Obama ...........delusional? or just outright deceitful

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BanginJimmy

Dont mean to be personal Tracy, and I know it's a harsh mindset, but as long as deviant behavior is rewarded, it will continue.

---

Don't worry about the personal stuff. I put it out there because I don't mind and I have nothing to hide.

I'm with ya and I agree. Thus why he has been completely out of my life for 6 years. I don't even let my parents talk to me about him. I don't feel sorry for him when they cry to me about how hard his life was....as they forget that I had the same exact life. They give him money while he is in jail making it to where they can't help me pay for my college. Ironic?

Like I said, he is able bodied, handsome and has his wits. He is lazy and pitiful and it sucks because I have part of some pretty amazing things that I would have loved to share with my little brother. I am just not willing to "reward" him, as you put it. I was PISSED when I found out he gets food stamps.

All goes back to my example. Sure he is poor, but he NOT less fortunate. He had the opportunity at 18 to change his life. Instead he chose to use his past as an excuse to get high and be a bum for the following 12 years....all while mooching off the gov't.

P.S. Maybe Tony can give him some charity since he is so willing. Maybe HIS money will help turn him around even though no one else has been able to.

Let me know, Tony. I will forward his number to you.

Yeah its easy to sit there and say "im all for wealth redistribution" , lets see it actually happen.

Tony i want you to donate 10% of your paycheck every month to Tracys brother. Hows that sound?

Survival of the Fittest, he who works hardest makes the most money, its as simple as that

Honestly, our health care system does need some work, but our economy and nation as a whole can't handle changing the health care system right now. I think a reform type plan should be initiated with a 10-20 year goal on it. What he is trying to do and push for is like trying to make a person who is 500 lbs over-weight healthy in 30 days. It is just simply impossible and takes a lot of TIME and careful planing and consideration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Creeper

Honestly, our health care system does need some work, but our economy and nation as a whole can't handle changing the health care system right now. I think a reform type plan should be initiated with a 10-20 year goal on it. What he is trying to do and push for is like trying to make a person who is 500 lbs over-weight healthy in 30 days. It is just simply impossible and takes a lot of TIME and careful planing and consideration.

---

Careful planning and time are 2 things Obama needs to avoid to get this through. The longer this sits in committee the better chance we have at avoiding it.


No one is arguing that our healthcare system has issues. There are reforms that need to be made, but nationalizing it is NOT the thing to do. A better idea would be to institute govt subsidized major medical plan that is initiated through private insurance companies. Something that doesnt cover regular visits of prescriptions, but does cover that horrible car accident, or that heart attack. This plan should only be available to people that are on unemployment, or can prove their employer does not offer health coverage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vteckidd

Yeah its easy to sit there and say "im all for wealth redistribution" , lets see it actually happen.

Tony i want you to donate 10% of your paycheck every month to Tracys brother. Hows that sound?

Survival of the Fittest, he who works hardest makes the most money, its as simple as that

---

I'd like to see that happen too.
I cannot believe people support this "redistribution of wealth" Umm, no.

How about congress just impeach the most left winged liberal, socialist, what ever.

Oh wait they cant.. Because the majority of congress and the house is his left winged liberal brothers!!! Damn it!!!

This country is further going down a socialist path every day.. Why don't we just call this Obama's House of Pain!

Money Spender- The rate hes going hes already spent way much more than bush and prior presidents combined.... THE MOST HE CAN DO IS SPEND IT "WISELY"

How about another damn Government runned health plan!! OMG!! Thats exactly what we need... lmao

And we voted for this man.... Why?

Oh right.. More Government.. Thats right.. More freedom for the GOVERNMENT!!! WOO HOOOO!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tracy

P.S. Maybe Tony can give him some charity since he is so willing. Maybe HIS money will help turn him around even though no one else has been able to.

Let me know, Tony. I will forward his number to you.

---

I said earlier that throwing money at certain issues would be a waste of time. A Universal Healthcare plan does not solve world peace, it just gives those who need the help that they require exactly that.. help. There is still personal accountability and you will always have those that get over on the system, its inevitable, but the majority of those do not. Ask a Dr. yourself, many of those on medicaid currently do not even take advantage of the benefit.

But I digress, the majority of the sentiment here is against a plan such as this one. We've discussed this issue at naseum in thread after thread with the same people saying the same thing. I'll keep doing what I do, and yes Mike if someone is in dire need I'll gladly give 10%, at the end of the day it is nothing more than currency and I am my brother's keeper.

Matter of fact my last paycheck was $1500, even though I just donated to the Salvation Army I'll take you up on that challenge Mike. I don't know what I could offer Tracy's brother but I know personally how underfunded Sickle Cell and those with it often cannot afford the treatment, I myself have a variation of Sickle Cell and carry the trait.. those in the know know why it is underfunded.. I'll leave it at that. $150 donation.

Quote:

---

Thank you Robert Abrom
A donation in the amount of $150 has been made in your name.

Thank you for helping to provide vital support to the Association's
growth and development.

Donation Amount: $150
Your reference number is DON-2005000780.
Visa Card: XXXX-4751
Expiration: 11/11


The Sickle Cell Disease Association of America, Inc.
is registered with the Maryland Secretary of State and is a
501(c)(3) organization and contributions to it are
tax-deductible to the extent allowed by law.

---

I'm done with this thread, yall do what you do I'll continue to do what I do.

Ahh but Tony you just proved my point. I didn't make you donate and you chose who you wanted to donate to. Good for you

Obama wants to decide for you

I donate to charity all the time. I donated a $200 wii for the memorial for Lisa for that raffle, I give money to charitys from md to diabetes to battered women etc. But I choose where how and when to spend my money

/thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vteckidd

Ahh but Tony you just proved my point. I didn't make you donate and you chose who you wanted to donate to. Good for you

Obama wants to decide for you

I donate to charity all the time. I donated a $200 wii for the memorial for Lisa for that raffle, I give money to charitys from md to diabetes to battered women etc. But I choose where how and when to spend my money

/thread

---

You just stole my basic response.

Instead of you choosing who to donate to, I should choose who you donate to. Apparently we are all going to be donating millions, if not billions, to an organization that in under investigation for voter fraud in about a dozen states. How do you feel about that.

I think it's sad that you can't stand your ground and continue the discussion. I am personally not angry at anyone and am not trying to be right or any of that type of thing. I don't choose parties or titles of any kind. I take things issue by issue because no one is going to make me conform to a SET of beliefs based on affiliation alone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tracy

I think it's sad that you can't stand your ground and continue the discussion. I am personally not angry at anyone and am not trying to be right or any of that type of thing. I don't choose parties or titles of any kind. I take things issue by issue because no one is going to make me conform to a SET of beliefs based on affiliation alone.

---

Tracy my leaving this thread wasn't about not wanting to engage you. I can post up 5 threads that had the exact same conversation we have here and nobody approaches the thread objectively, a month or a week later another thread starts and we are back at square one.

There is constructive arguments and then there is wasting time.. this is wasting time when I'm having the same conversation next month with the same talking points with the same people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tony

Tracy my leaving this thread wasn't about not wanting to engage you. I can post up 5 threads that had the exact same conversation we have here and nobody approaches the thread objectively, a month or a week later another thread starts and we are back at square one.

There is constructive arguments and then there is wasting time.. this is wasting time when I'm having the same conversation next month with the same talking points with the same people.

---

I don't agree, but you are entitled to your own feelings. When I am getting beat down, I stand my ground. So, maybe that's why I don't understand. I have been as objective as possible while using subjective examples to prove a point (I know you may or may not be referring to me). You weren't able to or chose to not respond to a lot of where I was coming from. Instead you chose to get mad at Mike and Jimmy.

Maybe my critical thinking class has taught me more than I thought. I can spot a consistent, contradictory or contrary argument a mile away and have been studying up on how to combat all 3.

I just feel like you avoided most of MY questions and I rarely engage in the political arguments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tracy

I don't agree, but you are entitled to your own feelings. When I am getting beat down, I stand my ground. So, maybe that's why I don't understand. I have been as objective as possible while using subjective examples to prove a point (I know you may or may not be referring to me). You weren't able to or chose to not respond to a lot of where I was coming from. Instead you chose to get mad at Mike and Jimmy.

Maybe my critical thinking class has taught me more than I thought. I can spot a consistent, contradictory or contrary argument a mile away and have been studying up on how to combat all 3.

I just feel like you avoided most of MY questions and I rarely engage in the political arguments.

---

I just don't have this undying need to be right in the minds of others.. I pick and choose my battles rather than defend my point to every person that opposes it.

From a critical thinking standpoint we're speaking on hypotheticals because nobody really knows the outcome and result of a Universal Plan. You asked who decides who is offered a benefit and who is not, I stated that there will always be those who take advantage of the system but you cannot allow that to limit the benefit because the people who need is greater than those who are looking to get over.

There is no simple answer to problem. This is not just If A then B, if that was the case this would have been solved years ago. What I offer here is the opposing view, I was initially against a Universal Plan but after some research and seeing examples my mind changed. If you want to engage me on this and be objective I'll answer you without distraction.

I am for a universal plan also, as I stated. Just not this one.

A lot of people feel the plan does not go far enough, I opt more for a single payer plan and there is a lot of transparency in what Obama is proposing but it is a start.

I think health care needs to wait until we first cut back gov't spending in other areas before even thinking about reforming Health care. Corruption and hidden agendas is going to ruin this country

I think health care is one of those things that is best decided by the individual. In that sense I'm against universal health care. I think a plan that gives businesses tax breaks for offering care or a plan that allows businesses to band together is what is needed

Read through the first few pages. Lots of good arguments but for those that believe there are actually 2 parties, are still blinded. They will pass a universal healthcare soon and it will send us deeper into recession.

Listen to the man for the first minute of the video. It speaks volumes.

Ron Paul Video from 1988

Tony, right now, if you had to pick which plan to get on, would you take your current insurance plan, or would you jump on to medicare? That is what we are being faced with right now. The only difference being that we wont have a choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tony

A lot of people feel the plan does not go far enough, I opt more for a single payer plan and there is a lot of transparency in what Obama is proposing but it is a start.

---

I wouldnt call cloak and dagger and telling HALF truths transparency. he has lied volumes on the implications of his medical plan. That has been proven.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vteckidd

I wouldnt call cloak and dagger and telling HALF truths transparency. he has lied volumes on the implications of his medical plan. That has been proven.

---

This is the same transparency we have seen from the administration since November. All we ever hear from Obama is how his perfect piece of legislation will avoid a crisis, yet the dems refuse to give up details in a timely manner and are known for throwing in amendments late at night for an early morning vote. Just like they did with the pork bill, cap and trade and the other spending bill that I cant remember the name of.

We wont even go into the quickly growing list of flat out lies he has told in the last 8 months.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BanginJimmy

Tony, right now, if you had to pick which plan to get on, would you take your current insurance plan, or would you jump on to medicare? That is what we are being faced with right now. The only difference being that we wont have a choice.

---

Honestly, medicare. No high ass deductible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tony

Honestly, medicare. No high ass deductible.

---

I prefer quality of care over cash, but then again, I will have very nice insurance come Sept 1. The most I would have to pay is a $150 inpatient hospital co-pay. This is from a plan that will cost just under 1600/yr for me and my wife.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BanginJimmy

I prefer quality of care over cash, but then again, I will have very nice insurance come Sept 1. The most I would have to pay is a $150 inpatient hospital co-pay. This is from a plan that will cost just under 1600/yr for me and my wife.

---

My mother is on medicaid now, when she went to Kennestone for congestive heart failure they put her in her own room in the Women's center which was newly built.. constant care and attention, looked pretty quality to me. Matter of fact it was better than I received from my insurance when I had to go in.

Its kinda like, would you rather pay more to have a quality car auto insurance like GEICO or Progressive, or go with Jim Bobs Insurance Agency.

Sure Jim Bob may be cheap, but when you get in an accident, you are going to deal with delays, lack of coverage, funds, etc.

WASHINGTON – After weeks of secretive talks, a bipartisan group in the Senate edged closer Monday to a health care compromise that omits a requirement for businesses to offer coverage to their workers and lacks a government insurance option that President Barack Obama favors, according to numerous officials.

Like bills drafted by Democrats, the proposal under discussion by six members on the Senate Finance Committee would bar insurance companies from denying coverage to any applicant. Nor could insurers charge higher premiums on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions.

But it jettisons other core Democratic provisions in a reach for bipartisanship on an issue that has so far produced little.

The effort received a boost during the day from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, normally a close ally of Republicans. In a letter to committee leaders, the business group called for the panel to "act promptly, preferably before" the Senate's scheduled vacation at the end of next week. In doing so, the business organization dealt a blow to the Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and other GOP lawmakers who have called repeatedly for Democrats to slow down.

In yet another boost for the drive to enact legislation, PhRMA, which represents drug companies, has purchased more than $500,000 worth of television ads to air during the week in nine states.

Obama's top domestic priority has suffered numerous setbacks in recent weeks, and Republicans have stepped up their criticism. A Senate vote has been postponed until September. Administration and Democratic leaders hope to show significant progress before lawmakers begin their monthlong recess in hopes of regaining momentum.

In the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said, "We're on schedule to do it now or do it whenever," when asked whether the House would complete its bill before lawmakers leave at the end of the week. Democrats called a meeting of all their House members late Monday afternoon.

In the Senate, officials stressed that no agreement has been reached on a bipartisan measure, and said there is no guarantee of one. They also warned that numerous key issues remain to be settled, including several options to pay for the legislation. They spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to discuss matters under private negotiations.

They said any legislation that emerges from the talks is expected to provide for a nonprofit cooperative to sell insurance in competition with private industry, rather than giving the federal government a role in the marketplace. The White House and numerous Democrats in Congress have called for a government option to provide competition to private companies and hold down costs.

One of the senators involved in the talks, Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, confirmed that co-ops are the preferred approach. "The co-op is certainly one of the prominent options that is on the table," Snowe told reporters after the group met Monday. "It's safe to say that'll probably remain in the final document."

Officials also said a bipartisan compromise would not subject companies to a penalty if they declined to offer coverage to their workers. Instead, these businesses would be required to reimburse the government for part or all of any federal subsidies designed to help lower-income employees obtain insurance on their own.

Snowe said the idea is to discourage employers from dropping coverage because under the plan their workers could get government assistance to pay premiums. "We don't want to undermine (employer coverage) or create a perverse incentive where employers potentially drop coverage because their employees can get subsidies," she said.

Democratic-drafted legislation in the House includes both a penalty and a requirement for companies to share in the cost of covering employees.

Additionally, negotiators are likely to call for a commission to recommend long-term savings in Medicare that would take effect automatically unless overturned by Congress. Unlike some of the other provisions, that is an issue that unites the White House and business groups seeking to rein in the cost of medical care.

Among tax increases likely to be adopted is an excise tax of as much as 35 percent on insurance with very high annual premiums, perhaps over $25,000.

The senators involved in the negotiations are all members of the Senate Finance Committee, and include Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., the chairman, and Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the senior Republican. Others participating are Democratic Sens. Kent Conrad of North Dakota and Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, and Republicans Snowe and Mike Enzi of Wyoming.

They have met for hours in recent weeks in Baucus' office, joined by aides and outside advisers such as actuaries summoned to explain arcane details of insurance. Douglas Elmendorf, head of the Congressional Budget Office, has also attended.

Baucus has been under intense pressure from the White House and Senate Democrats in recent weeks to convene the committee to vote out legislation to advance Obama's goal of extending health care to millions who lack it while curbing the explosive growth of health care costs overall. He has so far declined to do so, opting to give the bipartisan negotiations as much time as needed to succeed.

Several Democratic officials have said he recently pledged to Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., that the committee would meet next week to vote on legislation, a timetable that implies time is growing short for the bipartisan group to wrap up its work.

"We're going to get agreement here," Baucus said Monday. "The group of six really wants to get to 'yes.' "

Much of the cost of the proposal would come from curbing the growth in fees to insurance companies and other providers under Medicare.

But congressional aides in both parties as well as lobbyists said a proposal limiting Flexible Savings Accounts to $2,000 annually is also a strong possibility. FSAs permit the use of pretax income to pay for items such as health care and child care.

Negotiators also are considering fees on the manufacturers of medical devices and on the makers of both brand name and generic drugs coming onto the market.

To cut down on the cost of the bill, the bipartisan group may include only one year of a long-term plan to adjust reimbursement fees under Medicare.

Officials said the legislation under discussion in a series of private meetings would likely cost under $1 trillion, include an expansion of Medicaid, and provide federal subsidies for individuals and families up to 300 percent of poverty to spread health care more broadly.

Individuals would have a mandate to buy affordable insurance, but companies would not have a requirement to offer it.

It was not clear whether companies would be required to reimburse Medicaid, the government health care program for the poor, for the cost of covering any employees enrolled.

Nor was it clear what, if any, provision the proposal would include to make sure companies did not simply withdraw insurance as a fringe benefit to millions of workers who now have it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vteckidd

Obama didn't start the problem but it's overzealous to think you can fix it in 30 days or 6 months.

That's like solving world terrorism in 30 days or world hunger or the economy.

Obama is scaring Americans into thinking that if we don't fix healthcare now the economy will collapse. Sound familiar?

If he wants to fix healthcare it needs to be through incentives or tax cuts to small business. Anything that adds cost to them right now is bad news

---

sounds very familiar actually. are we gonna get a government rebate on our kidney transplant now. how is that going to work we can't recycle ourselves. lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BanginJimmy

Careful planning and time are 2 things Obama needs to avoid to get this through. The longer this sits in committee the better chance we have at avoiding it.


No one is arguing that our healthcare system has issues. There are reforms that need to be made, but nationalizing it is NOT the thing to do. A better idea would be to institute govt subsidized major medical plan that is initiated through private insurance companies. Something that doesnt cover regular visits of prescriptions, but does cover that horrible car accident, or that heart attack. This plan should only be available to people that are on unemployment, or can prove their employer does not offer health coverage.

---

what about people with permanent injuries that need help to gety a job and get insurance so they can get treatment. i went through this and it sucked and with the meds i take its hard to find a job.

on a serious note one way to get some funding for healthcare would be to legalize marijuana. not only would people smoke it but it would creat jobs with hash bars, growers, processors and would even help reduce the amount of lumber used for paper since it's a renewable fast growing crop and could be used for paper, ropes(we would not have had ships back in the day if it wasn't for this) oils, and even plastics from the oils, clothing, etc. that would actually generate a truckload of revenue just from the smokers. it also has mant medicinal purposes also and now that vaporizers are cheaper it would not hurt the lungs at all. look at alcohol, regardless of the economy ot would make money and that moeny generated would help the uninsured bocome insured and the system would not have to be changed to a gov't run entity.

Im actually in favor of legalizing marijuana

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by preferredduck

what about people with permanent injuries that need help to gety a job and get insurance so they can get treatment. i went through this and it sucked and with the meds i take its hard to find a job.

---

Sort of the same thing I said earlier. Some people will be losers in EVERY situation. I know its harsh, and I know its not fair to everyone, and I know how bad it sucks. There is just no other answer I can give you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BanginJimmy

Sort of the same thing I said earlier. Some people will be losers in EVERY situation. I know its harsh, and I know its not fair to everyone, and I know how bad it sucks. There is just no other answer I can give you.

---

yea no matter what i tried to get a temporary type mediciad for my neck i was shut down. i just needed a little help until i could get coverage again. yet i know of people who personally ride the system for free and thier whole family has. im going to be in pain the rest of my life and im sure there will be a time i need help again until i can get hings right again. but sadly i dont fit the description to get help at all. if i were a woman i could atleast have a jid and get medicaid, lol. but i cant even do that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vteckidd

Im actually in favor of legalizing marijuana

---

me too, there are more uses than just smoking it and it would be the biggest cash crop on the planet.

where do I signup to ..

Pay less Taxes ?

Pay less for healthcare ?


I guess asking Obama about Fairtax right now wouldnt be such a good idea huh.. ?

Obama would tell you that the fairtax is just an attack on the exploited poor people by rich white people

I don't know if this one has been mentioned here or not.. but this is absolutely DISGUSTING.. SO much for good paying decent JOBS in America.. He just fucked another 5200 people..

USEC to Pursue Discussions on Loan Guarantee

Demobilization Will Proceed

BETHESDA, Md.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--USEC Inc. (NYSE:USU) announced that it is requesting that the Obama administration review further the economic recovery and national and energy security benefits of providing a loan guarantee for the American Centrifuge Plant in Piketon, Ohio. This announcement comes in response to the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) request that USEC withdraw its application for loan guarantee funding.

“We believe the American Centrifuge Plant meets the financial and technical requirements of the Department’s Loan Guarantee Program as well as numerous Obama administration policy objectives,” said John K. Welch, USEC president and chief executive officer. “Accordingly, we plan to pursue further discussions with DOE to work with them to address any remaining technical and financial concerns they may have.

“As a result of the current uncertainty regarding DOE loan guarantee funding, we have been forced to begin the process of demobilizing the project and initiating layoffs that will directly affect nearly 2,000 current USEC and contractor employees in Ohio and several other states in the near term and indirectly impact thousands more,” Welch added.

“Reluctantly, we have no choice but to begin demobilization. However, we hope that the demobilization process can be averted by quick action by the Obama administration. USEC is prepared to work with DOE and the Obama administration to fashion a mutually acceptable loan guarantee that protects the taxpayers’ interests, while providing the financing needed to deploy the American Centrifuge Plant.

“We previously provided DOE with a financially sound path forward for completing the project. Specifically, to ensure repayment and protect U.S. taxpayers, USEC offered to provide a $1 billion parent guarantee that would be fully collateralized by non-project, corporate assets,” Welch added. “This structure would allow DOE to proceed with funding on a fully protected basis and avoid demobilization while USEC would continue to address any remaining technical and financial issues over the next 9-12 months. This offer is still on the table, and we believe it can provide the path to prompt implementation of federal loan guarantee funding for this important national project.”

USEC also disagrees with DOE’s characterization that the American Centrifuge technology is not technologically ready to move to commercial operations. Building upon DOE’s decade of experience with centrifuge machines, USEC has operated the centrifuges for over 235,000 machine hours, giving the Company data and expertise to begin the transition to commercial operation.

USEC’s customers have also expressed confidence in the technology and have already committed to purchasing over half of the initial, planned output of the American Centrifuge Plant. Christopher M. Crane, president and chief operating officer of Exelon, the largest nuclear utility in the United States, said: "We have confidence in the American Centrifuge technology, and we believe it would be an important player in the future of uranium enrichment.”

USEC strongly believes in the American Centrifuge technology and is committed to further interactions with DOE and the Obama administration to find an acceptable path forward. As America's only commercial uranium enrichment facility using U.S.-owned and operated centrifuge technology, the American Centrifuge Plant can play an important role in America's energy security and national security.

USEC Inc., a global energy company, is a leading supplier of enriched uranium fuel for commercial nuclear power plants.

Department of Energy Denies USEC’s Loan Guarantee Application
-Company begins demobilization of American Centrifuge Plant-

BETHESDA, Md. – USEC Inc. (NYSE:USU) President and Chief Executive Officer John K. Welch issued the following statement today after being advised that the U.S. Department of Energy would not proceed with USEC’s application for a loan guarantee to complete construction of the American Centrifuge Plant in Piketon, Ohio:

“We are shocked and disappointed by DOE’s decision. The American Centrifuge met the original intent of the loan guarantee program in that it would have used an innovative, but proven, technology, reduced greenhouse gas emissions and created thousands of immediate jobs across the United States.

“Our application has been pending for a year, and we have addressed any concerns the Department raised. Technically, we operated the American Centrifuge technology in a lead cascade for approximately 235,000 machine hours. Financially, we have invested $1.5 billion dollars in the project and offered $1 billion of additional corporate support. It is unclear how DOE expects to find innovative technologies that assume zero risk, but the American Centrifuge clearly meets the energy security and climate change goals of the Obama administration.

“With DOE’s decision, we are now forced to initiate steps to demobilize the project. We deeply regret the impact this decision will have on all those affected, but as we have stated in the past, a DOE loan guarantee was the path forward to completing financing for the project. Instead of creating thousands of jobs across the country, we are faced with losing them. Instead of reducing our dependence on foreign sources of energy, we are now increasing it. President Obama promised to support the loan guarantee for the American Centrifuge Plant while he campaigned in Ohio. We are disappointed that campaign commitment has not been met.

“Despite this setback, our core existing business remains strong. Our Paducah plant is running at its highest efficiency ever and we finished the second quarter with $78 million of cash on hand. We still believe strongly in the American Centrifuge technology and we still believe it is ready to be deployed. We will continue our American Centrifuge development work in Piketon, Ohio, and Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

“We remain focused on shareholder value and have engaged outside advisors to evaluate our strategic alternatives.”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mmmmpsi

President Obama promised to support the loan guarantee for the American Centrifuge Plant while he campaigned in Ohio. We are disappointed that campaign commitment has not been met.

---

Not a surprise at all, the punk has done nothing but lie to anyone that will listen to him. This just makes 1 more of dozens of high profile lies he has told in the last 6 months.

i blame the jews

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BanginJimmy

Not a surprise at all, the punk has done nothing but lie to anyone that will listen to him. This just makes 1 more of dozens of high profile lies he has told in the last 6 months.

---

All this means is he's no different from any politician out there, and for those that are charmed by Obama its a bit of reality. Personally I like the guy but he's far from perfect.