Cleo's Mom

Wishin 4 - It sure sounds like we have very similar experiences. I am glad we both found experienced doctors and are receiving good care now. I read so many posts of people who have surgeons similar to our former ones and I always encourage them to get a second opinion. That's what I did and that's how I found out what band I had - my original surgeon said I had an AP 10 (which is 10cc) when I really had a 4cc one. Many red flags with him and I knew I had to leave to get better care. Good luck to you.

I, too, had a 4cc band put in in Sept. 2008. The two general surgeons in the practice took over the practice of a retiring bariatric surgeon. It is my theory that he used up old inventory before buying new. There is an expiration date with these bands (guaranteed sterile) and mine was June 2009. So, I agree that using the old band was a monetary and not medical decision. This surgeon was inexperienced and being a general surgeon did not just do bariatric surgery. It quickly became apparent to me that he didn't know a lot about follow up care or how the band works. He overfilled me and then blamed me for the resulting problems. In April of this year, I switched to an experienced doctor who just does bariatric surgery and it's the best decision I've made so far.

You should get the H1N1 vaccine. Ask for the preservative free (mercury free) single dose. It is made just like the regular seasonal flu vaccine. No different. It contains DEAD virus which will stimulate your immune system so that if it sees the H1N1 virus it will be ready to fight it off. The risk of not getting the vaccine is much greater. Pregnant women have died from this flu. Plus, today I read that obese people have a 5X greater chance of having severe complications if they get the H1N1 flu. 20% of those admitted to the hospital for this flu are morbidly obese even though they only make up 5% of the population. When you're pregnant your immune system is compromised. It makes you less able to fight off an infection. And you put your baby at risk if you get this flu. Read my link in my other post below. And congratulations on your pregnancy. Good luck.

My daughter is 12 weeks pregnant and got the seasonal flu shot a couple of weeks ago (mercury free) and got the H1N1 (also mercury free) today. Her ob/gyn recommended both. They are dead viruses and cannot cause harm. But getting the H1N1 flu has resulted in the deaths of pregnant women and young children. I am glad she got the shots and didn't play russian roulette with her and her baby's health. For more info read: Flu Vaccine Safe Throughout Pregnancy

Did you get any of the quoted costs and what you were told about one doctor in writing? That's important, but even if you didn't you need to do the following: 1) contact the doctor's office and talk to those responsible for submitting bills and see if you can get any information. Go in person if you need to and refuse to leave until you get what you want. 2) Ask for copies of everything - all pre-op test results, the operative report, the make, model and serial number of your band. 3) Ask for a complete break down of all the costs associated with your bill. 4) Call your insurance company and ask for everything that was sent to them by your doctor's office before and after the surgery, including all charges. 5) If you have no success there, then start a complaint with the hospital. Call their patient advocate service. If no success, contact the hospital administrator. 6) And finally - get an attorney. Don't say you can't afford one. You can't afford not to get one if you are being charged $100,000 when you were told $8000. If you are willing to do the above (and more) then you might be able to be helped, if not, then there's not much you can do but pay it or file for bankruptcy.

My grocery store has whole rotissiere chickens for $4.99. I buy one every week and use it in various ways (all with the skin removed). One of the ways is to chop and mix the chicken with fat free gravy - so it's probably similar to what you're eating. Yes, it is good - and moist. And low in fat. Enjoy!!

My suggestion would be to get the serial number of the band you had put in and contact the company about this. You can get the serial number by contacting the hospital records department. If you do get it replaced, make sure to tell your doctor that you want the old one. After all, you paid for it. Make sure you are in contact with the company that made your band. But I don't think the band has a warranty. But it never hurts to make sure. If I were you, I wouldn't want to pay for a new band if you are self pay. If your insurance covers it, maybe they can intervene with the makers of the band on your behalf. Good luck.

I am sure your doctor prescribed synthroid because you needed it. It would be irresponsible for a doctor to prescribe it otherwise. Synthroid can increase your appetite. But it also can increase your metabolism. I have been on synthroid for almost 28 years. Initially I gained 14 pounds. Because my appetite increased. But I have been able to lose 75 pounds in the last 3-4 years. If you need synthroid and don't take it, you could die. It is that important. Talk to your doctor about this. You might need to adjust your diet, reduce your calories or increase exercise. Good luck.

When I get UTI's - and I have had two for sure and maybe one other one since banding a year ago - the only thing that works is Levaquin (not the generic cipro). It knocks it right out. And I take cranberry pills, too.

I was banded in Sept. 08. First fill Nov. 08. Second fill - January 09. After the second fill (total of 3cc in a 10cc band) all my problems started. I developed reflux at night - not necessarily heartburn - but liquid coming up. I quit eating at least 2 hours before bed. Didn't matter. My surgeon ordered an endoscopy. I had it yesterday. The first thing the gastro doctor said afterward was that he thought my band slipped upward. And I said how could that be resolved and he said my surgeon would have to reposition it. Then he said my surgeon might have deliberately placed it high if he wanted me to lose more weight (my BMI was under 35 before surgery). Anyway, he said it was higher than in most he had seen and I also have a hiatal hernia. He said the pouch is high, small and tight and there is no place for the food or liquid to go but up. So I got the whole sheet on hiatal hernia care - elevate the bed, no alcohol, no chocolate, blah, blah, blah. My husband suffered from GERD, hiatal hernia and eventually barrett's esophagus than turned into esophageal cancer. He died of it 3 years ago. So I could write the book on treatment of all these conditions. The lap band was supposed to reduce my hunger. It hasn't. It was supposed to make me feel satisfied with a smaller amount of food. It hasn't. I have changed the way I eat - I eat my Protein, then a little later a veggie, then later a fruit. My eating is spaced out over the day. Same foods, same calories - and it seems to help some with the discomfort that was happening when I ate. But the reflux remained. I have a LOT to discuss with my surgeon. I want my last fill removed for starters. So, since I got the band I have developed a hiatal hernia and reflux (I didn't have them before). Anyone else have this problem and if so, how did you and/or your doctor solve it? Thank you. P.S. My gastro doctor and surgeon work out of the same hospital and refer patients to each other and I doubt he will write anything in his report to second guess my surgeon. You know how that is.

ElfiePoo - I had my band placed in Sept. 2008. I have lost 15 pounds with it. But I have lost a total of 75 lbs from my highest weight. I started dieting on my own in January 2006 and lost 20 lbs. Then I went on the 6 month pre-op diet and lost another 20 lbs. Then I lost 10 pounds on the 2 week liquid pre-op diet and another 10 lbs. on the 2 week post op diet and 15 pounds in the last year, essentially, from the band. I have a 4cc band and had two fills taking me to 3cc's. This was too much and 1cc had to be removed because I developed a lot of problems - reflux, heartburn and pain. So, I have 2cc's in a 4cc band. During this almost 4 years of dieting, I have been hungry almost all the time. I get by on willpower. It is not head hunger, either. That is a term used by doctors who don't want to deal with the hunger that many of us feel. It's a blame the victim mentality. It's either head hunger or thirst. Well, let me tell you something - I am 58 years old, I have been on many diets and I know the difference between hunger, head hunger, thirst and satiety. The band does not work the way it is promoted as working for everyone. Some people reach their sweet spot, feel full after small amounts of healthy foods and lose weight consistently. Some slowly but they lose. This doesn't happen for everyone. I am one such person. I have been stuck at this weight since last spring. I exercise EVERY DAY - 4.8 hours a week. I shook things up by adding low impact aerobics and weight machines to my treadmill. Everything I eat is low fat, low calorie, calorie free, fat free, etc.. My calories are under 1300/day. I follow the lapband diet, I eat with a shrimp fork, baby spoon and off a small dish. I keep a food journal. I don't eat slider foods or fried foods or sweets, etc.. Now, if you look at those websites that calculate how many calories you should eat to lose weight - mine say about 1800 calories a day to lose a pound a week. That isn't happening. My doctor is happy with my weight loss but I know I am going to be stuck at this weight unless I eat less. And I don't want to eat less because it's a struggle each day with the hunger. I don't think a fill is the answer because when I was too tight, I was still hungry. The small amount of food I was able to eat did not satisfy me. So here is what I am saying: You can end up with a band that is tight enought that you aren't physically able to eat much food but it does not satisfy your hunger. To me that is the worst of both worlds. You have all the problems that might come with restriction without the benefit of being less hungry and feeling satisfied. I am happy that for many (most?) people the band works as it should. But you don't know if it will work for you that way even if you follow all the rules.

I left my doctor and found a new one because we were butting heads at visits. He was inexperienced - being a general surgeon who had only done 22 bandings before me. It became obvious that he lacked the knowledge about how the band works when he wanted me to lose 10-15 pounds in 3 weeks after my first post op visit (I had already lost 10lbs after surgery) and BEFORE my first fill. That isn't a realistic goal. When I didn't lose any weight (I went from liquids to mushies to soft foods during this time) he gave me the come to Jesus talk, and the band is a tool, blah, blah, blah. Then he overfilled me and blamed me for the resulting problems until he saw the results of the upper GI. He then unfilled me. I switched to an experienced bariatric surgeon who was thrilled in my weight loss to date and has been nothing but encouraging. What a difference. You deserve good follow up care with someone who understands the band. Many of these surgeons take weight loss and gain as their personal victory or failure. Sounds like your surgeon doesn't understand the band and you are going to have a difficult relationship with him and dread going to your appointments. Get a second opinion and change doctors. I did and have never looked back. Best decision I ever made. Good luck.

This video is a must see. I love Alan Grayson. His speech to Congress starts about 2 minutes into the video after a set up by Steve O'Donnell. He really tells it like it is!! Grayson blasts GOP and the bipartisan fetish in brilliant floor speech - Daily Kos TV (beta)

Infidelity rare in heterosexual marriages? Are you kidding me? Even your conservative estimate puts it at 1 out of every 4 men and it is a well known fact that people understate their infidelity. Being in a heterosexual relationship or marriage is one of the most violent place for a woman to be. So far from the June & Ward Cleaver image of the 50's - marriage can be a very violent place, especially for women. Nearly 50% of marriages end in divorce. It's not like the heterosexuals do a good job with long term committment. Why do the gay men and women want marriage? For the same reason straight men and women do. And it's not for the sex, because they are already having that outside of marriage. They want the legal power and benefits conferred on married couples. And the status society gives to married people. But to say they want to get married for the sex? That is laughable.

Tort reform only represents about 0.5% of health care costs. And of course the neo conservatives & republicans who don't want healthcare reform only want to discuss this and not the other 95.5% of healthcare costs. It's a red herring, a distraction and a deflection from the real issues. The healthcare insurance lobbyists spend $1.4 MILLION A DAY !!! to lobby against healthcare reform. They have spent over $586 million since 2007. Just think how many people could get healthcare with that money - people who were denied treatment. Compare that to trial lawyer lobbyist who in 2008 spent $7671/day to lobby democrats. A drop in the bucket compared to the health insurance industry and their clout. Trial lawyers do not take malpractice suits unless they think they have a good case. They don't want to waste their time and money on a weak case. Many cases are settled (for the plaintiff) prior to trial. Most that go to trial are found for the defendant because jurors like their doctors and don't want to believe they did anything wrong. If that is the case, then we don't need tort reform because if the doctors win most of the time then no big awards are being paid out. And I don't want a cap on awards when they are paid because some of the medical errors are so egregious that it will take millions and a lifetime of care for that person. And in many states, when the award exceeds $1 million the attorneys can only receive 10% of the award. In most cases under this amount, the attorney receives between 33% and 40%. And as far as ordering preventative tests - well, we do preventative maintenance with our cars and homes, so preventative care and tests is something that can and should be practiced as part of healthcare, when appropriate.

If people initially supported the Iraqi war it was for two reasons: 1) they were lied to about WMD - mushroom clouds, chemical warfare. We were in imminent danger, etc.. All false 2) they were told that to oppose the war would make them unpatriotic and siding with the terrorists The legitimacy of this war quickly unraveled and yet 6 years later we are still there costing us taxpayers billions of dollars we didn't have and borrowed from China. Not to mention the most important cost: 4000+ lives. Maintaining national parks is in our collective interest. It helps preserve some very pristine land that otherwise would be sold to the highest bidder and raped for profit. I am happy to have my federal tax dollars going for this. Yes, I believe the CBO because they have the numbers and facts. The healthcare bill would help rein in the skyrocketing costs of healtcare premiums and that would help people's pocketbooks and they would have more money to spend. If we don't rein in the healthcare premiums, then our economy won't be able to sustain it much longer. A government run healthcare option would be non-profit (as opposed to the obscene profits of private healthcare) with much lower administrative costs (no CEO's making $57,000/hour) and this competition would make private insurance clean up their act and LOWER costs for everyone. Private colleges have to compete with publically funded colleges and they do just fine. God doesn't enter into our society's definition of marriage. Just by your saying it doesn't make it so. If someone gets a marriage license and gets married by a judge, they are considered married. No religious ceremony is needed. And all the legal rights of marriage are afforded to them. And I believe that these legal rights should be extended to gays. Those who oppose gay marriage also oppose sex outside of marriage but yet you deny marriage to the gays who want to be married and remain in a monogamous relationship with all the benefits of marriage - legal and otherwise. The states that allow gay marriages actually have a lower divorce rate. So it doesn't have any negative effect on heterosexual marriages.

VERY well said, BJean. And these are the points I wanted to make but you said them so much better. Especially the point that we're talking about politics and religion - not God and the bible. I have the facts on my side and the other side only has hypocrisy. On every front - political and moral. Just today I read that the republicans oppose stricter regulations on banks and voted against a law to make it a crime to attack/kill someone based on their sexual orientation. Now, on a high note: Congratulations to President Barack Obama on receiving the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize. What a great honor and reflective of the world view that our country is finally being led by someone with brains and an understanding of the world around him. I'm sure all those who mocked Pres. Obama for being unable to bring the Olympics to America (and cheered because of it) will find something to criticize him for for receiving this prestigious award. Had they found out he was in contention and lost - well, that would have added fuel to their Obama hating fire.

Originally Posted by Cleo's Mom Paying taxes is the price we pay for living in a civilzed society. This is true, but there must be a limit to it. I am not opposed to paying taxes, but when things that are not essential are proposed, and especially during a recession, and they are borrowing money from other countries to meet the desires they have, this is wrong.Like bush borrowing from China to pay for the unjustified Iraqi war? I mean I think paying for highways and clean water is more important than paying for an unnecessary war. Why should our taxes pay for things like a park in some state or a study on how flies fart? Each individual state needs to take care of their own desires and if they can't afford it, the rest of the nation shouldn't have to supply it for them.States are not able to sustain all the things that are needed - like huge national parks. Or all the highways and clean water, and the list goes on..We need those things that our federal tax money can help provide. National government should not be funding such crap and especially when they are in big time DEBT!!!! Most, if not all, of the federally funded programs that were developed in the past are bankrupt. What makes you think a health care plan that the gov. wants to pass will not be the same? The CBO came out and said that the healthcare plan will REDUCE the deficit over the next 10 years but I forgot - you only believe them when they give the news that supports YOUR opinions. Is it their excellent record of success with other programs that convinces you? I guess I would rather look at the "success" (read: failure) of corporate america (wall street) whose greed got us in this economic mess to begin with. Or is it because Obama says so? People pay taxes according to their means and the money is distributed according to need. Do you think Obama invented this? The conservatives with the big tax cuts to the rich under Reagan and Bush took from the middle class and gave to the rich. Of course the only people who support this are the rich. Like I said, the haves. And that was stealing, BTW!!! It doesn't matter to me who is doing the stealing, or when the stealing was done. Like I said, the government is doing it and it is a crime.So you agree it was a crime to take from the middle class and give to the rich - because it was and the middle classes buying power went downhill which of course affected the economy and so on... Some taxes are to be expected, but now they have crossed the line. Mostly because they are not only making the US slaves to those we are in debt to, but our future children and grandchildren will be paying for it. It was once billions we owed, now it is TRILLIONS. It is unsustainable! Do you not watch the news or read the paper? Have you not seen the moral decline within the republican party among it's elected members? Their straight and gay affairs? They vote against gay marriage, they vote against women's rights, they vote against a woman's right to choose and then they go out and commit immoral acts. EVERY man is a sinner. But it is the one who recognizes it that God has mercy upon.When you say recognize - you mean the ones who got caught? All of mankind will NOT be able to make it through a day without doing wrong. Everyone knows this, and the Christian knows it better than anyone else. It does not excuse anyone from their moral duty to teach righteousness or to vote what is right. I liken it to a parent who tells their child not to curse, yet goes out and curses occasionally. They still stand by their decision that cursing is wrong, yet fail at keeping their own cursing at bay. We all do it. So, it's okay to vote against gays while you're fooling around with young pages, or to talk about the sanctity of marriage while carrying on an affair. They pontificate about family values and vote against increasing the minumum wage or child tax credits for daycare. Or against maternity care in healthcare. These things ARE family values. They vote against it because if the liberal had their way, the government would pay for everything! The government doesn't pay the minimum wage - they just want it to be fair. There must be a balance, and we crossed that line miles and miles back. WE ARE IN DEBT!!!!!!! What don't you get about that? Is there anything that you don't want the government to pay for? Yes, vouchers for private schools, unnecessary wars, abstinence only education, corporate welfare, tax cuts for the rich.. I'm curious, is there? Maybe if the government would allow the people to put their priorities in place, they would. But whose going to refuse a government handout?We provide a safety net for our citizens. That's what separates us from third world countries. Not too many people will. I know a person who works and gets daycare for free from the government. This person could afford to pay for her daycare, but why should she? The government says she is within the income guidelines. She parties all the time and sees more movies at the theater each week than I do. She spends more money on clothes than anyone I know. This is just one person, but you get the picture.Unless she told you personally I don't know how you would know how much she spends on clothes and movies. But this offends you and the fact that our health insurance premiums help to pay the CEO $57,000 AN HOUR doesn't??? Or in my previous post where I listed how our tax dollars were misused by defense contractors - WAY more money than this woman would ever see in 1000 lifetimes. The bible teaches that you need to work for your living. You say you don't want government getting bigger and intruding on our lives. You call universal healthcare a big government take over. But apparently you don't mind the big government being in a woman's uterus or in people's bedrooms or in their doctor's office. That's okay. So you make allowances for big government when it suits your purpose. Yes, I expect the government to protect the lives of ALL people, including the defensless unborn children that can't protect themselves! You talk about how you want people to take care of themselves, make their own decisions, fend for themselves and take care of their own communities but in the case of women taking care of their own bodies - well here's where you want the power of the big government to step in - in one of the most intimate and personal ways...No, I don't want the government in anyones bedroom. People can do what they choose with their own bodies, God will deal with them about that.... And, yes, I want the government to protect the God ordained institution of Marriage. God made the institution of marriage to be between a man and a woman who say their vows before Him, and I don't want any one group of people who feel it is okay to have sex with the same sex to desecrate what he set up as right and good. For it's NOT! Now, if they want to do that sinful deed, they certainly have their own free will to do so, but they should not expect this nation to condone it. Just as we should not condone any actions that God deems sinful. Marriage is a civil contract, not religious. Our government considers people married not because of a religious ceremony but because of a civil union with a marriage license performed by a judge, etc..Saying vows before God is not necessary to be considered a marriage by state or federal government. People will have to judge for themselves what they consider moral and immoral. They have freedom of choice. And a free will. True. Unbelievers in God will have to decide what they feel is moral or immoral, and believers in God have his word to tell them what is moral or immoral. The bible says that in the end times people will turn away from God and everything that God has deemed 'right' will be seen as wrong and everything that God deems 'wrong' will be seen as right in their eyes. There was a time when homosexuality would not even be 'talked' about for it was seen as such an abomination unto God, and rightly so. Today it is paraded in the streets. You see this as intolerance, I see this as obedience to God's word. I will always believe what God says about homosexuality and the practice of it. He does not change. I do not hate homosexual people. I hate what they do. It hurts God whenever anyone does what he calls sinful. I don't believe that gays choose their sexual orientation anymore than heterosexuals choose their orientation. Therefore, I think they should have the same marriage rights (legal) as any other couple. The religious right can tell its followers what to believe but when they try to inject their religion into government and say it is the one and only way - I have a problem with that. I think I have made very compelling and supportive arguments with examples in my last several posts. And I stand by them.

Paying taxes is the price we pay for living in a civilzed society. People pay taxes according to their means and the money is distributed according to need. Do you think Obama invented this? The conservatives with the big tax cuts to the rich under Reagan and Bush took from the middle class and gave to the rich. Of course the only people who support this are the rich. Like I said, the haves. And that was stealing, BTW!!! Do you not watch the news or read the paper? Have you not seen the moral decline within the republican party among it's elected members? Their straight and gay affairs? They vote against gay marriage, they vote against women's rights, they vote against a woman's right to choose and then they go out and commit immoral acts. They pontificate about family values and vote against increasing the minumum wage or child tax credits for daycare. Or against maternity care in healthcare. These things ARE family values. You say you don't want government getting bigger and intruding on our lives. You call universal healthcare a big government take over. But apparently you don't mind the big government being in a woman's uterus or in people's bedrooms or in their doctor's office. That's okay. So you make allowances for big government when it suits your purpose. People will have to judge for themselves what they consider moral and immoral. They have freedom of choice. And a free will. The religious right can tell its followers what to believe but when they try to inject their religion into government and say it is the one and only way - I have a problem with that.

No liberal talk show host encouraged protesters to arm themselves when they went to rallies. No liberal preacher preached from the pulpit that he wanted Bush to die. I am talking about those in the mainstream media - who have an audience - who get paid to say what they say. Now, as far as what God would want. Well, I think he would want us to help our fellow man. And the democratic party is the party of the comman man. The democrats have always helped the least among us. That is in the bible. The democratic party is responsible for (among other things) -the 40 hour work week -mandatory overtime -child labor laws -workplace safety laws -black lung benefits -laws for food and water safety -social security, medicare and medicaid -aid to families with dependent children -disability laws -special education laws -the family medical leave -the Lilly Ledbetter Act The democrats supported workers right to unionize and unions are what created the vast middle class in this country that has supported this country for the last 60 -70 years. Do you ever watch shows about what life was like when there wasn't any middle class? There was the big mansion on the hill. That belonged to the factory owner. He was a republican. Then below were company owned homes where the workers lived or they lived in shacks. Their working conditions were deplorable, unsafe and many died in work related accidents or later from things like black lung. If they lived in a company house, they had to shop in the company store. You know that song? "And I owe my soul to the company store?" That was life before the unions. The democratic party supports labor and unions because without them there isn't a level playing field. CEO's get to negotiate their contracts - why shouldn't the workers? The democratic party is the party of family values because they don't just talk the talk like the republicans do but they help to pass bills that actually help families. And do you really want to claim that republicans are more moral than democrats? Do you really want the laundry list of the immoral acts the MANY, MANY republican hypocrites have been involved in? I will be happy to provide them if necessary. My view of republicans is this. There are the 3 R's of republicanism: rich, racist and redneck. Now the rich are the haves and they make it their life's work to make sure that others don't get what they have (eg. healthcare) and the racists and rednecks just hate all people of color, gays, women's rights and anyone who isn't a white male. They support the money, wall street, the big corporations and reject any attempts to regulate any of this. Here are some examples: George Allen- republican - calling a person of color - Macacaw Bob McDonnell - republican (running for VA governor)- saying working women are detrimental to the family and opposes contraception for unmarried people. Sen John Kyl (R-Ariz.) - questioned why maternity care was in the healthcare bill because he said "I don't need it" The National Republican Congressional Committee - said this about Nancy Pelosi (after she said Gen McCrystal should view his opinions through the chain of command): "The taxpayers should hope that Gen. McCrystal puts Nancy Pelosi in her place." ARE YOU EFFING KIDDING ME?? IN HER PLACE? Languge used is very telling. This is a put down to women - where exactly is their place? - barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen? Sec'y Gates and Joint Chief of Staff Jones said the same thing about McCrystal but did the NRCC say anything about them? No, because they're men. And your language about "knocking Obama down a peg or two" is also telling. Like I said before - it's a slightly more cleaned up version of uppity. Since Ronald Reagan and especially since Bush - the republican party has gone much farther to the right and has become increasingly mean-spirited. That is why so many people (before the 2008 election) who were independent or republican switched to the democratic party.

100 pregnant women have been hospitalized with the swine flu and 28 have died. That is unheard of with past flu outbreaks. My daughter will be getting the swine flu shot. It is the dead virus and works just like the seasonal flu shot. The dangers of not getting it are far riskier. Plus the mother will pass her immunity onto her baby who cannot be given the flu shot until age 6 months. But pregnant women should NOT get the nasal spray version of the vaccine. Wait for the shot and make sure it is mercury (preservative) free.

These radical right wing extremists are like terrorists in that they help to incite violence with their constant hate talk. Someone who is already mentally unstable doesn't need much provocation to be pushed over the edge by this kind of rhetoric. The young guy who shot and killed 3 police officers in Pittsburgh in cold blood when they came to answer a domestic disturbance call thought Obama was going to take his guns away. He was armed to the teeth with assault rifles and a bullet proof vest (both illegal) and was lying in wait to execute those officers. Now, where do you think he got the idea that Obama was going to take away his guns? However, it appears that those who follow such hate radio and websites have had their 15 minutes of fame and their tantrums have wained. Obama's overall approval rating is going up, those who support healthcare is going up, those who think Obama is doing a good job on healthcare now exceeds those who think he isn't. And just recently more level headed republicans - like Swartzenagger and Dole have come out in support of healthcare reform and have asked their fellow republicans to cooperate with this.

He didn't do anything that leaders of other countries in contention for the Olympics didn't do. They went to Copenhagen to plug their country. President Obama did the same to champion our country. I am proud that he did this. I am pro-America and wanted the Olympics here. So what country did you root for to get the Olympics? Brazil? None. It would only be fair if it was in some other country, for we've had it here plenty. If it wasn't their hatred of Obama, then what motivated the republicans, tea baggers, the glen becks and rush limbaughs to Celebrate when America lost the Olympic bid? I'll tell you what - because they want Obama to fail - they don't care about America or helping to solve the problems in this country. THEY JUST WANT OBAMA TO FAIL. Limbaugh even said it. What pathetic excuses for people they are. Shame on those who cheered when Chicago wasn't selected. How anti-American that was. It had noting to do with being American or not. Obama showed that he is out for himslf when he chose to campaign for his hometown of Chicago. If I were him, I would have avoided Chicago as the site for the Olympics like a plague, just for that reason. But no. Again, prove that Obama personally picked Chicago or SHUT UP ABOUT IT. And out for himself? What would having the Olympics in Chicago do for him? He's the most powerful leader of the world, has a beautiful wife, 2 beautiful children, the respect of world leaders and still remains popular. His approval ratings are on the increase. More people now approve of his handling of healthcare than disapprove. So, I'm laughing about "Obama being out for himself" about Chicago. He's doing just fine. The Nation Brand Index (NBI) which measures global standing in the world shows that in the most recent poll the United States is now number one (#1) as the country most admired - up from number 7. It is attributed to President Obama. So again, he is doing just fine - he hardly needs Chicago. It had nothing to do with anything but a hatred of Obama. Of course it did. That's what most liberals use as their excuse for his absurdities. "Everybody hates him, that's why." We finally have someone with brains in the White House and you call HIM absurd. That just goes to show how out of touch you are. Zero credibility. rush limbaugh had two speeches prepared for the day after Rio was selected - one for if Chicago was selected and one for if it wasn't. Both portrayed Pres. Obama in a bad light. And shame on glenn beck for being giddy for Chicago losing. Obama needed to be knocked down a peg. You can't get by in the world on being an eloquent speaker alone. He needed to see that he's not God. Knocked down a peg??? Well, your true colors are showing. That's maybe a slightly more cleaned up version of calling him "UPPITY". Far from seeing himself as God, Obama has shown a great deal of humility. That's something bush never showed. He couldn't even answer the question about if he had ever made a mistake while in office. As for SNL - it's a comedy show. It is a non- discriminatory basher of everyone. It makes fun of anyone about anything. Don't put too much stock into it. I can recall the SNL crew's statements when Obama was elected. They were upset that a "wonderful" president like Obama wouldn't give them anything to mock, and that because of their liberal stance, had too much respect for him to poke fun at his mess ups. They have changed their tune, for they now see the light. Did you enjoy it for the 8 years it bashed bush? I don't watch SNL. For someone who doesn't watch it, you seem to have total recall of their past and present shows. Pres. Obama inherited a HUGE mess from bush who didn't deal well, or at all, with many of our problems. I can't tell you how many times I have heard Obama himself repeat over and over how he "inherited" the problems he is facing, as if he hasn't exasberated them at all. He may have inherited debt from the past, but he has multiplied it 20X over. So give it a rest with that phrase, huh? No chance. Because it's true and the truth hurts. And Obama is helping clean up the mess. It's painful and costly, yes, but to do nothing would have been a bigger disaster. What's he gonna say when he hands the mess he has created over to the next guy? Here's a little tidbit about his mess: He's already said that if he is a one term president because he took on the tough problems, then so be it. Quite refreshing from bush's/rove's tactics which involved lies to get reelected. Obama cares about the country more than getting re-elected. [Time is money, right? If you make one dollar every second, you will have a million dollars in twelve days. You will be a billionaire in 32 years, but it will take you more than 31,000 years to make a trillion dollars.]

I thought I did prove that Obama didn't select Chicago as the city for the Olympics with my quote by bush in Jan. 2008 (22 months ago) but here is another one: On April 14, 2007, Chicago was selected by the United States Olympic Committee (USOC) as the United States Bid city, and on June 4, 2008, the IOC named Chicago as one of four finalists to host the 2016 Olympic games. Now, YOU prove that Obama made the selection of Chicago!!!!!!!!!!

Let me preface this by saying that if ACORN were not a largely black organization helping poor people (who usually vote for Democrats) get registered and receive information about housing, employment, etc.. we wouldn't even be having this discussion. But if that loud noise we hear (which is Glen Beck patting himself on the back about ACORN) has subsided - then let us look at the following from Sen. Bernie Sanders who wants to apply the ACORN standard to federal defense contractors. Lockeed Martin , Boeing and Northrop Grumman (the top 3 federal defense contractors) all have a history of fraud and other illegal behavior. Combined these companies have engaged in 109 instances of misconduct just since 1995 and have PAID FEES AND SETTLEMENTS FOR THIS MISCONDUCT TOTALING $2.9 BILLION. Their reward for this? In 2007 their received $77 billion in government contracts. (No one said we should deny them federal funding did they? - maybe we should get the teabaggers on that one. ROFLMAO) By contrast, ACORN received a mere $53 million since 1995 and they were tripping over each other to cut off their funding. Let's apply that standard to ALL contractors - including and especially the defense contractors - but it appears we reward them rather than punishing them. Where are the Glen Becks on THIS issue? Why haven't we heard them ranting and raving about Lockheed? Makes you wanna go hmmmm. Now with regard to your term "welfare" - that actually is The Aid to Families with Dependent children and it amounts to about 10% of our federal budget. And I don't begrudge helping our poor children. It says a lot about what kind of country we are that we do. Without this safety net - well we would be just another 3rd world country - you've seen the picture of their hungry children. As for Medicaid - most of that is used for nursing home care for the poor or those who can't pay (who can pay $6000+/month). What do you want to do with these people? Social Security is not part of the federal budget. You are lumping all the mandatory spending on entitlements together and calling it welfare. That's because welfare has an inflammatory connotation. And it is a misnomer. Stop using it.