Fact check: Obama and the phantom peace dividend

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Sept. 7, 2012 10:56 a.m.

    Utah Girl,

    I can understand your dilemma. Many seniors are in the same boat.

    But, in a way, what you are saying is that you want to get rid of the parts of Obamacare that do not affect you and keep the parts that do.

    And I completely understand that. We all need to look out for ourselves.

    I am sure that you can find countless stories of people who have jobs but cannot afford insurance for them and their families. And they do not have the benefit of Medicare.

    I know it is not an easy solution. Any cuts will hurt someone.

    If we could get a group of politicians to come to the table in good faith, and without their pockets being lined by special interest groups, we could solve this problem and many more

  • Utah Girl Vernal, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 10:38 a.m.

    @ JoeBlow: This was the part I read and was referring to: "Obama's health care law improved Medicare benefits, adding better coverage for beneficiaries with high prescription costs as well as removing co-pays for a set of preventive benefits. If the law is repealed, those benefits would be lost unless Congress decides otherwise." As a person on Medicare, who has high prescription costs and needs to use the preventive benefits I recently acquired through Humana, I don't want to lose these. Obviously, they have to be funded somewhere, and that is where the fiscal creativity has to come in. I am still working...have no money to retire, but SS and that is less than $500 a month for me, as I've spent my life raising 9 children. My husband will be retirement age in about 6 years. We still have a mortgage. Just can't afford to pay more for anything, like so many seniors. His prescription costs are higher than mine, but he has insurance through his employer at this time. We both have "pre-existing conditions", so that is also important.

  • ksampow Farr West, Utah
    Sept. 7, 2012 9:41 a.m.

    JoeBlow: Just calling yourself a fact-checker does not make it so. Many of the fact-checkers slant things to match their perspective. You should check with original sources to verify things, not just take the word of fact-checkers. Or compare what several different "fact-checkers" say and then dig deeper if there is a disagreement over the "facts"

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Sept. 7, 2012 8:15 a.m.

    Obamacare, .... keep the best of it, and eliminate the rest."

    Unfortunately, the parts that people LIKE and want to KEEP are paid for by the parts that they want to ELIMINATE.

    Obviously you cannot just keep the part that says you cant be denied for preexisting conditions without the mandate.

    Otherwise no one will buy insurance until they get sick.

    Its kind of like saying We like Social Security, but we don't like the tax that funds it.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Sept. 7, 2012 6:23 a.m.

    I tend to think that the fact checkers provide a much clearer and truthful description than either of the candidates.

    You cant pick and choose the "facts" that you like.

    You cant say, "all the fact checkers have a liberal bias" and then cite fact checkers.

  • Utah Girl Vernal, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 1:30 a.m.

    It is my hope that Romney will be elected. It is also my hope that the new presidency and congress will not just abandon all of Obamacare, but rather look at the various parts of it, and create something less unwieldy, and keep the best of it, and eliminate the rest. Not an easy task, for sure, but something that needs to be done.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Sept. 6, 2012 11:19 p.m.

    Yeah. Let's try ten years of war in Iran, and tax breaks for all. See if that isn't a phantom dividend