Editor Ryan Fitzpatrick email@example.com
Mitt's so riled up about the Affordable Care Act, he might need medical attention.
9:23 am on Sunday, July 1, 2012
Boy we sure know what side the Patch is on. I don't like that!
10:41 am on Sunday, July 1, 2012
It sure is true though--you gotta admit that!
2:04 pm on Sunday, July 1, 2012
Look a little more in the comics and you'll find knocks on Obama too. Don't like that we call it for what it is? That doesn't mean we're on a side. It just means we're doing our job.
3:18 pm on Sunday, July 1, 2012
Mom - you clearly haven't looked into what Willard Romney had done while he was Governor. Which was create the foundation to what is now called ObamaCare. Which just cracks me up. I seriously have no idea why people are against this.
4:34 pm on Sunday, July 1, 2012
Actually, NOT! These cartoons have been leaning more right than left. But that doesn't really matter. They are cartoons.
10:15 am on Sunday, July 1, 2012
Freedom of speech.
This is the USA right?
Only if you are a right winger, it seems.
10:51 am on Sunday, July 1, 2012
Sad but true. Romney is no "small government" guy. He compromises, whether you consider that an asset or a liability.
There is one HUGE difference here. The people of Massachussetts really WANTED Romneycare, and he created plan that his constituents supported. It was popular and had widespread support.
Obamacare was forced on us when the MAJORITY of US voters are against it. Obama wasn't SERVING the people, he was usurping power and control of a great deal of the national income.
There's a really big difference in the two candidates. Romney believes government exists to serve the people, and Obama believes the people exist to serve his government and his dictatorial "executive orders" which exempt his campaign supporters from this heinous "Obamacare" and he burdens the rest of us with its cost and limitations.
There couldn't be a clearer choice next November.
11:16 am on Sunday, July 1, 2012
I agree with most of that , bob--except I would amend your comment to read as follows: " Romney believes government exists to serve rich people and Obama believes government exists to serve everyone".
11:05 pm on Sunday, July 1, 2012
I am curious...what power was usurped?
States rights? That only comes up when it is beneficial, just as federal power is only important when Democrats find that convenient.
Our individual rights? Those were taken away for something a LOT less imnportant than life or death for profit. (Only industrialized nation with a FOR profit industry of health care or health care insurance.) Drive a car much? If you are over, say, 39-40, you should remember a time when AUTO insurance wasn't MANDATED upon individuals. Why? Because the insurance company lobbyists got into the pockets of our elected leaders. Why do you think it became LAW to wear a seatbelt? Because once everybody HAD to have insurance companies found out that all those people that usually were bad drivers too. They also got into an abusrdly high number of head-on collisions. The kind that cost insurance companies the most because of fatalities or heavy bodily harm. SO...back to the pockets of those same officials; Walaaa! Seatbelt law! (NOT to say they don't save lives, or that kids aren't better off in them! Just that those same facts were known for YEARS, and nobody cared until the insurance companies cared...about their bottom-lines.)
The healthcare insurance companies were all FOR this at first; they LOVE the mandate. They got annoyed with the two most popular provisions, kids under parent coverage later in life, and sick people can't be kicked off or turned down. Because singles pay more, and sick people cost more.
12:05 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
Right, elanor, that's why Obama runs on class warfare instead of his dismal and failed records on jobs, border security (or rather lack of it), and providing a fair immigration policy that puts the needs of US citizens behind the wants of corrupt businesses and illegal aliens and drug trafficers.
I think you need to ammend YOUR statement further to, "Romney believes government exists to serve HARD WORKING rich, poor and middle class people and Obama believes government exists to serve everyone....that contributes to his campaign with huge dollars!".
Never has one president cheated so many to profit so few...$23 billion in stock losses to GM and Chrysler...Billions of losses to GM bond holders to prevent bankrupcy and reopening the unconscionable union contracts that caused the problems in the first place....over $24 billion in bad investments in "green technology" that no one ever thought was economically viable, but had many campaign contribution "bundlers" for his campaign cash in a psotion to profit from it up unitl they went bankrupt and leaving the taxpayers the bill for their bad loans.
The list of Obama cheating the many to benefit the RICH few goes on and on, Eleanor.
Tell me, Eleanor, what examples can you give of situations where Romney took tax dollars to unfairly enrich his friends in sleazy deals like Obama has?
Bain capital only invested money voluntarily given from the public. None was forcibly taken from people as is the case with Obama.
3:29 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
Bob, you're right. When GM was saved by Obama only the RICH profited, never mind all those middle class workers whose jobs were saved at GM. And all the restaurant employees and businesses (cashiers, stockers, etc.) that those GM workers patronized, they didn't benefit at all from GM staying in business.
4:14 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
Actually, Wendy, it goes far beyond that. If GM and Chrysler had not been helped, it would have dramtatically increased the price on ALL domestic production, because GM alone is such a large vendee of supplies in the country. The entire supply chain would have gone up in price as the lack of need for more parts would have affected countless companies (not to mention all the ancillary towns, diners, shoe stores, etc across the country that would have gone away wherever THOSE supplying companies would have closed). It is why Ford was for the program, even though they took NO money; they KNEW it would hurt them down the road.They might hope to overtake GM one day, but not at the expense of GM (and Chrysler) going away and leaving a hole that would only get filled by higher prices due to lack of competition. Literally thousands of jobs, if not a million jobs were saved. Was the program run perfectly, or even very well? Probably not. Would it have been worse to let GM and Chrysler go away? Yes.
Remember, this was done AFTER the banks and AIG. Why was AIG bailed out at ALL? Not only did they take TARP money and give it as bonuses, they gave it to the very division that caused the problem, which wasn't even in America (Britain). Why was Hank Paulson allowed to bail out his friends?
Bob, I would only ask you what your definition of hard working people is. You think he worked hard when his dad put him through college? When he bullied gay kids, when he dodged the draft? When?
4:41 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
I agree with your statement "There couldn't be a clearer choice next November." Obama. No one else in the running is humane or fair enough to lead our nation.
1:41 pm on Sunday, July 1, 2012
Eleanor, love it!
6:19 pm on Sunday, July 1, 2012
I support the guy who follows the constitution and works with congress. So I guess that means Obummer is not my guy.
4:44 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
In case you missed it, SCOTUS agreed with Obama. In case you have been sleeping for nearly 4 years, it has been the Republican side of Congress that has been putting up shields that will move our nation forward.
10:49 pm on Sunday, July 1, 2012
Neither side would have been able to work with Congress. They are so thoroughly entrrenched on BOTH sides, in so many ways, it is insane. If we literally started over with 535 new Congresspeople, we would probably only lose about 5% good ones. Everyone complains about them, but the 'recidivism' rate of these criminals is over 90% consistently. We have horrible turn out, and in general we are a very ill-informed electorate. Other countries are voting after walking literally dozens of miles one way under threat of gunfire or other physical violence to get a ink stain on their thumb that won't be off for weeks...we stay home if it drizzles. We are disengaged until all the 'really juicy stuff' comes out and are swayed by negative ads that say nothing about the person who paid for them, but plenty of rumors or lies about the OTHER person.
The Supreme Court is just as bad...Roberts may be trying to retain some dignity ofr it, but it may already be too late. Public opinion is at its worst for SCOTUS in maybe 50 years, because people know they just vote down party lines. (I love when people now call him a politcal hack, that is precious.)
Russ, do you think if McCain had been elected, the Democrats would have worked with him? The Republican majority leadership came out and said that their mission was to get the elected (by a margin greater than BOTH Bush elections combined) president defeated; NOT to work with him, NOT to do the people's business, but to get political revenge.
9:30 am on Monday, July 2, 2012
Well Dave, Obummer is a prime example of saying what he'll do than doing as he chooses. So your point is taken but I'll still take the guy who follows the constitution and will attempt and/or work with congress. That ceratinly is not Obummer.
12:35 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
What has the President done that dosent "follow" the constitution?
12:37 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
“[W]e established incentives for those who were uninsured to buy insurance,” Romney wrote in a 2009 USA Today op-ed. “Using tax penalties, as we did … encourages ‘free riders’ to take responsibility for themselves rather than pass their medical costs on to others.”
- Mitt Romney
“With regards to the individual mandate, the individual responsibility program that I proposed, I was very pleased that the compromise between the two houses includes the personal responsibility mandate,”
12:55 pm on Monday, July 2, 2012
"For those without jobs, the tax compromise extends unemployment benefits for 13 months. A decent and humane society must have a strong safety net for the unemployed." Mitt in 2010 commenting on Obama extending benefits...
"An uninsured libertarian may counter that he may refuse free care, but under law that is impossible and inhumane." (Mitt)
Would you like to receive email updates about this article?
Advertise on Patch and reach potential customers in your backyard and beyond. Click here for more information.
Learn more »
If you want to help local causes, or your cause needs local help, your next click should be right here.
Learn more »
Share with your social networks:
Write your message below.
Homewood-Flossmoor news, events, and deals sent to you daily and breaking news as it happens.
See more options
You’re now signed up!
Enter your tip here and it will be sent straight to
Ryan Fitzpatrick, Guest Editor Bridgette Outten, Ann C. Piasecki, and Jeff Graveline,
Homewood-Flossmoor Patch's (incredibly grateful)