Off-Topic :
Fairfax Underground
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Alan Grayson
()
Date: January 10, 2014 05:44AM
One of the more frustrating elements of the debate about Obamacare is that the right wing has dictated the terms of that debate.
Resolved: Does American Want Socialized Medicine?
While the Obamacare legislation was being legislated, the debate was about "socialized medicine." As if. Obamacare is no more a government takeover of health care than air traffic control is a government takeover of the skies. Or traffic lights are a government takeover of the roads. (Although the Post Office is, in fact, a government takeover of the mail. Cue to Tea Partiers blowing up their own mailboxes.)
Resolved: Is Obamacare Unconstitutional?
Then there was that interminable debate about whether Obamacare is constitutional. Let me get this straight: Are you telling me that it is constitutional for the government to draft your rear end and ship you to Vietnam to serve as cannon fodder, but somehow it isn't constitutional for the government to make you pay for your own emergency-room care? Oh, come on! If it's constitutional for the government to put you in prison if you fail to buy car insurance, then surely it's constitutional for the government to make you pay a fee if you fail to buy health insurance.
Resolved: Isn't the Obamacare Website Absolutely Sucktastic?
And now the Tea Partiers are shedding crocodile tears over the Obamacare website. The website that they tried to repeal, on 40+ different occasions. The website that went live on the very day that they shut down the federal government. Because, you know, they get really upset if there is any delay in people obtaining Obamacare coverage, since they don't want anyone ever to have it.
Why? Why did the right wing go to such lengths to dictate the Obamacare debate? Because if you're obsessing over government takeovers, and constitutionality, and a website, then you aren't ever talking about:
- closing the "donut hole" in prescription drug coverage for seniors;
- extending coverage and care to 40 million people with preexisting conditions;
- prohibiting insurance companies from literally pulling the plug on patients whose care becomes too expensive;
- allowing young adults up to the age of 26 to remain on their parents' health insurance policies;
- eliminating deductibles and copayments for ordinary care for seniors;
- mandating refunds for seniors who are overcharged under the Medicare Advantage program;
- eliminating useless and predatory "junk" coverage;
- prohibiting overcharging on the basis of gender;
- preventing employers who don't offer insurance coverage from making employers who do offer coverage feel like suckers and fools;
- extending Medicaid to the working poor; and
- paying over one-third of the cost of small businesses providing employee healthcare.
Funny, but I don't remember the Republicans ever arguing for the repeal of any of those specific provisions, just the "Obamacare" bogeyman.
Regardless, the autumn Tea Party blitzkrieg to repeal Obamacare really came down to an element of Obamacare that has received little or no mention, except when I mentioned it: the "affordability credits." The government-mandated discounts on health insurance, which generally see to it that you don't have to pay more than 11 percent of your income for health insurance. The discounts that the Kaiser Foundation says will save families who buy their own insurance an average of $2,700 each year. (Actually, to be specific, Kaiser found that 48 percent who purchase their own insurance will qualify for the affordability credits, and for them, the discounts will save a stunning $5,500 each year.)
That's what I'm talking about.
Tea Party Republicans were determined -- no, engrossed; no, bent; no, obsessed; no, consumed; no, possessed by demons -- with the urgent compulsion to prevent the affordability credits from ever going into effect. Because then, you know, people could afford insurance, which means that they would get the health care that they need to stay healthy and alive.
You don't have to take my word for it. A right-wing columnist in a right-wing newspaper (Byron York of the Washington Examiner) wrote this very revealing statement last July, just before the Tea Party repeal efforts went nuclear: "The White House knows that once those payments begin, repealing Obamacare will no longer be an abstract question of removing legislation not yet in effect. Instead, it will be a very real matter of taking money away from people. It's very, very hard to do that."
So if you were wondering why the Tea Party went so far as to shut down the government, and threaten default on the national debt, just to prevent one single aspect of one single government program from being implemented, now you know why.
Look, if you ask people who don't have health insurance why they don't have it, 90 percent say that it's because they can't afford it. Which leaves two options:
Make it affordable.
Tell them to go to hell.
Obamacare represents the first option. Maniacal efforts to repeal Obamacare represent the second option.
And now, as of January 1, 2014, America is going with the first option. That's America's New Year's resolution: "Heal the sick."
I feel good about that.
Courage,
Rep. Alan Grayson
Resolved: Does American Want Socialized Medicine?
While the Obamacare legislation was being legislated, the debate was about "socialized medicine." As if. Obamacare is no more a government takeover of health care than air traffic control is a government takeover of the skies. Or traffic lights are a government takeover of the roads. (Although the Post Office is, in fact, a government takeover of the mail. Cue to Tea Partiers blowing up their own mailboxes.)
Resolved: Is Obamacare Unconstitutional?
Then there was that interminable debate about whether Obamacare is constitutional. Let me get this straight: Are you telling me that it is constitutional for the government to draft your rear end and ship you to Vietnam to serve as cannon fodder, but somehow it isn't constitutional for the government to make you pay for your own emergency-room care? Oh, come on! If it's constitutional for the government to put you in prison if you fail to buy car insurance, then surely it's constitutional for the government to make you pay a fee if you fail to buy health insurance.
Resolved: Isn't the Obamacare Website Absolutely Sucktastic?
And now the Tea Partiers are shedding crocodile tears over the Obamacare website. The website that they tried to repeal, on 40+ different occasions. The website that went live on the very day that they shut down the federal government. Because, you know, they get really upset if there is any delay in people obtaining Obamacare coverage, since they don't want anyone ever to have it.
Why? Why did the right wing go to such lengths to dictate the Obamacare debate? Because if you're obsessing over government takeovers, and constitutionality, and a website, then you aren't ever talking about:
- closing the "donut hole" in prescription drug coverage for seniors;
- extending coverage and care to 40 million people with preexisting conditions;
- prohibiting insurance companies from literally pulling the plug on patients whose care becomes too expensive;
- allowing young adults up to the age of 26 to remain on their parents' health insurance policies;
- eliminating deductibles and copayments for ordinary care for seniors;
- mandating refunds for seniors who are overcharged under the Medicare Advantage program;
- eliminating useless and predatory "junk" coverage;
- prohibiting overcharging on the basis of gender;
- preventing employers who don't offer insurance coverage from making employers who do offer coverage feel like suckers and fools;
- extending Medicaid to the working poor; and
- paying over one-third of the cost of small businesses providing employee healthcare.
Funny, but I don't remember the Republicans ever arguing for the repeal of any of those specific provisions, just the "Obamacare" bogeyman.
Regardless, the autumn Tea Party blitzkrieg to repeal Obamacare really came down to an element of Obamacare that has received little or no mention, except when I mentioned it: the "affordability credits." The government-mandated discounts on health insurance, which generally see to it that you don't have to pay more than 11 percent of your income for health insurance. The discounts that the Kaiser Foundation says will save families who buy their own insurance an average of $2,700 each year. (Actually, to be specific, Kaiser found that 48 percent who purchase their own insurance will qualify for the affordability credits, and for them, the discounts will save a stunning $5,500 each year.)
That's what I'm talking about.
Tea Party Republicans were determined -- no, engrossed; no, bent; no, obsessed; no, consumed; no, possessed by demons -- with the urgent compulsion to prevent the affordability credits from ever going into effect. Because then, you know, people could afford insurance, which means that they would get the health care that they need to stay healthy and alive.
You don't have to take my word for it. A right-wing columnist in a right-wing newspaper (Byron York of the Washington Examiner) wrote this very revealing statement last July, just before the Tea Party repeal efforts went nuclear: "The White House knows that once those payments begin, repealing Obamacare will no longer be an abstract question of removing legislation not yet in effect. Instead, it will be a very real matter of taking money away from people. It's very, very hard to do that."
So if you were wondering why the Tea Party went so far as to shut down the government, and threaten default on the national debt, just to prevent one single aspect of one single government program from being implemented, now you know why.
Look, if you ask people who don't have health insurance why they don't have it, 90 percent say that it's because they can't afford it. Which leaves two options:
Make it affordable.
Tell them to go to hell.
Obamacare represents the first option. Maniacal efforts to repeal Obamacare represent the second option.
And now, as of January 1, 2014, America is going with the first option. That's America's New Year's resolution: "Heal the sick."
I feel good about that.
Courage,
Rep. Alan Grayson
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Fat~Bottom~Girl
()
Date: January 10, 2014 09:10AM
+1
Make no mistake: The right-wing's greatest fear regarding Obamacare is that it will succeed and be wildly popular with voters. There's nothing scarier to GOP-tards than government working and improving the lives of everyday AMericans.
Make no mistake: The right-wing's greatest fear regarding Obamacare is that it will succeed and be wildly popular with voters. There's nothing scarier to GOP-tards than government working and improving the lives of everyday AMericans.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
oy vey
()
Date: January 10, 2014 09:21AM
Where are the facts? Only a moron would consider this as 'well written.' This is just more or your run of the mill liberal garbage.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Liberal Logic 35
()
Date: January 10, 2014 11:26AM
oy vey Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Where are the facts? Only a moron would consider
> this as 'well written.' This is just more or your
> run of the mill liberal garbage.
Alan Grayson has never once let facts get in the way of running his mouth, why should we expect anything different from him now?
Hes really smart too losing 18 million falling for such a complex scam like this:
"The scheme worked like this: clients would turn over their stocks to Chapman as collateral for a loan, and Chapman would let customers borrow about 90 percent of the stocks' value.
If the stocks did badly, borrowers could walk away and keep the money they were loaned. But if the borrowers' stocks did well, they would repay the loan with interest, and Chapman was supposed to return the stocks to the investor at their increased value.
But, according to court papers, Chapman sold the stocks and had no way to fulfill his obligations if a client's stock portfolio did well."
-------------------------------------------------------
> Where are the facts? Only a moron would consider
> this as 'well written.' This is just more or your
> run of the mill liberal garbage.
Alan Grayson has never once let facts get in the way of running his mouth, why should we expect anything different from him now?
Hes really smart too losing 18 million falling for such a complex scam like this:
"The scheme worked like this: clients would turn over their stocks to Chapman as collateral for a loan, and Chapman would let customers borrow about 90 percent of the stocks' value.
If the stocks did badly, borrowers could walk away and keep the money they were loaned. But if the borrowers' stocks did well, they would repay the loan with interest, and Chapman was supposed to return the stocks to the investor at their increased value.
But, according to court papers, Chapman sold the stocks and had no way to fulfill his obligations if a client's stock portfolio did well."
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Hussein Obama-
()
Date: January 10, 2014 11:38AM
What drivel. I can't even make it passed the first couple sentences they are so ridiculous. The FAA's management of air traffic control is exactly what you would expect from federal government. The are inept, expensive, unreliable, cannot set goals and achieve them and have workers that are on drugs, drunk or asleep. Being a pilot, this is clearly a division that should be contracted out to a private party.
Also, the last time I checked, traffic lights were controlled by the states, not the federal government.
The fact that those first sentences do not present any facts is enough for me to laugh at the pathetic attempt at liberals to justify a fascist nationalized health insurance scam.
Also, the last time I checked, traffic lights were controlled by the states, not the federal government.
The fact that those first sentences do not present any facts is enough for me to laugh at the pathetic attempt at liberals to justify a fascist nationalized health insurance scam.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
wrongg
()
Date: January 10, 2014 11:39AM
that was the most pathetic attempt at "well written" I have ever seen. I didn't go much past the 40 mil with preexisting conditions. Of course fatty liked it. Leftist all like their lies. They are almost always insecure losers who can take comfort that they have finally found someone else that is as hopeless as they are. You leftists are a cancer on our society. 40 mil with pre existing conditions? Is the sky falling too chicken fucking little? you are scary stupid.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Knower of Things
()
Date: January 10, 2014 11:43AM
It is telling that oy vey & LL offer no refutation of Grayson's salient argument: Right-wing efforts to repeal Obamacare are based upon fear that the program will succeed rather than on ‘principle’ as they claim.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Knower of Things
()
Date: January 10, 2014 11:44AM
Nor Hussein Obama- or wrongg (who certainly is).
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
wrongg
()
Date: January 10, 2014 11:52AM
Ignorant pathetic loser.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Knower of Things
()
Date: January 10, 2014 11:56AM
wrongg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ignorant pathetic loser.
Are ad hominem attacks the best you can do? Who’s the ignorant, pathetic loser? Tht'd be you.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ignorant pathetic loser.
Are ad hominem attacks the best you can do? Who’s the ignorant, pathetic loser? Tht'd be you.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Liberal Logic 35
()
Date: January 10, 2014 11:58AM
Knower of Things Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It is telling that oy vey & LL offer no refutation
> of Grayson's salient argument: Right-wing efforts
> to repeal Obamacare are based upon fear that the
> program will succeed rather than on
> ‘principle’ as they claim.
Expanding Medicade and parents insurance until youre 26 were the only factual statements in that garbage.
3rd grade teachers wouldnt consider garbage like " preventing employers who don't offer insurance coverage from making employers who do offer coverage feel like suckers and fools" well written or intellectually stimulating, but apparently progressives do.
Theres a 1000 treads all ready with all this bs exposed and actual facts in real life do not support that nonsense.
The only take away from this is that the education system failed you if thats what you consider a "salient argument"
-------------------------------------------------------
> It is telling that oy vey & LL offer no refutation
> of Grayson's salient argument: Right-wing efforts
> to repeal Obamacare are based upon fear that the
> program will succeed rather than on
> ‘principle’ as they claim.
Expanding Medicade and parents insurance until youre 26 were the only factual statements in that garbage.
3rd grade teachers wouldnt consider garbage like " preventing employers who don't offer insurance coverage from making employers who do offer coverage feel like suckers and fools" well written or intellectually stimulating, but apparently progressives do.
Theres a 1000 treads all ready with all this bs exposed and actual facts in real life do not support that nonsense.
The only take away from this is that the education system failed you if thats what you consider a "salient argument"
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Knower of Things
()
Date: January 10, 2014 12:02PM
Liberal Logic 35 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [Not much of anything]
Thanks for confirming that you do not have a rebuttal to Mr. Grayson.
-------------------------------------------------------
> [Not much of anything]
Thanks for confirming that you do not have a rebuttal to Mr. Grayson.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Liberal Logic 35
()
Date: January 10, 2014 12:03PM
Knower of Things Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Liberal Logic 35 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > [Not much of anything]
>
> Thanks for confirming that you do not have a
> rebuttal to Mr. Grayson.
Whats wrong got tired of being made a fool under the No 4 screen name?
-------------------------------------------------------
> Liberal Logic 35 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > [Not much of anything]
>
> Thanks for confirming that you do not have a
> rebuttal to Mr. Grayson.
Whats wrong got tired of being made a fool under the No 4 screen name?
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Hussein Obama-
()
Date: January 10, 2014 12:04PM
Ok, a week or so ago all the liberal parrots in here were screaming that Obamacare is the republican Heritage Foundation plan. So, if that plan was good enough for Obama to make it a law, why does Alan Grayson call it the "die quickly" plan?
Hmmmmmm?
Pathetic libs.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/alan-grayson-die-quickly-comment-prompts-uproar/
Hmmmmmm?
Pathetic libs.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/alan-grayson-die-quickly-comment-prompts-uproar/
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Knower of Things
()
Date: January 10, 2014 12:09PM
Hussein Obama- Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> why does Alan Grayson call [the republican Heritage Foundation plan] the "die quickly" plan?
He doesn't. He said that 'die quickly' is what Republicans want of the poor/uninsured.
-------------------------------------------------------
> why does Alan Grayson call [the republican Heritage Foundation plan] the "die quickly" plan?
He doesn't. He said that 'die quickly' is what Republicans want of the poor/uninsured.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
wrongg
()
Date: January 10, 2014 12:17PM
Knower of Things Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> wrongg Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Ignorant pathetic loser.
>
> Are ad hominem attacks the best you can do?
> Who’s the ignorant, pathetic loser? Tht'd be
> you.
You are really pathetic,therefore not ad hom. Oh and you are clearly a loser as well. What a hot pile of cow shit.
-------------------------------------------------------
> wrongg Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Ignorant pathetic loser.
>
> Are ad hominem attacks the best you can do?
> Who’s the ignorant, pathetic loser? Tht'd be
> you.
You are really pathetic,therefore not ad hom. Oh and you are clearly a loser as well. What a hot pile of cow shit.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
ludicrous
()
Date: January 10, 2014 12:22PM
wrongg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Knower of Things Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > wrongg Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Ignorant pathetic loser.
> >
> > Are ad hominem attacks the best you can do?
> > Who’s the ignorant, pathetic loser? Tht'd be
> > you.
>
>
> You are really pathetic,therefore not ad hom. Oh
> and you are clearly a loser as well. What a hot
> pile of cow shit.
thou hast shitteth in thy benghazi retardation
-------------------------------------------------------
> Knower of Things Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > wrongg Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Ignorant pathetic loser.
> >
> > Are ad hominem attacks the best you can do?
> > Who’s the ignorant, pathetic loser? Tht'd be
> > you.
>
>
> You are really pathetic,therefore not ad hom. Oh
> and you are clearly a loser as well. What a hot
> pile of cow shit.
thou hast shitteth in thy benghazi retardation
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
BelowMe.
()
Date: January 10, 2014 12:23PM
How about one of you guys write an actual rebuttal to Grayson- something articulate and factual.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Liberal Logic 35
()
Date: January 10, 2014 12:26PM
BelowMe. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How about one of you guys write an actual rebuttal
> to Grayson- something articulate and factual.
As soon as Grayson writes something articulate and factual itd be worth the time to write a rebuttal.
Theres no reason to legitimize childish garbage with line by line responses
-------------------------------------------------------
> How about one of you guys write an actual rebuttal
> to Grayson- something articulate and factual.
As soon as Grayson writes something articulate and factual itd be worth the time to write a rebuttal.
Theres no reason to legitimize childish garbage with line by line responses
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
wrongg
()
Date: January 10, 2014 12:30PM
BelowMe. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How about one of you guys write an actual rebuttal
> to Grayson- something articulate and factual.
Ignorant fucking lemming. Look the shit up for yourself. Are you really so fucking stupid that you believe there are 40 million people with pre existing conditions?
Do you fucking chicken littles ever bother to check facts yourselves?
-------------------------------------------------------
> How about one of you guys write an actual rebuttal
> to Grayson- something articulate and factual.
Ignorant fucking lemming. Look the shit up for yourself. Are you really so fucking stupid that you believe there are 40 million people with pre existing conditions?
Do you fucking chicken littles ever bother to check facts yourselves?
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Consevi-tards R Dumb
()
Date: January 10, 2014 01:38PM
wrongg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Are you really so fucking stupid that
> you believe there are 40 million people with pre
> existing conditions?
Nope. It's over 57 million.
One in Five Americans Is at Risk of a Denial of Coverage
•Approximately 57.2 million Americans under the age of 65 have a pre-existing condition that, absent reform, could lead to a denial of coverage by an insurance company.
•This means that, without health reform, more than one in every five non-elderly Americans (22.4 percent) is at risk of being denied coverage.
http://www.familiesusa.org/resources/publications/reports/health-reform/pre-ex-conditions-findings.html
-------------------------------------------------------
> Are you really so fucking stupid that
> you believe there are 40 million people with pre
> existing conditions?
Nope. It's over 57 million.
One in Five Americans Is at Risk of a Denial of Coverage
•Approximately 57.2 million Americans under the age of 65 have a pre-existing condition that, absent reform, could lead to a denial of coverage by an insurance company.
•This means that, without health reform, more than one in every five non-elderly Americans (22.4 percent) is at risk of being denied coverage.
http://www.familiesusa.org/resources/publications/reports/health-reform/pre-ex-conditions-findings.html
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Let Me Guess
()
Date: January 10, 2014 02:24PM
Grayson is wrong because Fox News says so?
Attachments:
Attachments:
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 02:28PM
All the dumb Republicans thought they finally had well written opposition to Obama Care on their hands. Looks at all thr disappointed puke trolls above. Funny as hell to read.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Hussein Obama-
()
Date: January 10, 2014 02:32PM
Consevi-tards R Dumb Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> wrongg Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Are you really so fucking stupid that
> > you believe there are 40 million people with
> pre
> > existing conditions?
>
> Nope. It's over 57 million.
>
> One in Five Americans Is at Risk of a Denial of
> Coverage
>
> •Approximately 57.2 million Americans under
> the age of 65 have a pre-existing condition that,
> absent reform, could lead to a denial of coverage
> by an insurance company.
>
> •This means that, without health reform, more
> than one in every five non-elderly Americans (22.4
> percent) is at risk of being denied coverage.
>
> http://www.familiesusa.org/resources/publications/
> reports/health-reform/pre-ex-conditions-findings.h
> tml
But Obama said that only 30 million people didn't have insurance. So what you're saying is that he lied! SHOCKER!
So not only do 30 million people not have health insurance, out of that 30 million 57 million have a pre-existing condition and can't get coverage.
Good math.
Keep up the good work. SMH
-------------------------------------------------------
> wrongg Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Are you really so fucking stupid that
> > you believe there are 40 million people with
> pre
> > existing conditions?
>
> Nope. It's over 57 million.
>
> One in Five Americans Is at Risk of a Denial of
> Coverage
>
> •Approximately 57.2 million Americans under
> the age of 65 have a pre-existing condition that,
> absent reform, could lead to a denial of coverage
> by an insurance company.
>
> •This means that, without health reform, more
> than one in every five non-elderly Americans (22.4
> percent) is at risk of being denied coverage.
>
> http://www.familiesusa.org/resources/publications/
> reports/health-reform/pre-ex-conditions-findings.h
> tml
But Obama said that only 30 million people didn't have insurance. So what you're saying is that he lied! SHOCKER!
So not only do 30 million people not have health insurance, out of that 30 million 57 million have a pre-existing condition and can't get coverage.
Good math.
Keep up the good work. SMH
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Consevi-tards R Dumb
()
Date: January 10, 2014 02:46PM
Hussein Obama- Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Consevi-tards R Dumb Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > wrongg Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Are you really so fucking stupid that
> > > you believe there are 40 million people with
> > pre
> > > existing conditions?
> >
> > Nope. It's over 57 million.
> >
> > One in Five Americans Is at Risk of a Denial of
> > Coverage
> >
> > •Approximately 57.2 million Americans
> under
> > the age of 65 have a pre-existing condition
> that,
> > absent reform, could lead to a denial of
> coverage
> > by an insurance company.
> >
> > •This means that, without health reform,
> more
> > than one in every five non-elderly Americans
> (22.4
> > percent) is at risk of being denied coverage.
> >
> >
> http://www.familiesusa.org/resources/publications/
>
> >
> reports/health-reform/pre-ex-conditions-findings.h
>
> > tml
>
> But Obama said that only 30 million people didn't
> have insurance. So what you're saying is that he
> lied! SHOCKER!
> So not only do 30 million people not have health
> insurance, out of that 30 million 57 million have
> a pre-existing condition and can't get coverage.
Where, genius, does the quote say that the 57.2 million Americans at risk of being denied coverage by an insurance company are uninsured?
You are an idiot.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Consevi-tards R Dumb Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > wrongg Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Are you really so fucking stupid that
> > > you believe there are 40 million people with
> > pre
> > > existing conditions?
> >
> > Nope. It's over 57 million.
> >
> > One in Five Americans Is at Risk of a Denial of
> > Coverage
> >
> > •Approximately 57.2 million Americans
> under
> > the age of 65 have a pre-existing condition
> that,
> > absent reform, could lead to a denial of
> coverage
> > by an insurance company.
> >
> > •This means that, without health reform,
> more
> > than one in every five non-elderly Americans
> (22.4
> > percent) is at risk of being denied coverage.
> >
> >
> http://www.familiesusa.org/resources/publications/
>
> >
> reports/health-reform/pre-ex-conditions-findings.h
>
> > tml
>
> But Obama said that only 30 million people didn't
> have insurance. So what you're saying is that he
> lied! SHOCKER!
> So not only do 30 million people not have health
> insurance, out of that 30 million 57 million have
> a pre-existing condition and can't get coverage.
Where, genius, does the quote say that the 57.2 million Americans at risk of being denied coverage by an insurance company are uninsured?
You are an idiot.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Lion Tamer
()
Date: January 10, 2014 02:52PM
Let Me Guess Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Grayson is wrong because Fox News says so?
Do you think Fox News is any more or less biased than any other news? If so, you're a partisan moron. They slant their coverage just like NBC, ABC, CNN, Yahoo, the WP and every other news organization. Attacking Fox News as a source is no more valid than attacking every other news source. It's just stupid.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Grayson is wrong because Fox News says so?
Do you think Fox News is any more or less biased than any other news? If so, you're a partisan moron. They slant their coverage just like NBC, ABC, CNN, Yahoo, the WP and every other news organization. Attacking Fox News as a source is no more valid than attacking every other news source. It's just stupid.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Knower of Things
()
Date: January 10, 2014 02:55PM
All media is biased because it is controlled, produced, and delivered by humans.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Hussein Obama-
()
Date: January 10, 2014 03:02PM
.
Attachments:
Attachments:
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Facts suck
()
Date: January 10, 2014 03:08PM
Consevi-tards R Dumb Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Where, genius, does the quote say that the 57.2
> million Americans at risk of being denied coverage
> by an insurance company are uninsured?
>
> You are an idiot.
Whatever number you want to start with:
1. There are more now on net than prior to passage of the law due to cancellations resulting from the law.
2. The costs for insurance under the program have increased on average.
3. The vast majority of those who were uninsured will remain uninsured even after implementation.
4. Grayson's an ultra-partisan dumbshit on par with the same level of ultra-partisan dumbshits on the other side and one of the main reasons why we can't get shit done in this country.
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Where, genius, does the quote say that the 57.2
> million Americans at risk of being denied coverage
> by an insurance company are uninsured?
>
> You are an idiot.
Whatever number you want to start with:
1. There are more now on net than prior to passage of the law due to cancellations resulting from the law.
2. The costs for insurance under the program have increased on average.
3. The vast majority of those who were uninsured will remain uninsured even after implementation.
4. Grayson's an ultra-partisan dumbshit on par with the same level of ultra-partisan dumbshits on the other side and one of the main reasons why we can't get shit done in this country.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 03:10PM
Republicans seem confused and without a political strategy. They themselves seem worn out by their dedication to opposition to a single piece of legislation without a viable solution.
A solution thats needed more and more with every additional enrollee. They seem to have dug yet another hole for themselves.
A solution thats needed more and more with every additional enrollee. They seem to have dug yet another hole for themselves.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
YctEG
()
Date: January 10, 2014 03:25PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Republicans seem confused and without a political
> strategy. They themselves seem worn out by their
> dedication to opposition to a single piece of
> legislation without a viable solution.
>
> A solution thats needed more and more with every
> additional enrollee. They seem to have dug yet
> another hole for themselves.
The Republicans (finally) wised up and learned not to get in front of a train wreck.
You know... Kind of like the Dems have done avoiding touching the entitlement spending disaster which they've tried to push with a shit stick over so that the Republicans will take the required steps and then they can blame them.
They offered multiple alternative proposals re the law. Obama and the Dems blew all of them off thinking that they knew the way and that it would be only their way since they had the votes.
Your side made the bed. Time to lie down.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Republicans seem confused and without a political
> strategy. They themselves seem worn out by their
> dedication to opposition to a single piece of
> legislation without a viable solution.
>
> A solution thats needed more and more with every
> additional enrollee. They seem to have dug yet
> another hole for themselves.
The Republicans (finally) wised up and learned not to get in front of a train wreck.
You know... Kind of like the Dems have done avoiding touching the entitlement spending disaster which they've tried to push with a shit stick over so that the Republicans will take the required steps and then they can blame them.
They offered multiple alternative proposals re the law. Obama and the Dems blew all of them off thinking that they knew the way and that it would be only their way since they had the votes.
Your side made the bed. Time to lie down.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 04:11PM
Democrats believe in a balanced approach to addressing the remaining 450 billion dollar yearly deficit. Democratic policies have decreased the deficit more than ever in the history of this country as it is.
The Democrats are willing to negotiate and balance the budget through a balanced approach. One that includes even traces of increased revenue.
The Republicans refuse and are incapable of moderation and such a solution. If you believe in such a balanced solution you should vote for Democrats. If you believe in taking an ax to medicare and social security and other entitlements. You should vote for Republicans. Its very simple.
The Democrats are willing to negotiate and balance the budget through a balanced approach. One that includes even traces of increased revenue.
The Republicans refuse and are incapable of moderation and such a solution. If you believe in such a balanced solution you should vote for Democrats. If you believe in taking an ax to medicare and social security and other entitlements. You should vote for Republicans. Its very simple.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 04:13PM
In the mean time we have and probably will continue to have divided government. The Democratic solution requires bipartisanship in such a governmental state. The Republican position requires complete control when they only control one half of Congress and have struggled to make any electoral gains with their positions.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Crazy Gerry's Dream Machine
()
Date: January 10, 2014 04:19PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Democrats believe in a balanced approach to
> addressing the remaining 450 billion dollar yearly
> deficit. Democratic policies have decreased the
> deficit more than ever in the history of this
> country as it is.
>
> The Democrats are willing to negotiate and balance
> the budget through a balanced approach. One that
> includes even traces of increased revenue.
>
> The Republicans refuse and are incapable of
> moderation and such a solution. If you believe in
> such a balanced solution you should vote for
> Democrats. If you believe in taking an ax to
> medicare and social security and other
> entitlements. You should vote for Republicans.
> Its very simple.
You're delusional. lol
The only thing that cut the deficit were the sequester, slightly higher revenues, and the several hundred billion dollar pay-back gifts from the GSEs in August. Total Federal spending is up.
And it was Obama/Obamcare who made recent cuts to Medicare.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Democrats believe in a balanced approach to
> addressing the remaining 450 billion dollar yearly
> deficit. Democratic policies have decreased the
> deficit more than ever in the history of this
> country as it is.
>
> The Democrats are willing to negotiate and balance
> the budget through a balanced approach. One that
> includes even traces of increased revenue.
>
> The Republicans refuse and are incapable of
> moderation and such a solution. If you believe in
> such a balanced solution you should vote for
> Democrats. If you believe in taking an ax to
> medicare and social security and other
> entitlements. You should vote for Republicans.
> Its very simple.
You're delusional. lol
The only thing that cut the deficit were the sequester, slightly higher revenues, and the several hundred billion dollar pay-back gifts from the GSEs in August. Total Federal spending is up.
And it was Obama/Obamcare who made recent cuts to Medicare.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 04:23PM
It was the fact that the Obama economic policies revived an economy in recession dip shit. Want to talk about delusion. Conservative austerity caused triple dip recessions in Great Britain. You are failures, there's evidence your failures. It fact that your policies are always wrong in whatever circumstance.
You bashed this president on his economic policies and he ended the recession. You were wrong. Wrong again as always. You have no shame and no self respect. No dignity to accept all the times you've been wrong.
Bush left us with a mess in revenue generation and an economy on the verge of self destruction. Obama's policies have decreased deficits more than has ever occurred in the history of this country. And that's a fact you son of a bitch.
It's about time you started showing some respect to a president that fearlessly brought us out of your recession.
You bashed this president on his economic policies and he ended the recession. You were wrong. Wrong again as always. You have no shame and no self respect. No dignity to accept all the times you've been wrong.
Bush left us with a mess in revenue generation and an economy on the verge of self destruction. Obama's policies have decreased deficits more than has ever occurred in the history of this country. And that's a fact you son of a bitch.
It's about time you started showing some respect to a president that fearlessly brought us out of your recession.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 04:25PM
The Sequester only amounts to 75 billion dollars a year in deficit reduction too dumb ass.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Trillions here, trillions there
()
Date: January 10, 2014 04:32PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It was the fact that the Obama economic policies
> revived an economy in recession dip shit. Want to
> talk about delusion. Conservative austerity
> caused triple dip recessions in Great Britain.
> You are failures, there's evidence your failures.
> It fact that your policies are always wrong in
> whatever circumstance.
>
> You bashed this president on his economic policies
> and he ended the recession. You were wrong.
> Wrong again as always. You have no shame and no
> self respect. No dignity to accept all the times
> you've been wrong.
>
> Bush left us with a mess in revenue generation and
> an economy on the verge of self destruction.
> Obama's policies have decreased deficits more than
> has ever occurred in the history of this country.
> And that's a fact you son of a bitch.
>
> It's about time you started showing some respect
> to a president that fearlessly brought us out of
> your recession.
Uh, no. The recovery has been pitiful by any typical comparisons and Obama's impotent economic policy has had little to do with anything. Funneling some cash to your pals through the stimulus didn't do much of anything to stimulate demand or jobs.
And you need to update your talking points. The "austerity" path (which really wasn't other than in comparison with the Krugman-esque fantasyland we should spend another $4 trillion idiocy), has worked out just fine. There's virtually no difference in where affected economies have ended up without sinking their debt even further into the abyss as we have. The countries least affected to begin with were those who had their debt under control from the start relative to others, and, longer term, they'll be the ones who end up in a better position.
-------------------------------------------------------
> It was the fact that the Obama economic policies
> revived an economy in recession dip shit. Want to
> talk about delusion. Conservative austerity
> caused triple dip recessions in Great Britain.
> You are failures, there's evidence your failures.
> It fact that your policies are always wrong in
> whatever circumstance.
>
> You bashed this president on his economic policies
> and he ended the recession. You were wrong.
> Wrong again as always. You have no shame and no
> self respect. No dignity to accept all the times
> you've been wrong.
>
> Bush left us with a mess in revenue generation and
> an economy on the verge of self destruction.
> Obama's policies have decreased deficits more than
> has ever occurred in the history of this country.
> And that's a fact you son of a bitch.
>
> It's about time you started showing some respect
> to a president that fearlessly brought us out of
> your recession.
Uh, no. The recovery has been pitiful by any typical comparisons and Obama's impotent economic policy has had little to do with anything. Funneling some cash to your pals through the stimulus didn't do much of anything to stimulate demand or jobs.
And you need to update your talking points. The "austerity" path (which really wasn't other than in comparison with the Krugman-esque fantasyland we should spend another $4 trillion idiocy), has worked out just fine. There's virtually no difference in where affected economies have ended up without sinking their debt even further into the abyss as we have. The countries least affected to begin with were those who had their debt under control from the start relative to others, and, longer term, they'll be the ones who end up in a better position.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Fantasy Factory
()
Date: January 10, 2014 04:34PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Sequester only amounts to 75 billion dollars a
> year in deficit reduction too dumb ass.
And exactly how much is the deficit "lower" by now?
Add that, plus the GSE contribution, plus a small increase in revenues and, as I said, there's your claimed deficit reduction.
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Sequester only amounts to 75 billion dollars a
> year in deficit reduction too dumb ass.
And exactly how much is the deficit "lower" by now?
Add that, plus the GSE contribution, plus a small increase in revenues and, as I said, there's your claimed deficit reduction.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Consevi-tards R Dumb
()
Date: January 10, 2014 04:36PM
Facts suck Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Whatever number you want to start with:
>
> 1. There are more now on net than prior to
> passage of the law due to cancellations resulting
> from the law.
a) It's early in the game.
b) And they'll get new coverage on the exchanges.
c) So?
> 2. The costs for insurance under the program have
> increased on average.
Which is offset by subsidies.
> 3. The vast majority of those who were uninsured
> will remain uninsured even after implementation.
Not so.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Whatever number you want to start with:
>
> 1. There are more now on net than prior to
> passage of the law due to cancellations resulting
> from the law.
a) It's early in the game.
b) And they'll get new coverage on the exchanges.
c) So?
> 2. The costs for insurance under the program have
> increased on average.
Which is offset by subsidies.
> 3. The vast majority of those who were uninsured
> will remain uninsured even after implementation.
Not so.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 04:37PM
I'm sorry so should we have implemented a Republican austerity plan with heavy cuts to entitlements in the midst of the recession rather than economic stimulas?
Did Great Britian not fall into a triple dip recession? Was their Conservative shitty Prime Minister not over here begging us to take action to increase trade with his country. Was all of that a figment of my imagination as well?
You are failures. The deficit could be balanced tomorrow if Republicans weren't fighting a class war.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/10/2014 04:39PM by Gerrymanderer2.
Did Great Britian not fall into a triple dip recession? Was their Conservative shitty Prime Minister not over here begging us to take action to increase trade with his country. Was all of that a figment of my imagination as well?
You are failures. The deficit could be balanced tomorrow if Republicans weren't fighting a class war.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/10/2014 04:39PM by Gerrymanderer2.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Rockhound
()
Date: January 10, 2014 04:39PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
The defecit could be balanced
> tomorrow if Republicans weren't fighting a class
> war.
The deficit could be fixed today if our government wasn't corrupt and evil.
-------------------------------------------------------
The defecit could be balanced
> tomorrow if Republicans weren't fighting a class
> war.
The deficit could be fixed today if our government wasn't corrupt and evil.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Facts suck
()
Date: January 10, 2014 04:50PM
Consevi-tards R Dumb Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Facts suck Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Whatever number you want to start with:
> >
> > 1. There are more now on net than prior to
> > passage of the law due to cancellations
> resulting
> > from the law.
>
> a) It's early in the game.
>
> b) And they'll get new coverage on the exchanges.
>
> c) So?
The stated objective of the law as to reduce the number of uninsured and to make it more affordable. Failure on both counts.
The reason being that the actual objective was to provide healthcare (versus insurance) to the lowest segment of the population. In that respect it has been a "success" given that we've greatly increased Medicaid participation. Which will increase costs overall for an already severely pressured program.
>
> > 2. The costs for insurance under the program
> have
> > increased on average.
>
> Which is offset by subsidies.
>
Nope, it's not. That only applies at the very low end and not as much as was expected even in that case. More importantly, is that the subsidization is not free. Somebody somewhere pays for that subsidy either directly through higher premiums, taxes, or debt.
> > 3. The vast majority of those who were
> uninsured
> > will remain uninsured even after
> implementation.
>
> Not so.
So. See CBO's estimates among others. It was never expected to decrease more than about 1/3rd of the uninsured to begin with (hint: otherwise their own stated goals for the program would have needed to be far higher than ~7 million).
-------------------------------------------------------
> Facts suck Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Whatever number you want to start with:
> >
> > 1. There are more now on net than prior to
> > passage of the law due to cancellations
> resulting
> > from the law.
>
> a) It's early in the game.
>
> b) And they'll get new coverage on the exchanges.
>
> c) So?
The stated objective of the law as to reduce the number of uninsured and to make it more affordable. Failure on both counts.
The reason being that the actual objective was to provide healthcare (versus insurance) to the lowest segment of the population. In that respect it has been a "success" given that we've greatly increased Medicaid participation. Which will increase costs overall for an already severely pressured program.
>
> > 2. The costs for insurance under the program
> have
> > increased on average.
>
> Which is offset by subsidies.
>
Nope, it's not. That only applies at the very low end and not as much as was expected even in that case. More importantly, is that the subsidization is not free. Somebody somewhere pays for that subsidy either directly through higher premiums, taxes, or debt.
> > 3. The vast majority of those who were
> uninsured
> > will remain uninsured even after
> implementation.
>
> Not so.
So. See CBO's estimates among others. It was never expected to decrease more than about 1/3rd of the uninsured to begin with (hint: otherwise their own stated goals for the program would have needed to be far higher than ~7 million).
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
wrongg
()
Date: January 10, 2014 04:57PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Democrats believe in a balanced approach to
> addressing the remaining 450 billion dollar yearly
> deficit. Democratic policies have decreased the
> deficit more than ever in the history of this
> country as it is.
>
> The Democrats are willing to negotiate and balance
> the budget through a balanced approach. One that
> includes even traces of increased revenue.
>
> The Republicans refuse and are incapable of
> moderation and such a solution. If you believe in
> such a balanced solution you should vote for
> Democrats. If you believe in taking an ax to
> medicare and social security and other
> entitlements. You should vote for Republicans.
> Its very simple.
The democrats have already produced historic tax increases. what is their balance?
-------------------------------------------------------
> Democrats believe in a balanced approach to
> addressing the remaining 450 billion dollar yearly
> deficit. Democratic policies have decreased the
> deficit more than ever in the history of this
> country as it is.
>
> The Democrats are willing to negotiate and balance
> the budget through a balanced approach. One that
> includes even traces of increased revenue.
>
> The Republicans refuse and are incapable of
> moderation and such a solution. If you believe in
> such a balanced solution you should vote for
> Democrats. If you believe in taking an ax to
> medicare and social security and other
> entitlements. You should vote for Republicans.
> Its very simple.
The democrats have already produced historic tax increases. what is their balance?
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Fantasy Factory
()
Date: January 10, 2014 05:00PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm sorry so should we have implemented a
> Republican austerity plan with heavy cuts to
> entitlements in the midst of the recession rather
> than economic stimulas?
>
Another typical Gerry libtard fail. When losing the argument, claim that their arguing things that they aren't. lol
Nobody suggested making heavy cuts to entitlements. The economic argument was over spending another several trillion dollars for stimulus. Of course if you pump money in you'll get an effect on the front-end. The problem is that you Krugnuts never want to talk about the back-end other than waving it away and saying "debt doesn't matter."
> Did Great Britian not fall into a triple dip
> recession? Was their Conservative shitty Prime
> Minister not over here begging us to take action
> to increase trade with his country. Was all of
> that a figment of my imagination as well?
>
Nope, actually they didn't beyond relatively small ticks up and down. Beyond your cherry-picking examples, overall they've been about on par on a relative basis with everyone else for where they started versus ended regardless what policy was followed. They did at least avoid digging their hole even deeper by taking some of the hit upfront versus just pushing it off by greatly increasing accumulated debt. We're lucky that we can (kind of for the moment at least) get away with it. They couldn't have even if they wanted to and would have seen even more negative effects later.
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm sorry so should we have implemented a
> Republican austerity plan with heavy cuts to
> entitlements in the midst of the recession rather
> than economic stimulas?
>
Another typical Gerry libtard fail. When losing the argument, claim that their arguing things that they aren't. lol
Nobody suggested making heavy cuts to entitlements. The economic argument was over spending another several trillion dollars for stimulus. Of course if you pump money in you'll get an effect on the front-end. The problem is that you Krugnuts never want to talk about the back-end other than waving it away and saying "debt doesn't matter."
> Did Great Britian not fall into a triple dip
> recession? Was their Conservative shitty Prime
> Minister not over here begging us to take action
> to increase trade with his country. Was all of
> that a figment of my imagination as well?
>
Nope, actually they didn't beyond relatively small ticks up and down. Beyond your cherry-picking examples, overall they've been about on par on a relative basis with everyone else for where they started versus ended regardless what policy was followed. They did at least avoid digging their hole even deeper by taking some of the hit upfront versus just pushing it off by greatly increasing accumulated debt. We're lucky that we can (kind of for the moment at least) get away with it. They couldn't have even if they wanted to and would have seen even more negative effects later.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 05:02PM
Obama has cut plenty outside of entitlements. If you won't give him credit that's your choice. The Democrats are focused on jobs and the economy and the lives of ordinary Americans.
Let us know when you start supposedly caring about jobs again rather than cutting medicare and privatizing social security.
What would your Republicans do if the old were all living in poverty and without health care? You'd have nothing else to stand for?
Let us know when you start supposedly caring about jobs again rather than cutting medicare and privatizing social security.
What would your Republicans do if the old were all living in poverty and without health care? You'd have nothing else to stand for?
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Fantasy Factory
()
Date: January 10, 2014 05:10PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Obama has cut plenty outside of entitlements. If
> you won't give him credit that's your choice. The
> Democrats are focused on jobs and the economy and
> the lives of ordinary Americans.
For example...???
>
> Let us know when you start supposedly caring about
> jobs again rather than cutting medicare and
> privatizing social security.
>
See above. Obama/Obamacare took money away from Medicare. Nobody else has.
Obama only "pivots" back to jobs every 5 months when he needs a distraction from whatever else is failing at the moment. As the job numbers show, he's done squat beyond making speeches.
> What would your Republicans do if the old were all
> living in poverty and without health care? You'd
> have nothing else to stand for?
Again see above. When failing, argue idiotic tangential points.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Obama has cut plenty outside of entitlements. If
> you won't give him credit that's your choice. The
> Democrats are focused on jobs and the economy and
> the lives of ordinary Americans.
For example...???
>
> Let us know when you start supposedly caring about
> jobs again rather than cutting medicare and
> privatizing social security.
>
See above. Obama/Obamacare took money away from Medicare. Nobody else has.
Obama only "pivots" back to jobs every 5 months when he needs a distraction from whatever else is failing at the moment. As the job numbers show, he's done squat beyond making speeches.
> What would your Republicans do if the old were all
> living in poverty and without health care? You'd
> have nothing else to stand for?
Again see above. When failing, argue idiotic tangential points.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 05:19PM
So you want Obama to cut Medicare while demonizing him for being the only person to cut Medicare?
You don't stand for anything. You just hold up the country is all you do.
You don't stand for anything. You just hold up the country is all you do.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Fantasy Factory
()
Date: January 10, 2014 05:31PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So you want Obama to cut Medicare while demonizing
> him for being the only person to cut Medicare?
>
> You don't stand for anything. You just hold up
> the country is all you do.
Didn't say that either. If you're going to argue, then you should try sticking to what I've said versus what you'd like for me to be saying.
On the other hand, you did say:
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Obama has cut plenty outside of entitlements. If
> you won't give him credit that's your choice. The
> Democrats are focused on jobs and the economy and
> the lives of ordinary Americans.
Again, for example?
-------------------------------------------------------
> So you want Obama to cut Medicare while demonizing
> him for being the only person to cut Medicare?
>
> You don't stand for anything. You just hold up
> the country is all you do.
Didn't say that either. If you're going to argue, then you should try sticking to what I've said versus what you'd like for me to be saying.
On the other hand, you did say:
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Obama has cut plenty outside of entitlements. If
> you won't give him credit that's your choice. The
> Democrats are focused on jobs and the economy and
> the lives of ordinary Americans.
Again, for example?
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 05:44PM
The president enacted the budget control act. Trillion dollar legislation over ten years. He has also eliminated multiple programs in various departments providing for another 30 billion dollars a year in decreased spending.
Government spending growth has also been less than going all the way back to the Eisenhower Administration.
Government spending growth has also been less than going all the way back to the Eisenhower Administration.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
all timee
()
Date: January 10, 2014 05:57PM
dun got me an obama meal
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Fantasy Factory
()
Date: January 10, 2014 06:29PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The president enacted the budget control act.
> Trillion dollar legislation over ten years. He
> has also eliminated multiple programs in various
> departments providing for another 30 billion
> dollars a year in decreased spending.
Oh the irony of calling anything related to out-of-control Federal spending the "Budget Control Act." Which amounted was squat without counting the sequester "cuts" and was the highest of the various alternatives proposed.
http://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/2013/12/11/review-numbers-discretionary-spending-levels-budget-control-act-and-sequester
which he proposed and then whined when it went through. Remember? It was going to be absolutely devastating! Like Nancy said, the cupboard is bare! Now you want to take credit for things they didn't want to do. lol
The bulk of the reduction came from the factors noted above which had little to nothing to do with any cost reduction he did.
>
> Government spending growth has also been less than
> going all the way back to the Eisenhower
> Administration.
BS. The only thing that's slowed is the RATE of growth. Which reflects the cuts above and is as you'd expect given that it's harder to grow multiple trillions by an equivalent percentage even when you try.
-------------------------------------------------------
> The president enacted the budget control act.
> Trillion dollar legislation over ten years. He
> has also eliminated multiple programs in various
> departments providing for another 30 billion
> dollars a year in decreased spending.
Oh the irony of calling anything related to out-of-control Federal spending the "Budget Control Act." Which amounted was squat without counting the sequester "cuts" and was the highest of the various alternatives proposed.
http://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/2013/12/11/review-numbers-discretionary-spending-levels-budget-control-act-and-sequester
which he proposed and then whined when it went through. Remember? It was going to be absolutely devastating! Like Nancy said, the cupboard is bare! Now you want to take credit for things they didn't want to do. lol
The bulk of the reduction came from the factors noted above which had little to nothing to do with any cost reduction he did.
>
> Government spending growth has also been less than
> going all the way back to the Eisenhower
> Administration.
BS. The only thing that's slowed is the RATE of growth. Which reflects the cuts above and is as you'd expect given that it's harder to grow multiple trillions by an equivalent percentage even when you try.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 06:35PM
Why don't you decide if you are crediting the president with the sequester cuts before taking a position. You don't know if you're coming or going.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Fantasy Factory
()
Date: January 10, 2014 06:49PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why don't you decide if you are crediting the
> president with the sequester cuts before taking a
> position. You don't know if you're coming or
> going.
I'm not a partisan hack like you so I don't have to take a "position." I just call the facts as they are. The Republicans are equally inept as far as controlling spending, the sequester being a rare exception which nobody really expected to actually happen. Which is the only reason that it did. And now the majority have ended up bailing on most of that in the most recent budget. But trying to play Obama up as making significant cuts is laughable.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why don't you decide if you are crediting the
> president with the sequester cuts before taking a
> position. You don't know if you're coming or
> going.
I'm not a partisan hack like you so I don't have to take a "position." I just call the facts as they are. The Republicans are equally inept as far as controlling spending, the sequester being a rare exception which nobody really expected to actually happen. Which is the only reason that it did. And now the majority have ended up bailing on most of that in the most recent budget. But trying to play Obama up as making significant cuts is laughable.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 06:52PM
I don't give a shit what the fuck you are. I am talking about the contradictions that exist in your specific statement. Is President Obama responsible for the Sequester or isn't he. He can't be both can he?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/10/2014 06:53PM by Gerrymanderer2.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/10/2014 06:53PM by Gerrymanderer2.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Fantasy Factory
()
Date: January 10, 2014 07:04PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't give a shit what the fuck you are. I am
> talking about the contradictions that exist in
> your specific statement. Is President Obama
> responsible for the Sequester or isn't he. He
> can't be both can he?
I know it sucks for you when you can fall back to your usual easy us-versus-them bullshit and have to actually argue facts.
Sure he can be. As anyone with a little sense and memory understands.
They proposed a disingenuous deal (which he later even tried to claim that he'd not been the one who did and distance himself from but later had to admit otherwise), on the basis that he thought nobody would ever take it.
His bluff got called.
He then whined and stomped his feet complaining about it.
Now you want to give him credit for the results of his "brilliant" plan that he didn't want. lol
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't give a shit what the fuck you are. I am
> talking about the contradictions that exist in
> your specific statement. Is President Obama
> responsible for the Sequester or isn't he. He
> can't be both can he?
I know it sucks for you when you can fall back to your usual easy us-versus-them bullshit and have to actually argue facts.
Sure he can be. As anyone with a little sense and memory understands.
They proposed a disingenuous deal (which he later even tried to claim that he'd not been the one who did and distance himself from but later had to admit otherwise), on the basis that he thought nobody would ever take it.
His bluff got called.
He then whined and stomped his feet complaining about it.
Now you want to give him credit for the results of his "brilliant" plan that he didn't want. lol
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 07:19PM
I don't want to give him credit for anything. I don't want to make anything partisan. You seem incapable of expressing a view point.
The question is quite simple. Is Obama responsible for the Sequester and therefore deserves credit for it or not?
These people all have the power to reverse whatever they want if there is enough support from the other side.
Which one is it? Is he responsible for the Sequester or not? You seem to be having a lot of difficulty with a very simple question.
The question is quite simple. Is Obama responsible for the Sequester and therefore deserves credit for it or not?
These people all have the power to reverse whatever they want if there is enough support from the other side.
Which one is it? Is he responsible for the Sequester or not? You seem to be having a lot of difficulty with a very simple question.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 07:21PM
This is stupid. You say you are not a Republican but you sure are mouthing off a lot of GOP double speak.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 07:24PM
This is why I call Republicans cowards. They want cuts, harsh cuts, they will hold the government hostage for such cuts. They will obstruct for years for such cuts.
But then when there are cuts they want to blame Democrats for them as well. If you want the fucking cuts, you let the cuts occur, you keep the government from reversing the cuts. You do all you can to make the cuts permanent.
Stand up like a man and take credit for your actions. The Republicans have been protecting and defending the Sequester using their power in Congress for what seems like forever now.
Yet you still have these cowards not willing to own their actions and point their finger at the president. You're cowards. Stand for something and take ownership of it.
But then when there are cuts they want to blame Democrats for them as well. If you want the fucking cuts, you let the cuts occur, you keep the government from reversing the cuts. You do all you can to make the cuts permanent.
Stand up like a man and take credit for your actions. The Republicans have been protecting and defending the Sequester using their power in Congress for what seems like forever now.
Yet you still have these cowards not willing to own their actions and point their finger at the president. You're cowards. Stand for something and take ownership of it.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Fantasy Factory
()
Date: January 10, 2014 07:28PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't want to give him credit for anything. I
> don't want to make anything partisan. You seem
> incapable of expressing a view point.
>
> The question is quite simple. Is Obama
> responsible for the Sequester and therefore
> deserves credit for it or not?
>
> These people all have the power to reverse
> whatever they want if there is enough support from
> the other side.
>
> Which one is it? Is he responsible for the
> Sequester or not? You seem to be having a lot of
> difficulty with a very simple question.
I gave you the reality of the situation as it exists above.
No, he doesn't deserve credit for it because he opposed the net effect of the deal from the start, never supported it, and still doesn't. You can't get credit for something that you didn't intend to happen and oppose. Because costs ended up lower in spite of his efforts and position taken doesn't wash.
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't want to give him credit for anything. I
> don't want to make anything partisan. You seem
> incapable of expressing a view point.
>
> The question is quite simple. Is Obama
> responsible for the Sequester and therefore
> deserves credit for it or not?
>
> These people all have the power to reverse
> whatever they want if there is enough support from
> the other side.
>
> Which one is it? Is he responsible for the
> Sequester or not? You seem to be having a lot of
> difficulty with a very simple question.
I gave you the reality of the situation as it exists above.
No, he doesn't deserve credit for it because he opposed the net effect of the deal from the start, never supported it, and still doesn't. You can't get credit for something that you didn't intend to happen and oppose. Because costs ended up lower in spite of his efforts and position taken doesn't wash.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Fantasy Factory
()
Date: January 10, 2014 07:31PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is stupid. You say you are not a Republican
> but you sure are mouthing off a lot of GOP double
> speak.
I know it's hard to understand in your simple black/white little world, but criticism of Obama/Democrats doesn't require that you're a Republican.
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is stupid. You say you are not a Republican
> but you sure are mouthing off a lot of GOP double
> speak.
I know it's hard to understand in your simple black/white little world, but criticism of Obama/Democrats doesn't require that you're a Republican.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Fantasy Factory
()
Date: January 10, 2014 07:39PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is why I call Republicans cowards. They want
> cuts, harsh cuts, they will hold the government
> hostage for such cuts. They will obstruct for
> years for such cuts.
>
> But then when there are cuts they want to blame
> Democrats for them as well. If you want the
> fucking cuts, you let the cuts occur, you keep the
> government from reversing the cuts. You do all
> you can to make the cuts permanent.
>
> Stand up like a man and take credit for your
> actions. The Republicans have been protecting and
> defending the Sequester using their power in
> Congress for what seems like forever now.
>
> Yet you still have these cowards not willing to
> own their actions and point their finger at the
> president. You're cowards. Stand for something
> and take ownership of it.
^ This is why partisan fucktards like you are fucktards.
Nobody who's concerned with excessive spending is disappointed with the "cuts" or avoiding ownership. Regardless how it happened, the net result works.
The only point that I called you on was you trying to give Obama credit for reducing spending when little to none of any reduction is attributable to anything that he's done in that regard.
In fact, he opposed the sequester and he (and you) have argued for much greater spending as a means for stimulating the economy. You can't have it both ways son.
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is why I call Republicans cowards. They want
> cuts, harsh cuts, they will hold the government
> hostage for such cuts. They will obstruct for
> years for such cuts.
>
> But then when there are cuts they want to blame
> Democrats for them as well. If you want the
> fucking cuts, you let the cuts occur, you keep the
> government from reversing the cuts. You do all
> you can to make the cuts permanent.
>
> Stand up like a man and take credit for your
> actions. The Republicans have been protecting and
> defending the Sequester using their power in
> Congress for what seems like forever now.
>
> Yet you still have these cowards not willing to
> own their actions and point their finger at the
> president. You're cowards. Stand for something
> and take ownership of it.
^ This is why partisan fucktards like you are fucktards.
Nobody who's concerned with excessive spending is disappointed with the "cuts" or avoiding ownership. Regardless how it happened, the net result works.
The only point that I called you on was you trying to give Obama credit for reducing spending when little to none of any reduction is attributable to anything that he's done in that regard.
In fact, he opposed the sequester and he (and you) have argued for much greater spending as a means for stimulating the economy. You can't have it both ways son.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 07:41PM
No I understand very well. Its just with the issue of the Sequester. You cowards show your colors more than anything. You don't have the testicular fortitude to take credit for cuts you support. That's what I've mean when I've called you cowards.
You want Obama to be responsible for the trouble if any the harsh cuts may be causing or have caused but not give him credit for the deficit reduction. You want it both ways.
It doesn't matter if you're a fucking Republican or not. Your knowledge of the specifics and the position of the Democrats that it needs to be revised to make the cuts in a more responsible fashion and not across the board is very limited.
There's a lot of history there about the positions of both parties. All the way to the recent negotiations between Paul Ryan and Patty Murray.
I know what the Sequester is and was, do you outside the limited bullshit double speak you've been fed?
You want Obama to be responsible for the trouble if any the harsh cuts may be causing or have caused but not give him credit for the deficit reduction. You want it both ways.
It doesn't matter if you're a fucking Republican or not. Your knowledge of the specifics and the position of the Democrats that it needs to be revised to make the cuts in a more responsible fashion and not across the board is very limited.
There's a lot of history there about the positions of both parties. All the way to the recent negotiations between Paul Ryan and Patty Murray.
I know what the Sequester is and was, do you outside the limited bullshit double speak you've been fed?
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 07:46PM
Fantasy Factory Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > This is why I call Republicans cowards. They
> want
> > cuts, harsh cuts, they will hold the government
> > hostage for such cuts. They will obstruct for
> > years for such cuts.
> >
> > But then when there are cuts they want to blame
> > Democrats for them as well. If you want the
> > fucking cuts, you let the cuts occur, you keep
> the
> > government from reversing the cuts. You do all
> > you can to make the cuts permanent.
> >
> > Stand up like a man and take credit for your
> > actions. The Republicans have been protecting
> and
> > defending the Sequester using their power in
> > Congress for what seems like forever now.
> >
> > Yet you still have these cowards not willing to
> > own their actions and point their finger at the
> > president. You're cowards. Stand for
> something
> > and take ownership of it.
>
>
> ^ This is why partisan fucktards like you are
> fucktards.
>
> Nobody who's concerned with excessive spending is
> disappointed with the "cuts" or avoiding
> ownership. Regardless how it happened, the net
> result works.
>
> The only point that I called you on was you trying
> to give Obama credit for reducing spending when
> little to none of any reduction is attributable to
> anything that he's done in that regard.
>
> In fact, he opposed the sequester and he (and you)
> have argued for much greater spending as a means
> for stimulating the economy. You can't have it
> both ways son.
I never gave Obama credit for the Sequester cuts. If you scroll up where I list cuts he should receive credit for that is not included. I also never gave him credit for those cuts in any of my statements.
Stop fabricating positions for me and creating lies about my statements.
What I asked the many anonymous trolls that want me to slap them around now.
Is if you're making a statement in relation to the Sequester being one of the primary reason for deficit reduction.
What is your position on who is responsible for the Sequester. I know in the initial days every Republican across the board said the President was responsible although Republican refused to bring it up.
I wasn't the one that brought the Sequester into the discussion whatsoever. Those who did can't seem to decide who's responsible for it while denying the president deserves credit.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > This is why I call Republicans cowards. They
> want
> > cuts, harsh cuts, they will hold the government
> > hostage for such cuts. They will obstruct for
> > years for such cuts.
> >
> > But then when there are cuts they want to blame
> > Democrats for them as well. If you want the
> > fucking cuts, you let the cuts occur, you keep
> the
> > government from reversing the cuts. You do all
> > you can to make the cuts permanent.
> >
> > Stand up like a man and take credit for your
> > actions. The Republicans have been protecting
> and
> > defending the Sequester using their power in
> > Congress for what seems like forever now.
> >
> > Yet you still have these cowards not willing to
> > own their actions and point their finger at the
> > president. You're cowards. Stand for
> something
> > and take ownership of it.
>
>
> ^ This is why partisan fucktards like you are
> fucktards.
>
> Nobody who's concerned with excessive spending is
> disappointed with the "cuts" or avoiding
> ownership. Regardless how it happened, the net
> result works.
>
> The only point that I called you on was you trying
> to give Obama credit for reducing spending when
> little to none of any reduction is attributable to
> anything that he's done in that regard.
>
> In fact, he opposed the sequester and he (and you)
> have argued for much greater spending as a means
> for stimulating the economy. You can't have it
> both ways son.
I never gave Obama credit for the Sequester cuts. If you scroll up where I list cuts he should receive credit for that is not included. I also never gave him credit for those cuts in any of my statements.
Stop fabricating positions for me and creating lies about my statements.
What I asked the many anonymous trolls that want me to slap them around now.
Is if you're making a statement in relation to the Sequester being one of the primary reason for deficit reduction.
What is your position on who is responsible for the Sequester. I know in the initial days every Republican across the board said the President was responsible although Republican refused to bring it up.
I wasn't the one that brought the Sequester into the discussion whatsoever. Those who did can't seem to decide who's responsible for it while denying the president deserves credit.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 07:48PM
So don't put words in my mouth because you talk out of both sides of yours. I strive for consistency and don't make statements I don't believe in.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Fantasy Factory
()
Date: January 10, 2014 10:34PM
Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I never gave Obama credit for the Sequester cuts.
> If you scroll up where I list cuts he should
> receive credit for that is not included. I also
> never gave him credit for those cuts in any of my
> statements.
>
> Stop fabricating positions for me and creating
> lies about my statements.
>
> What I asked the many anonymous trolls that want
> me to slap them around now.
>
> Is if you're making a statement in relation to the
> Sequester being one of the primary reason for
> deficit reduction.
>
> What is your position on who is responsible for
> the Sequester. I know in the initial days every
> Republican across the board said the President was
> responsible although Republican refused to bring
> it up.
>
> I wasn't the one that brought the Sequester into
> the discussion whatsoever. Those who did can't
> seem to decide who's responsible for it while
> denying the president deserves credit.
Those were the only significant discretionary cuts nutsack. The "sequester" was the sequel to and effectively superseded the original BCA.
I don't have a "position," I just have the facts of the matter as I described the timeline above. The admin came up with the scheme not counting on it happening and has opposed it ever since. The Republicans played a better hand and caused it happen. You can assign "responsibility" within that reality however you want.
Personally, I don't think either side gets much credit since neither really wanted it. They both fell into it only because they're too fucking incompetent to come up with anything better.
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I never gave Obama credit for the Sequester cuts.
> If you scroll up where I list cuts he should
> receive credit for that is not included. I also
> never gave him credit for those cuts in any of my
> statements.
>
> Stop fabricating positions for me and creating
> lies about my statements.
>
> What I asked the many anonymous trolls that want
> me to slap them around now.
>
> Is if you're making a statement in relation to the
> Sequester being one of the primary reason for
> deficit reduction.
>
> What is your position on who is responsible for
> the Sequester. I know in the initial days every
> Republican across the board said the President was
> responsible although Republican refused to bring
> it up.
>
> I wasn't the one that brought the Sequester into
> the discussion whatsoever. Those who did can't
> seem to decide who's responsible for it while
> denying the president deserves credit.
Those were the only significant discretionary cuts nutsack. The "sequester" was the sequel to and effectively superseded the original BCA.
I don't have a "position," I just have the facts of the matter as I described the timeline above. The admin came up with the scheme not counting on it happening and has opposed it ever since. The Republicans played a better hand and caused it happen. You can assign "responsibility" within that reality however you want.
Personally, I don't think either side gets much credit since neither really wanted it. They both fell into it only because they're too fucking incompetent to come up with anything better.
Re: What ObamaCare is Really About - Very Well Written and Fact Based
Posted by:
Gerrymanderer2
()
Date: January 10, 2014 10:39PM
Okay so no one is responsible but Obama is to blame. Got it thanks for the clarification.