O'Reilly article

[Turtle]

What is also interesting is I seen a report a year or so ago that was showing people moving to disabilty when their extended unemployment checks were about to run out. Basically a replacement for that check.

And most of that is mental disability, largely for being depressed that their extended unemployment benefits ran out. They were on unemployment for so long that they became non-functional and didn't know how to go about applying for a job. They became chronically depressed to he point of being disabled. That's their story and they're sticking to it.

 

[Dreamer]

And most of that is mental disability, large for being depressed that their extended unemployment benefits ran out. They were on unemployment for so long that they became non-functional and didn't know how to go about applying for a job. They became chronically depressed to he point of being disabled. That's their story and they're sticking to it.

Sad thing is, I know a guy like that..he was unemployed so long he got anxiety attacks about going back to work.... the very thought of interviewing upset him, etc....yep, disability. He had back problems,but they wouldn't give him disability on that...mental stres tho? Yep...


Dale




Sent from my SPH-D700 using EO Forums

 

[layoutshooter]

Sad thing is, I know a guy like that..he was unemployed so long he got anxiety attacks about going back to work.... the very thought of interviewing upset him, etc....yep, disability. He had back problems,but they wouldn't give him disability on that...mental stres tho? Yep...


Dale




Sent from my SPH-D700 using EO Forums

Yeah, and then Vets who have real problems due to combat or their work, have to fight for anything. Great system.

 

[Humble2drive]

To what extent should we shield ourselves from painful truths? To what extent is it justified to shield other people from knowledge we think they might experience as painful? Is ignorance always bliss or is knowledge always to be preferred, even though that knowledge is totally opposite as to what the truth actually is?

You speak as though you hold some truth?

Neither you nor I are the holders of the truth. The difference is that I am willing to seek knowledge from all sides of an issue in order to search for the truth. You believe that you have the truth and seek to prove all other sides to be foolish.

In seeking wisdom thou art wise; in imagining that thou hast attained it - thou art a fool.
Lord Byron

 

[cheri1122]

While you're all congratulating yourselves for figuring out what got O reelected, [or more likely, listening to the wingnuts who claim to have figured it out. The same ones who claimed Romney was winning, uh huh.] how about applying the 'cui bono' [who benefits?] test to a couple of your favorite assertions?

First: you dislike 'big government' & [by extension] regulations: cui bono if government is reduced and regulations curtails and/or weakened?

Unions: cui bono?

Government handouts [to the poor] & entitlements: cui bono?

Answer: in every case, the bono goes to the upper class elites. You are promoting their wishlist: a reduction in government regulations [but they never provide specifics, do they?], less money given to the lower class means less pressure for them to contribute more, no more unions is self explanatory.

You demonize the unemployed, yet voted for the guy whose main accomplishment in business was improving profits [his first] by 'outsourcing jobs', thereby driving unemployment higher. Then he campaigns on 'getting America back to work' - the sheer unmitigated hypocrisy of that is just breathtaking, IMO - he sure as HELL didn't care about it before he became a candidate, now, did he?
Obama is a pragmatist: the answer to unemployment is to get people back to work, and I believe he will make that a priority, [remember his first term, the 'Reinvesting in America' funds that caused all the orange barrels to multiply? Yes, it drove me nuts, too, but it meant people worked, as promised.]
BTW: Obama never loosened the welfare to work rules - he gave governors the flexibility they asked for in administering the particulars in their own states. Isn't that something conservatives wanted, states' rights?

 

[layoutshooter]

No one demonizes the unemployed. Those unemployed who are too lazy to get off their butts and move for work should lose their benefits. Mankind has ALWAYS moved to greener pastures or to were work was, at least those who are worth their weight in salt. My Great grand parents did, my parents did, I did, my brother did. ONLY my little brother, the Obama bum brother did not. He has Obama phones. He is a useless bum. He has NEVER taken responsibility for ANYTHING in his life. He REFUSES to accept the fact that he is 100% the cause of his failure in life.

There is NO ONE who is ENTITLED to monies that they have not EARNED!

There should be NO Federal Welfare system THEN the States WOULD be free to do as they please.

Obama is a Marxist. So is anyone who believes in redistribution of wealth. Marxism is EVIL. Evil must be fought.

 

[cheri1122]

I mean, Cheri you DID bring up the horse deal in your ill-fated and misinformed rant.

for good reason: Romney is, as the politically correct say "tone deaf" - meaning he just can't hear how his comments sound to others. In the quote I mentioned, his response when asked about his wife's horse [competing at the Olympics, where Romney was at the time] sounds a lot like he doesn't care about his wife's achievement, like she'd just entered a pie in the county fair, right? It sounded like "I'm campaigning, and it's all about me!" My point is, that there's no doubt whatsoever that Romney loves his wife, and would not demean her in public, but that's exactly what his answer did, because of his apparently incurable tone deafness.
That's a huge factor to me - one of the POTUS' duties [and a very important one] is conversing and negotiating with his counterparts from all over the world. Many of whom are not just literally foreign, but utterly so: in appearance, dress, customs, language - how would Romney do at that , do you think?
Every time I envision Romney in a delicate conversation with an important head of say, a Middle Eastern country, it always ends in war being declared - on us.
Obama has proven himself capable of diplomacy [we need all the goodwill we can get!] and that's a huge plus in my book.

 

[layoutshooter]

"Obama has proven himself capable of diplomacy [we need all the goodwill we can get!] and that's a huge plus in my book."


Yeah, Obama is good a bowing a scraping before other countries leaders. He is good about apologizing for things he had not right too. And good about backing those who would kill American diplomats and lying about it. What a JERK! As big a liar as Carter was. Carter did get more killed though. Pretty good at the cover up though, must have had lessons from Carter.

 

[Ragman]

No one demonizes the unemployed. . .

You've got to be kidding me! How can you say that?
The unemployed are constantly being demonized by the right!

 

[aristotle]

You've got to be kidding me! How can you say that?
The unemployed are constantly being demonized by the right!

Ragman... what should be done with those who refuse to be employed?

 

[layoutshooter]

You've got to be kidding me! How can you say that?
The unemployed are constantly being demonized by the right!

First off, I know of NO right wing politicians in the US. Both parties are very much left wing here. Second, telling someone to get off their butt and fend for them self is not demonizing, it is doing them a GREAT favor. The more a man does from himself the better he becomes. The more he has done for him the weaker and more demoralized he becomes. In the end, he becomes dependent.

Second, I don't what the right wing taking over here either, if we every do manage to rid ourselves of the evil of Marxism. I want a return to the Constitution. What part of that is too for "right" for you?

 

[cheri1122]

Correction: when I asserted that less money given as handouts to the lower class means less pressure for the upper classes to pay more, I forgot to stress less attention paid to the money given as handouts to themselves.
Misdirection: works for magicians, and con artists too.

 

[Ragman]

Ragman... what should be done with those who refuse to be employed?

Those who refuse - Tht's a diffenent issue.

I'm refering to those that, through no fault of their own, have lost their job and just ask for a helping hand. They have been dragged through the mud, called lazy and other things.

I have always said we are compassionate people and have no problem with society helping.

 

[Ragman]

telling someone to get off their butt and fend for them self . . .

Sometimes a person needs a hand up after falling on their butt, why can't we extend that hand?

 

[layoutshooter]

Sometimes a person needs a hand up after falling on their butt, why can't we extend that hand?

If that hand is extended by CHOICE, otherwise it is not charity it is by definition, redistribution of wealth by force.

What do you do when that person REFUSES to move for work? Still take others hard earned wages and support their unwillingness to fend for themselves? For how long?

We SHOULD be FREE to provide, or not provide charity, of our own free will. Otherwise, we are not free.

 

[muttly]

for good reason: Romney is, as the politically correct say "tone deaf" - meaning he just can't hear how his comments sound to others. In the quote I mentioned, his response when asked about his wife's horse [competing at the Olympics, where Romney was at the time] sounds a lot like he doesn't care about his wife's achievement, like she'd just entered a pie in the county fair, right? It sounded like "I'm campaigning, and it's all about me!" My point is, that there's no doubt whatsoever that Romney loves his wife, and would not demean her in public, but that's exactly what his answer did, because of his apparently incurable tone deafness.
That's a huge factor to me - one of the POTUS' duties [and a very important one] is conversing and negotiating with his counterparts from all over the world. Many of whom are not just literally foreign, but utterly so: in appearance, dress, customs, language - how would Romney do at that , do you think?
Every time I envision Romney in a delicate conversation with an important head of say, a Middle Eastern country, it always ends in war being declared - on us.
Obama has proven himself capable of diplomacy [we need all the goodwill we can get!] and that's a huge plus in my book.

Cheri,you have given at least three replies in this thread pretty much slamming Romney with no more than liberal talking points and opinions that seem like they have been fed to you by the lame stream media. You only mentioned Obama briefly about diplomacy and wanting to do something about unemployment. The unemployment rate is still higher than when he took office almost four years ago. The debt is over 16 billion and climbing. Record food stamp recipients.Minority unemployment is higher. What exactly did he do to earn your vote again?

 

[Pilgrim]

It's just amazing how so many people have been sold on the concept of the "new normals" for America: lower national credit rating, sky-high deficits, over 8% unemployment, socialized medicine, nanny state support for anyone who wants it, public education standards at near moronic levels, deferring to the UN for foreign affairs policy, etc. No president in history with a record this bad has ever been re-elected to a 2d term.The next two years should be very telling. Looking back on a similar situation, the nation would have survived a 2d term of Jimmy Carter but the Reagan election brought us to a level of prosperity totally beyond Carter's level of competence.

 

[muttly]

It's just amazing how so many people have been sold on the concept of the "new normals" for America: lower national credit rating, sky-high deficits, over 8% unemployment, socialized medicine, nanny state support for anyone who wants it, public education standards at near moronic levels, deferring to the UN for foreign affairs policy, etc. No president in history with a record this bad has ever been re-elected to a 2d term.The next two years should be very telling. Looking back on a similar situation, the nation would have survived a 2d term of Jimmy Carter but the Reagan election brought us to a level of prosperity totally beyond Carter's level of competence.

Yep, this is the new normal. I was thinking too that this will be the second term of the Jimmy Carter presidency we didn't get to see in the early 1980's. Now we will see it...on steroids.

 

[cheri1122]

Cheri,you have given at least three replies in this thread pretty much slamming Romney with no more than liberal talking points and opinions that seem like they have been fed to you by the lame stream media.

Liberal talking points? Lame stream media? Excuse me, but I'm not the one speaking in cliches copied from the talk show pundits. I have described why I saw Romney as totally unqualified for the role, both by his experience [making profits, not employment], personality [tone deafness] and style [my way or the highway works for the CEO, but not the POTUS - have you ever watched him handle a heckler, or anyone who disagrees with his policies? He doesn't know how, plain and simple]

You only mentioned Obama briefly about diplomacy and wanting to do something about unemployment. The unemployment rate is still higher than when he took office almost four years ago. The debt is over 16 billion and climbing. Record food stamp recipients.Minority unemployment is higher. What exactly did he do to earn your vote again?

O, did I fail to mention Saddam Hussein & Osama bin Laden? Sorry, thought that went without saying. And GM & Chrysler didn't go down in flames, either.
If Obama had a crystal ball, he'd have tried to get a lot more done before the 2010 congressional elections, when the Tea Party Repubs moved in and began their policy of obstruction, but who saw that coming? Congress is supposed to vote for their constituents, not the GOP, right? Their publicly stated goal was to prevent passage of any and all legislation that Obama wanted. [I can't put my hands on it right now, but a journalist compared the % of bipartisan voting between Bush & Obama on 4 major initiatives for each, and Bush got more than twice as much cooperation from the Dems as Obama got from the GOP.] So it's hard for me to see how we can blame everything on Obama and nothing on the Congress that torpedoed every effort he made, purely on partisan grounds.
I have some reservations about the Prez myself [chiefly with the Patriot Act and feds spying on citizens], but for the most part, I think he did pretty well. Considering what he was left to deal with, and the GOP determination to stop him from doing anything, he did better than many could have, IMO.

 

[RLENT]

Yeah, Obama is good a bowing a scraping before other countries leaders. He is good about apologizing for things he had not right too. And good about backing those who would kill American diplomats and lying about it. What a JERK! As big a liar as Carter was. Carter did get more killed though. Pretty good at the cover up though, must have had lessons from Carter.

I suspect the quality of the "information" (about Obama) you are relying on to make the above statements is probably on par with the "information" you shared with us about how Obama won 108% of the vote in Woods County Ohio ...