Fact check: Reporter on CNN busts open new ad lie. Wife had iinsurance.

[JoeB131]

If this is the case, why not just pay the employees a decent wage and make them buy their own insurance? At least then they get what they want.

Uhhh, not so much.

The problem with that is that it would be hard for a guy like myself who is 50 to get a premium policy that covers stuff than it would be for a 20 year old to get it. Group policies are practical because they are a pool.

 

[Noomi]

If this is the case, why not just pay the employees a decent wage and make them buy their own insurance? At least then they get what they want.

Uhhh, not so much.

The problem with that is that it would be hard for a guy like myself who is 50 to get a premium policy that covers stuff than it would be for a 20 year old to get it. Group policies are practical because they are a pool.

Then allow the employee to choose whether they want to buy their own insurance and take home a better wage, or to have the employer pay for the insurance. That could work...

 

[JoeB131]

If this is the case, why not just pay the employees a decent wage and make them buy their own insurance? At least then they get what they want.

Uhhh, not so much.

The problem with that is that it would be hard for a guy like myself who is 50 to get a premium policy that covers stuff than it would be for a 20 year old to get it. Group policies are practical because they are a pool.

Then allow the employee to choose whether they want to buy their own insurance and take home a better wage, or to have the employer pay for the insurance. That could work...

That sounds a bit better...

But here's the thing. of the 46 million uninsured, a lot of them are young people who could get insurance and don't. So I can't see such a system working unless you have a mandate.

However, as I've said elsewhere, after I ran up close to $50,000 in medical bills in 2007, the company I worked for put an emphasis in trying to get me off the payroll.

First they changed my job description to something that was truly insulting hoping I'd quit. (And I did look for other jobs during that time, just nothing that paid as well.)

When that didn't work, they just downsized me, and paid me a bribe so I wouldn't sue them for medical discrimination. Since I had something already lined up, I took the money.

Personally, I'd like to get employers completely out of the picture and have something like Canada has, or perhaps what Germany has.

 

[P@triot]

Wow. The woman (the wife) in question had her own insurance even after this man was laid off at Bain.

It's a complete and utter lie.

Considering it was proven that Obama lied about his own mother not having insurance, does this really shock anyone?

Like the rest on the left, Obama has to lie to push marxism on the people. He has never told the truth about anything...

 

[JoeB131]

Rottie defines "Marxism" as actually caring about the well-being of others...

 

[P@triot]

Rottie defines "Marxism" as actually caring about the well-being of others...

Liberals only have "compassion" for others when using someone else'$ money. All of you hoard your own wealth like typical marxists.

Socialism is for the people, not the socialist.... right Joe?

 

[JoeB131]

Rottie defines "Marxism" as actually caring about the well-being of others...

Liberals only have "compassion" for others when using someone else'$ money. All of you hoard your own wealth like typical marxists.

Socialism is for the people, not the socialist.... right Joe?

I pay a higher percentage of my income in taxes than Mitt Romney does, thank you very much. So I'm ponying up...

Where's Mitt?

 

[P@triot]

Rottie defines "Marxism" as actually caring about the well-being of others...

Liberals only have "compassion" for others when using someone else'$ money. All of you hoard your own wealth like typical marxists.

Socialism is for the people, not the socialist.... right Joe?

I pay a higher percentage of my income in taxes than Mitt Romney does, thank you very much. So I'm ponying up...

Where's Mitt?

LMAO!!! Vintage liberal there... I have "compassion" because I pay taxes (which is forced on me by law). Spoken like a true communist.

 

[saveliberty]

Rottie defines "Marxism" as actually caring about the well-being of others...

Liberals only have "compassion" for others when using someone else'$ money. All of you hoard your own wealth like typical marxists.

Socialism is for the people, not the socialist.... right Joe?

I pay a higher percentage of my income in taxes than Mitt Romney does, thank you very much. So I'm ponying up...

Where's Mitt?

Should we return government benefits on a percentage basis too?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Wow. The woman (the wife) in question had her own insurance even after this man was laid off at Bain.

It's a complete and utter lie.

Yup its 100% dishonest and false.

Too bad, I'm sure Romney's wife thinks Romney is sensitive to people with cancer, after all he stood by her side as she battled breast cancer.

We shouldn't go after this guy or his dead wife though, the anger and vitriol should be directed at the source of the dishonesty....the obama admin (someone in the whitehouse is on tape talking to this man about it before the ad came out) and the super pac that ran the ad.

With all due respect, the man has consistently lied about Bain, Romney and his wife's demise.

Do I feel sorry for him because he lost his wife to cancer? Most certainly. I lost my Mom, Dad, Baba and Gido to cancer.

But I don't argue health care issues in Canada or try to elect my Prime Minister by lying about how they died or using their deaths to further a political goal.

We come back to Joe Soptic lied. Lied big. Lied a whopper of a whopper all to re-elect Obama.

It has to be said. I don't care that it might hurt his feelings. It has to be said that the man knowingly in two commercials lied his ass off.

I understand your position. Personally I just don't feel like the man, as an individual, needs to be attacked even with the understanding of your viewpoint.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Red herring, Joe. If she was truly unable to work, she would have qualified for SSI disability, AND MEDICARE. Remember, this was several years before her lung cancer was discovered. If she applied and was denied, then Sopic's beef is with the Social Security Administration, NOT his former employer (assuming she really was disabled in the first place). You union stooges think you are entitled to absolutely everything from your employer, for life; well, YOU'RE NOT! Getting laid off is an occupational hazard, and if/when it happens, you had best have some marketable skills. The fact that Sopic could only find work as a janitor, in five years, says he didn't have any. More likely Sopic decided to go without insurance (he should have had enough money to buy a policy of some sort, which he did not); the fact that he lost that gamble is NOT the fault of his former employer, nor any of its executives.

Few who work and are laid off can afford to continue their health insurance. COBRA costs are outrageous. When you get laid off, you do not know how long it will be until you work again. You have to plan and save every dime you get. Health insurance is a luxury and unless you are sick when you get laid off, it is not a luxury most people can afford.

That is not the fault of the employer. It is not the employer's responsibility to make the worker save for a rainy day. But the fact is that few of us would be able to afford health insurance if our employers did not supply it as a benefit... which is something a lot of people forget. They think "my employer only pays me $15.75/hour, what a rip off". What they forget is that a families health insurance costs well over $1200 a month and whatever the employer offers to pay for that is also part of their earnings.

To someone with a "you owe me" mentality, nothing the employer provides is going to be enough.

Immie

If this is the case, why not just pay the employees a decent wage and make them buy their own insurance? At least then they get what they want.

The part you're missing, probably because you've been a mindless, droning slave your whole life, is that we don't consider it anyone's job - particularly not the government's - to MAKE anyone buy anything.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Yup its 100% dishonest and false.

Too bad, I'm sure Romney's wife thinks Romney is sensitive to people with cancer, after all he stood by her side as she battled breast cancer.

We shouldn't go after this guy or his dead wife though, the anger and vitriol should be directed at the source of the dishonesty....the obama admin (someone in the whitehouse is on tape talking to this man about it before the ad came out) and the super pac that ran the ad.

With all due respect, the man has consistently lied about Bain, Romney and his wife's demise.

Do I feel sorry for him because he lost his wife to cancer? Most certainly. I lost my Mom, Dad, Baba and Gido to cancer.

But I don't argue health care issues in Canada or try to elect my Prime Minister by lying about how they died or using their deaths to further a political goal.

We come back to Joe Soptic lied. Lied big. Lied a whopper of a whopper all to re-elect Obama.

It has to be said. I don't care that it might hurt his feelings. It has to be said that the man knowingly in two commercials lied his ass off.

I understand your position. Personally I just don't feel like the man, as an individual, needs to be attacked even with the understanding of your viewpoint.

I think he does. He's a lying sack, and having lost his wife to cancer doesn't mitigate that.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

With all due respect, the man has consistently lied about Bain, Romney and his wife's demise.

Do I feel sorry for him because he lost his wife to cancer? Most certainly. I lost my Mom, Dad, Baba and Gido to cancer.

But I don't argue health care issues in Canada or try to elect my Prime Minister by lying about how they died or using their deaths to further a political goal.

We come back to Joe Soptic lied. Lied big. Lied a whopper of a whopper all to re-elect Obama.

It has to be said. I don't care that it might hurt his feelings. It has to be said that the man knowingly in two commercials lied his ass off.

I understand your position. Personally I just don't feel like the man, as an individual, needs to be attacked even with the understanding of your viewpoint.

I think he does. He's a lying sack, and having lost his wife to cancer doesn't mitigate that.

Dishonesty, when talking about other people, is a huge pet peeve of mine so I'm not surprised that people resist my standpoint at all and don't think you are wrong for doing so.

However, I just think focusing on the man instead of on the person in the obama admin, who talked to the man via conference call, and not concentrating on the super pac who ran this highly dishonest ad does nothing to bring attention to their involvement in it.

Tearing down the man who lost his wife isn't going to help get Obama out of office but addressing the true and real links between this ad, the superpac, and his administration will.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I understand your position. Personally I just don't feel like the man, as an individual, needs to be attacked even with the understanding of your viewpoint.

I think he does. He's a lying sack, and having lost his wife to cancer doesn't mitigate that.

Dishonesty, when talking about other people, is a huge pet peeve of mine so I'm not surprised that people resist my standpoint at all and don't think you are wrong for doing so.

However, I just think focusing on the man instead of on the person in the obama admin, who talked to the man via conference call, and not concentrating on the super pac who ran this highly dishonest ad does nothing to bring attention to their involvement in it.

Tearing down the man who lost his wife isn't going to help get Obama out of office but addressing the true and real links between this ad, the superpac, and his administration will.

On the other hand, how can you fully address the faults of the SuperPAC and its ad without addressing the primary one: that they knowingly distributed an ad of a liar telling lies?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I think he does. He's a lying sack, and having lost his wife to cancer doesn't mitigate that.

Dishonesty, when talking about other people, is a huge pet peeve of mine so I'm not surprised that people resist my standpoint at all and don't think you are wrong for doing so.

However, I just think focusing on the man instead of on the person in the obama admin, who talked to the man via conference call, and not concentrating on the super pac who ran this highly dishonest ad does nothing to bring attention to their involvement in it.

Tearing down the man who lost his wife isn't going to help get Obama out of office but addressing the true and real links between this ad, the superpac, and his administration will.

On the other hand, how can you fully address the faults of the SuperPAC and its ad without addressing the primary one: that they knowingly distributed an ad of a liar telling lies?

Sounds like we are on the same hand, are we not?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Dishonesty, when talking about other people, is a huge pet peeve of mine so I'm not surprised that people resist my standpoint at all and don't think you are wrong for doing so.

However, I just think focusing on the man instead of on the person in the obama admin, who talked to the man via conference call, and not concentrating on the super pac who ran this highly dishonest ad does nothing to bring attention to their involvement in it.

Tearing down the man who lost his wife isn't going to help get Obama out of office but addressing the true and real links between this ad, the superpac, and his administration will.

On the other hand, how can you fully address the faults of the SuperPAC and its ad without addressing the primary one: that they knowingly distributed an ad of a liar telling lies?

Sounds like we are on the same hand, are we not?

I guess that would depend on whether or not you want us to somehow criticize the PAC while giving their lie-mongering pet du jour a pass. Personally, I think he AND they should be dissected like dead frogs in high school biology class (metaphorically speaking, for those hard-of-thinking people reading this).

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

On the other hand, how can you fully address the faults of the SuperPAC and its ad without addressing the primary one: that they knowingly distributed an ad of a liar telling lies?

Sounds like we are on the same hand, are we not?

I guess that would depend on whether or not you want us to somehow criticize the PAC while giving their lie-mongering pet du jour a pass. Personally, I think he AND they should be dissected like dead frogs in high school biology class (metaphorically speaking, for those hard-of-thinking people reading this).

I just feel it would give the defenders of this dishonesty less wiggle room if we only concentrated on the super pack, the admin, and the official in the admin who talked to this guy and apparantly got the story to the super pac.

Like I said I understand why you want to go after the man who told the lie in the first place too, I'm just more thinking of what is best (in my opinion) for fixing the mistake we made by putting Obama into the office of the President.

 

[JoeB131]

Liberals only have "compassion" for others when using someone else'$ money. All of you hoard your own wealth like typical marxists.

Socialism is for the people, not the socialist.... right Joe?

I pay a higher percentage of my income in taxes than Mitt Romney does, thank you very much. So I'm ponying up...

Where's Mitt?

LMAO!!! Vintage liberal there... I have "compassion" because I pay taxes (which is forced on me by law). Spoken like a true communist.

We aren't talking about what I do personally (which is actually quite a lot of community involvement) we are talking about what kind of society we are going to have. Too bad you don't understand the difference.... or can't.

 

[JoeB131]

Liberals only have "compassion" for others when using someone else'$ money. All of you hoard your own wealth like typical marxists.

Socialism is for the people, not the socialist.... right Joe?

I pay a higher percentage of my income in taxes than Mitt Romney does, thank you very much. So I'm ponying up...

Where's Mitt?

Should we return government benefits on a percentage basis too?

NO, government benefits should be on the basis of need. Which means we shouldn't be giving fat social security checks to millionaires... to start with.

 

[naturegirl]

I pay a higher percentage of my income in taxes than Mitt Romney does, thank you very much. So I'm ponying up...

Where's Mitt?

Should we return government benefits on a percentage basis too?

NO, government benefits should be on the basis of need. Which means we shouldn't be giving fat social security checks to millionaires... to start with.

Ahhhhh Joey, I suspect Romney pays more in taxes in one year than you earn the entire year. So yeah, he's paying a LOT of taxes.