Strictly Street

But at least you got the quote right this time.

No wait, they didn't... They said this country will have NO established religion. http://altreligion.about.com/od/alternativereligionsaz/p/Deism.htm At least get the quote correct. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Congress cannot pass a law to favor one religion over another or to make any religion the "official" religion of the USA. Therefor there is no separation of church and state per se rather an acceptance by the state that in fact there are religions and therefore churches. Seeing as many religions do believe in GOD. It seems that having "In God We Trust" on the money or in the pledge of allegiance does not favor one religion over another. With the interesting concept of the atheist having no religion and demanding that no other belief can be tolerated, doesn't that violate the or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; clause? To say it another way, you can't tell me I have to say it, but you can't tell me I can't say it either.

You were talking about this, right? I get the "Easily inflated by mouth." but about the "Packs to about the size of a water bottle." I'm not sure what you mean by that. Does look suited to outdoor activity alright.

For every story that is pro Obamacare there seems to exist one that is anti Obamacare. The sheer number of both proves to me that nobody still knows all the problems with this law. There are many problems it would seem. Obamacare will dramatically increase health insurance premiums throughout Ohio for young and middle-aged men and women alike, based on the most accurate policy data available from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Obamacare premium estimates are not readily available for all ages, but figures HHS has released indicate that Ohioans in their 20s, 30s, 40s, and 50s in every county should expect to pay steep costs for President Obama's signature legislative achievement. A Media Trackers comparison of Obamacare "Gold" plans from HHS and existing policies with similar deductibles listed at eHealth found that: Obamacare plans for 27-year-old female nonsmokers will cost at least $100 per month -- or $1,200 per year -- more than pre-Obamacare health insurance policies in 72 of Ohio's 88 counties.Obamacare premiums for 27-year-old male nonsmokers will be at least $100 per month more expensive than pre-Obamacare premiums in 85 of 88 counties -- and at least $200 more per month in 15 counties.Compared to pre-Obamacare policies for 50-year-old female nonsmokers, Obamacare plans will cost at least $1,000 more per year in all 88 counties, at least $2,000 more per year in 54 counties, and at least $3,000 more per year in 16 counties.Obamacare premiums for 50-year-old male nonsmokers will cost at least $100 more per month than current policies in all 88 counties, at least $200 more per month in 61 counties, and at least $300 more per month in 14 counties.Statewide annual estimates weighted using county populations from the 2010 Census are shown in the following table. Obamacare Bronze plans are the cheapest policies for individuals over the age of 30, except in cases of financial hardship; Catastrophic plans are available to those 30 and under. Most Bronze and Catastrophic plans have annual deductibles at least three times greater than the policies quoted from eHealth for this analysis. Demographic Ohio % Change, Obamacare Catastrophic/Bronze Plan Ohio $ Change, Obamacare Catastrophic/Bronze Plan Ohio % Change, Obamacare Gold Plan Ohio $ Change, Obamacare Gold Plan Women, Age 27 -2% -$49 84% $1,364 Men, Age 27 37% $421 160% $1,834 Women, Age 50 19% $553 66% $2,017 Men, Age 50 39% $1,001 94% $2,466 Because Obamacare is a redistributive system by design, proponents counter concerns about premiums by pointing to the federal subsidies some Ohioans will receive. A Kaiser Family Foundation study released November 5 estimated that 554,000 Ohioans will qualify for Obamacare subsidies. For those eligible for the law's entitlement benefits, a portion of Obamacare's astronomical premiums will be borne by taxpayers -- many of whom will also be paying higher costs for their own insurance as a result of the Democrats' latest socialized medicine program. While Kaiser estimates 812,000 Ohioans will purchase insurance through the Obamacare exchange, dozens of employers across the state have already announced layoffs or cuts from full- to part-time status in order to avoid Obamacare's employer mandate. Combined with the implosion of President Obama's vow that "if you like your plan, you can keep it," this means more Ohioans than expected may be pushed into Ohio's federally-run Obamacare "marketplace." The following maps demonstrate exactly how severe and far-reaching Obamacare's premium increases will be for Ohioans in a range of demographic groups. Click each map for further Media Trackers analysis. As more facts become available to taxpayers, it may turn out that the technological disaster of the Obamacare exchanges at HealthCare.gov is one of the more successful aspects of the 2010 health law. This story was originally published at Media Trackers.

Talk about out of touch, wow. Did you see this? It didn't feel like any kind of apology to me it felt more like he was blaming me for something. Obama offers fauxpology for 'situation' Using lawyerly care in choosing passive-construction words, President Obama last night apologized for something, but most definitely not for lying to the American people in order to sell his health care plan on false promises and get re-elected. Here are the words he uttered to Chuck Todd, White House correspondent for NBC, friendliest news agency among the progressive media toadies. "I am sorry that they, you know, are finding themselves in this situation based on assurances they got from me." Apologizing that people find themselves in a situation is not the same thing as apologizing for lying. And the situation that people find themselves in (losing their health insurance) is not the result of his assurances, it is the result of the law itself. Only if one connects several dots, realizing that the only reason the law passed and the regulations got written by Kathleen Sebelius is because people believed his lie, does the sentence make any sense at all. By leaving out the part about lying, the president vitiated the apology. President Obama also claimed that administration officials "weren't as clear as we needed to be." This is itself another lie, as Charles Krauthammer aptly observed: "He said, if you have your plan and you like your plan, you will keep your plan, period," Krauthammer, a syndicated columnist and Fox News contributor said. "The punctuation is the key here. No context, no caveats, no exceptions, that's what the word period means. He couldn't have been clearer, and for him to pretend he wasn't is simply appalling." The president came close to admitting that Obamacare is a flawed law, needing revision: Obviously, we didn't do a good enough job in terms of how we crafted the law. And, you know, that's something that I regret. That's something that we're going to do everything we can to get fixed." This would seem to open the door to legislation revising, if not repealing Obamacare. But almost certainly, this president who believes that he can modify and even suspend laws passed by Congress that he is sworn to faithfully execute, would be loath to allow the GOP_dominated House the chance to tinker with what his supporters like to call "settled law." Update: Perhaps the most egregious moment of the interview was when Obama cast himself as the victim, saying "I've been burned by a website." He quickly added that the American people had also been affected, but the reveal was there. He's the victim. You can watch the entire interview with Chuck Todd here. One note on media coverage of the fauxpology: most outlets, including NBC News itself in its online transcript, have cleaned up the president's words, omitting his "errs," and "you knows." But not the Washington Post's Juliet Eilperin and several other outlets. For tea leaf readers, this is evidence that some of the establishment media have gotten fed up with the lies and are no longer as actively covering for Obama. A small point, but something to keep in mind, because the problems with Obamacare are not only not solved, they have only just begun. Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/11/obama_offers_fauxpology_for_situation.html#ixzz2k4Mw8Sm8 Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Capitalists capitalizing on socialist ideals. All in lock step with the idea of the man. What a concept.

Hi boys and girls, can you say Lawsuit?

Nice beer commercial. Sounds like there might be more to this story. Cage driver swerved because? Something is missing here.

Fact checking seems to be the new thing to do. Sounds like a pretty good idea. Clearly we can't trust the talking heads on TV or anybody using talking points. Which may be the same thing come to think of it. Seems like all stories have a side to them. Everything is bent one way or the other. We have a right to a free press, just makes me wonder what the word "free" means these days.

The mainstream media is starting in on the whole thing. Starting to get real numbers not Obamacare talking points. - Interesting times we live in.

By whom? Themselves? And of course the next question, why? Defining a majority by the belief system of a sub set of members sounds more like racism or slander in action. As in "a gang member is white = all whites are gang members". That's some good deductive reasoning there. How about this, to demonize a group by picking the least understood faction of a group and then ascribing to the entire group all manner of of evil for political gain. For historical reference of this principle in action please see WWII - Japanese Internment camps, Jewish death camps etc For current political reference please see the democratic party and their public attacks on any other point of view than their own. For internet reference please ensure that the wiki pages haven't been recently changed with inaccurate information such as blaming the Republicans for the ACA problems. /sarc>

Thank God there wasn't a rider near this woman! How many times have we heard "I didn't see you" on a bike. But this lady takes it to a whole new level when she hit a herd of cows while yaking on her cell phone! http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Woman-Drove-Herd-Cows-Orange-County-Arrest-Police-230530531.html Police arrested a 21-year-old New York woman who allegedly drove into a herd of cows in Orange County, seriously injuring three of them. Authorities say Daisy Cowit, of Wawayanda, was using her cell phone when she plowed her Jeep Liberty into the cows on Mountain Road last Monday. Six of the cows were struck, and two farm workers were nearly hit, police said. Three of the cows had to undergo emergency surgery for their injuries; they survived. Cowit was charged with reckless endangerment, criminal mischief and reckless driving. She also faces charges of driving while using a cell phone and failure to exercise due care, both traffic infractions. It wasn't immediately clear if Cowit had a lawyer

From the same article: Obamacare’s supporters argue that these rate increases aren’t important, because many people will be protected from them by federal subsidies. Those subsidies aren’t free—they’re paid for by taxpayers–and so it is irresponsible for people to argue that subsidies somehow make irrelevant the underlying cost of health insurance. Nonetheless, it’s important to understand the impact of subsidies on Obamacare’s exchanges; later in September, we released a second iteration of the map to do just that. Any comment on the recent revelation that you can only get the subsidies by buying from the higher priced "exchanges". That buying coverage directly from a carrier directly makes you exempt from the subsidies? Yes this is a breaking story but it will also go hand in hand with how they are going to apply the subsidies. It is starting to look like you can only get the subsidies if you buy from the government store. Not taking away from you trying to find a bright spot in all this but the subsidies play a large role in what "is" the cost. A little background, dated but relevant: http://www.sibson.com/publications/perspectives/Volume_21_Issue_1/private-health-insurance-exchange.html Keeping in mind that the Obamacare architect, Ezekial Emanuael has been quoted as saying that the individual market is going away and we are all going to single payer or government run insurance. From that point of view Obamacare is supposed to be a flop so we can move on to more hope and change with the feds taking over 20% of the USA economy. Of course that's just one point of view. not mine but Ezekial Emanuael's

Interesting. Bush era laws being re-issued or finally passed by the now primarily Democratic Senate in the 110th Congress session. Financial reform. A gift to the legal profession providing endless lawsuits and giving the FTC domain over spam complaints. Not saying they are bad laws just that you have made some interesting choices. Or the Bush bashers bots either it would seem. And in fact they have. Because he did not back their "Green" policies he caused disasters by asscoiaction. You have got to be kidding me about the gay thing. There you go again, religion = republican = whatever your personal evil is. I did Google it before I posted this. Couldn't find one credible source to back up your claim. The closest I could get was a campaign worker for Rick Perry who had a church on the side in which she claimed something of the sort. She might have even been a republican but she certainly did not speak as a representative of the GOP party in her church sermon.

Great Blog! Nice pics too!

Ok. I'll bite. What has he done that is good?

What exactly is it that he did that preformed this feat? A little bit more specific if you please. Which one of these did this; American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Re-authorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010. Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, often referred to as "Obamacare" Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010. Are there any market forces at work here that don't need his direct approval. Such as perhaps China buying our debt? Obama didn't do that but it did happen and is happening still. The FED is the central bank for the USA, might they have also had something to do with this all? To be sure Obama did sign laws -and- the economy has changed. But these two things may not be a tightly related as you seem to think. Or maybe they are? So what do you think about it? (I'm guessing the "Don't ask, don't tell repeal act" had little influence on the economy. Obamacare doesn't really count yet as it is still kicking in and the effects are either too new or not well understood at this point. Too much "He said, she said" at this point. As in we are finding out Obama knew 100 million people or 1/3 of the country were getting kicked off their plans when he started. Or are we? The talking heads are still at it) Could grow over the next 40 years, not already spent. It Could turn into teapots circling Jupiter as well as you have so colorfully put conjecture in the past. How much in the last 5 years? How is that Bushes fault? Because he started it or Obama kept at it? Since 2001 it states,. Ok, over the last 12 years 5 of which Obama has been at the helm. So we could say almost half of the cost is his. Not a very convincing study. I get the point but it seems a little contrived. It's almost like Obama isn't accepting any blame for his actions. Or more to the point the authors of this "study" are trying to fix the blame of everything on anybody but Obama. Good Obamabots. Which on the other hand is his tried and true mantra, it's always somebody else's fault, Bush, Tea Party, Damned Republicans, Christian right wingers etc. He does have quite the list of people who's fault it always must be. Good politics I suppose but it does start to sound a little lame after all these years. Go Bucs!

Better check your numbers there. Not even remotely true or even defensible. You must have misquoted something here. Even your article you cite from Rueters doesn't even go that far. "Our debt also matters internationally. My friend, the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, likes to remind us that it took 42 Presidents 224 years to run up only $1 trillion of foreign-held debt." - Barak Obama 2006 Blaming Bush for his troubles is now a knee-jerk reaction from Obama. He does it automatically without thinking about it. So do the Obamabots in the media. It's to the point that I'm sure he will still be doing it on his way out the door in 2016. The media will still be giving him a free pass on it too. And what of the six trillion Obama "invested" in the economy to single handedly bail it out? Would this be the GM bailout in which we the people lost somewhere between 43 billion and 100 billion, depending on who you believe. How about the Banking crisis which nobody knows how much was spent and did the exact opposite of its stated purpose. Perhaps the Housing bubble crash that is/was Fannie May and Freddie Mac which still hasn't changed the rules and is still handing out sub prime loans. The ACA with all its new taxes which is causing everyone such angst at the moment? Of course that will be fixed right after election time so maybe I shouldn't include it in this list. The "Cash for Clunkers" which wiped out the used car market for a bit. That doesn't seem like much of a help to the economy. Record tax revenues or to say it another way, higher taxes on everybody doesn't seem like it was much of a help either. Having NASA promote Muslim values, not much help there either. Using the EPA to shut down entire industries such as the coal fired electricity generation industry. Shutting down the only lead smelter in the USA. Not seeing the value there either. Arming middle eastern rebels with ties to Al Qida and siding with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt didn't seem to help even if he did sell a few guns to them not much of an economic win there. Immigration, adding somewhere between eleven and fifty million new citizens to our economic woes doesn't seem like that great of an idea either. Giving away the USS Forrestal for a penny when in fact it is worth millions at scrap metal prices doesn't seem like a wise move either. The economy still sucks even after he did whatever it is that he did. Obama may go down in history as a lot of things but economic savior isn't one of them. I can't see where Obama has single handedly done anything to cause you to make the claim that he spent six trillion to help rebuild our entire economy with his 6 trillion... But you obviously had something in mind when you said this so what did he borrow six trillion for that helped rebuild our entire economy? Ah, they are including military benefits as well in their total of 4 trillion, fair enough. Still a little shy of six trillion as you stated. Is it fair to call it Bush's war when Obama has kept it going for the last five years? A quibble I admit but it does seem a little misleading I'm thinking that if you asked them they would claim to be "Tea Partiers" not RINO's. Pretty sure no one will admit to such a label. McCain for one sure fits the bill. What of Democrats who are really Marxist Socialist such as Hillary? Wonder what we should call them? Demolists? DTARMS? Transformerists, Socialist in disguise! Interesting, the term RINO was coined by Republicans that felt they were being sold out by their misnamed fellow legislators. I wonder if you can be too much of a socialist for the Democrat party? An interesting question.

The new RINO's (Republican In Name Only) are democrats in disguise. Ah for the good old days, but times were simpler then too.

Not sure where you get your numbers from, 6 trillion Iraqi war? http://nationalpriorities.org/en/cost-of/war-in-iraq/ Obama rebuilt our entire economy with his 6 trillion debt? A quick fact check.

Bloomberg of course!

Sure a bill to stall until after the elections but for only a year. After that...

Let us know how it all works out for you! There is a youtube channel and I think you can get to facebook but without a keyboard it's kinda pointless. Old PC and wireless keyboard and mouse doubles as a DVD player as well if you have the connections on the tv.

It was passed so we could find out what was in it, now we are. Turns out it's not cheaper unless you do some strange math tricks. Paycheck to paycheck math for the average bear, it's going to be painful for a lot of people Never did get the concept that applying an additional double digit tax on people was going to help the economy either. I'm not confident this isn't going to get worse as it goes in spite of the glowing comments of the administration saying how successful it is. Still wondering why your records will be viewed by law enforcement along with other unnamed agencies. Mandatory DNA database? The exchanges are signing up people for Medicare at record rates but those buying the new policies, not so much. With the fines being less than the price of a policy for the next few years I wonder how many are just going to pass on the whole thing and pay the fine. Of course as written there is no enforceable way to collect the fines, yet. I'm certain that will change as well. But don't loose heart! They are starting to float the idea of a single payer system. And won't that be nice. And of course everything is going on hold till after the November elections. I'd cite sources for all the above comments but I'm too depressed.