one of the unintended
consequences of Dodd-Frank… We need to get rid of that provision because it’s
killing regional and small banks. They’re getting hurt.” The law merely says that
the biggest, systemically risky banks need to abide by more stringent regulations. If those
banks fail, they will be unwound by a new process in the Dodd-Frank law that protects taxpayers from having to pony up for a
bailout.
19) “And, unfortunately, when — when — when
you look at Obamacare, the Congressional Budget Office has said it will cost
$2,500 a year more than traditional insurance. So it’s adding to cost.” Obamacare will actually
provide millions of families with tax credits to make health care more
affordable.
20) “[I]t puts in place an unelected board
that’s going to tell people ultimately what kind of treatments they can have. I
don’t like that idea.” The Board, or IPAB is tasked with making binding recommendations to
Congress for lowering health care spending, should Medicare costs exceed a
target growth rate. Congress can accept the savings proposal or implement its
own ideas through a super majority.
The panel’s plan
will modify payments to providers but it cannot “include any recommendation to
ration health care, raise revenues or Medicare beneficiary premiums…increase
Medicare beneficiary cost-sharing (including deductibles, coinsurance, and co-
payments), or otherwise restrict benefits or modify eligibility criteria” (Section 3403 of the ACA). Relying on health
care experts rather than politicians to control health care costs has
previously attracted bipartisan support and even Ryan himself proposed two IPAB-like structures in a 2009
health plan.
21) “Right now, the CBO says up to 20
million people will lose their insurance as Obamacare goes into effect next year.
And likewise, a study by McKinsey and Company of American businesses said 30
percent of them are anticipating dropping people from coverage.” The Affordable Care Act
would actually expand health care coverage to 30 million Americans, despite
Romney fear mongering. According to CBO director Douglas Elmendorf, 3 million or less people would leave
employer-sponsored health insurance coverage as a result of the law.
22) “I like the way we did it [health care]
in Massachusetts
23)
“It’s why Republicans said, do not do this, and the Republicans had — had the
plan. They put a plan out. They put out a plan, a bipartisan plan. It was swept
aside.”
The Affordable Care Act incorporates many Republican ideas including the
individual mandate, state-based health care exchanges, high-risk insurance
pools, and modified provisions that allow insurers to sell policies in multiple
states. Republicans never offered a united bipartisan alternative.
24) “Preexisting conditions are covered
under my plan.” Only people who are continuously insured would not be discriminated
against because they suffer from pre-existing conditions. This protection would
not be extended to people who are currently uninsured.
25) “In one year, you provided $90 billion
in breaks to the green energy world. Now, I like green energy as well, but
that’s about 50 years’ worth of what oil and gas receives.” The $90 billion was given
out over several years and included loans, loan guarantees and grants through
the American Recovery Act. $23 billion of the $90 billion “went toward
“clean coal,” energy-efficiency upgrades, updating the electricity grid and
environmental clean-up, largely for old nuclear weapons sites.”
26) “I think about half of [the green firms
Obama invested in], of the ones have been invested in have gone out of
business. A number of them happened to be owned by people who were contributors
to your campaigns.” As of late last year, only “three out of the 26 recipients of 1705 loan
guarantees have filed for bankruptcy, with losses estimated at just over $600
million.”
27)
“If the president’s reelected you’ll see dramatic cuts to our military.” Romney is referring to
the sequester, which his running mate Paul Ryan supported. Obama opposes the
military cuts and has asked Congress to formulate a balanced approach that
would avoid the trigger.
~~~
PEOPLE, DO
NOT WANT
TO BE
DRAWING UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS.
Floyd Bowman
Opinions Based On Facts
Published 10-4-12
If you have ever been
on unemployment, you know that it is an empty and dis-hearting position. Almost anyone would much rather, have a well-paying
productive job than to be receiving unemployment insurance. Being in that position not only gives you
financial problems and worries, it is degrading and gets very discouraging, as
well. After a time, you become
despondent.
Now, I think that the
greater percent of people without jobs and on unemployment would much rather
have a job. However, those who feel
otherwise, such as both Presidential nominee Mitt Romney and his running mate
Paul Ryan, think that these people, and many others, are mutchers and takers,
instead of makers.
I speak from
experience watching it happen to my Son.
He worked for one company for 28 years with very high ratings. He was named Employee of the Year once, among
about 1,500 employees. He was laid off
to be replaced by beginners at about one third his salary. Found out later the company was a big looser,
having to hire two replacements and still lost all of my Son's expertise.
He worked as hard as
you can imagine to get other employment, but with no success. After seven years the stress and loss of all
savings has taken it's toll on his health and now he is not employable for
anything. Don't
anyone tell me that, for the most part, the unemployed would rather draw
unemployment insurance. It just isn't
true.
~~~
If the good Lord is willing and the creek don't rise, I'll talk with you
again on Tuesday October 9, 2012.
"GOD BLESS ALL OF YOU
&
GOD BLESS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Floyd
No comments:
Post a Comment