login
Obama's Credibility in Melting (Page 2)
-
No new posts
|
 2013-10-29 8:44 AM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Pro  9391     Omaha, NE |  Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in MeltingOriginally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by Left Brain I think I would have to echo PM's comments. President Obama is the leader of our country, and I respect that.....but really, he has done NOTHING to increase our standing in the world. You can point to Obamacare if you like it, and you can say he stood down the Tea Party, but his foreign policy decisions have been abysmal. Aren't we withdrawing from multiple wars at the moment? And we have reached a deal to get a hostile, tumultuous nation to destroy their chemical weapon arsenal. I would say that is at least something. Would you say Bush increased our standing in the world? Comparing this President to the last I would say he has done a better job. That's a good question. I agree that getting out of Iraq was a good thing and no matter what it was going to be messy, so I don't fault the President for that. I think he's trying to get out of Afghanistan, but it's a lot more messy and if he just withdraws completely things could go south in a bad way. So, I also give him credit for what he's done up to this point and see that as a good thing as well. Now comparing him to Bush, I think what Obama has done in Afghanistan and Iraq are positives, but I'm not sure how much credit he gets for them. I think in contrast the increased use of drone strikes to assassinate terrorists abroad has harmed us almost as much as Iraq has. The other issue is all of the NSA stuff that's coming out regarding our allies. That one is pretty new, but I told a friend the other day it's like getting caught with a hidden camera in your neighbors house and then wondering why they don't want to talk to you anymore or help you out. (ok, maybe a bad example) |
| 2013-10-29 8:47 AM in reply to: dmiller5 |
New user 900 , | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by Left Brain I think I would have to echo PM's comments. President Obama is the leader of our country, and I respect that.....but really, he has done NOTHING to increase our standing in the world. You can point to Obamacare if you like it, and you can say he stood down the Tea Party, but his foreign policy decisions have been abysmal. Aren't we withdrawing from multiple wars at the moment? And we have reached a deal to get a hostile, tumultuous nation to destroy their chemical weapon arsenal. I would say that is at least something. Would you say Bush increased our standing in the world? Comparing this President to the last I would say he has done a better job. And exactly how much of Syria's stockpile has been destroyed? And since it is so peaceful now in Syria I guess you are going to vacation in Damascus next year. BTW, it was Mr. Putin who brokered that deal and with Mr. Obama's response, our influence in the region was handed over to the Russians. N. Africa and the M.E. is a ticking time bomb thanks to Mr. Obama's foreign policy or lack there of. |
| 2013-10-29 8:50 AM in reply to: 0 |
Member 465 | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by Left Brain I think I would have to echo PM's comments. President Obama is the leader of our country, and I respect that.....but really, he has done NOTHING to increase our standing in the world. You can point to Obamacare if you like it, and you can say he stood down the Tea Party, but his foreign policy decisions have been abysmal. Aren't we withdrawing from multiple wars at the moment? And we have reached a deal to get a hostile, tumultuous nation to destroy their chemical weapon arsenal. I would say that is at least something. Would you say Bush increased our standing in the world? Comparing this President to the last I would say he has done a better job. I think I recall Obama interrupted regularly scheduled broadcasting to make his case to bomb Syria. Don't you remember how emotional he got talking about dead Syrian children. FYI, Syrian children are still dying. How did that whole coalition building go for Obama? who did he get to agree with him that bombing Syria was a really good idea? What political chips could he cash in? For crying out loud, we couldn't even get the Brits this time. Putin put the chemical weapon deal together. Just a heads up, when an ex-KGB thug is viewed as the adult in the room, you know you got credibility problems Edited by Jackemy1 2013-10-29 8:51 AM |
| 2013-10-29 8:52 AM in reply to: NXS |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting Originally posted by NXS Originally posted by dmiller5 And exactly how much of Syria's stockpile has been destroyed? And since it is so peaceful now in Syria I guess you are going to vacation in Damascus next year. BTW, it was Mr. Putin who brokered that deal and with Mr. Obama's response, our influence in the region was handed over to the Russians. N. Africa and the M.E. is a ticking time bomb thanks to Mr. Obama's foreign policy or lack there of. Originally posted by Left Brain I think I would have to echo PM's comments. President Obama is the leader of our country, and I respect that.....but really, he has done NOTHING to increase our standing in the world. You can point to Obamacare if you like it, and you can say he stood down the Tea Party, but his foreign policy decisions have been abysmal. Aren't we withdrawing from multiple wars at the moment? And we have reached a deal to get a hostile, tumultuous nation to destroy their chemical weapon arsenal. I would say that is at least something. Would you say Bush increased our standing in the world? Comparing this President to the last I would say he has done a better job. You are horribly misrepresenting the facts. I believe it was a joke by John Kerry that actually started the negotiations about destroying the weapons. We don't have "influence" in that region other than the threat of war. Israel is the only country that really listens at all to anything we say. The Russians have always had influence because they sell weapons there. Instead of rhetoric why don't we have a discussion about what is actually happening. |
| 2013-10-29 9:31 AM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting The Syrian chemical weapons deal was just enbarrassing. And yeah, Obama looked like an idiot compared to Putin. But to me, it pales in comparison to the "starting of relations" with Iran. Obama will alienate every friend of ours in the region to end up looking like a complete buffoon when Iran goes live with a weapons program. There is not an expert anywhere on iranian policy who doesn't believe this is Iran putting on a good face while they continue down the road to their goal of a nuclear weapon. Iran MUST continue to be margionalized by the rest of the world through sanctions and covert coverage of their nuclear program. That regime has one goal, the destruction of Israel and ultimately the United States. Look, Obama has no foreign policy......he's just throwing darts at a board and running his mouth. |
| 2013-10-29 9:54 AM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Member 465 | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by NXS Originally posted by dmiller5 And exactly how much of Syria's stockpile has been destroyed? And since it is so peaceful now in Syria I guess you are going to vacation in Damascus next year. BTW, it was Mr. Putin who brokered that deal and with Mr. Obama's response, our influence in the region was handed over to the Russians. N. Africa and the M.E. is a ticking time bomb thanks to Mr. Obama's foreign policy or lack there of. Originally posted by Left Brain I think I would have to echo PM's comments. President Obama is the leader of our country, and I respect that.....but really, he has done NOTHING to increase our standing in the world. You can point to Obamacare if you like it, and you can say he stood down the Tea Party, but his foreign policy decisions have been abysmal. Aren't we withdrawing from multiple wars at the moment? And we have reached a deal to get a hostile, tumultuous nation to destroy their chemical weapon arsenal. I would say that is at least something. Would you say Bush increased our standing in the world? Comparing this President to the last I would say he has done a better job. You are horribly misrepresenting the facts. I believe it was a joke by John Kerry that actually started the negotiations about destroying the weapons. We don't have "influence" in that region other than the threat of war. Israel is the only country that really listens at all to anything we say. The Russians have always had influence because they sell weapons there. Instead of rhetoric why don't we have a discussion about what is actually happening. America negotiates through comedy now? Jimmy Carter brokered the Camp David accords, not through the threat of way but by being a credible broker of peace. To say that America can only influence through force is wrong and absolutely contrary to what Obama said he would do in his speech in Egypt a few years back. |
| 2013-10-29 10:01 AM in reply to: Jackemy1 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting And then there's this foreign policy gem...........shameful.
|
| 2013-10-29 11:32 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
Member 465 | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting Originally posted by Left Brain And then there's this foreign policy gem...........shameful.
That right wing hack job "news" program did an absolutely scathing story on Benghazi. This is must see TV. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57609479/60-minutes-benghazi/ I am starting to sense a trend...... |
| 2013-10-29 1:02 PM in reply to: Jackemy1 |
Expert 2180 Boise, Idaho | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting I'm becoming a bit more skeptical. Hillary may have ALOT of 'splainin' to do...... |
| 2013-10-29 8:08 PM in reply to: jeffnboise |
| Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting Originally posted by jeffnboise I'm becoming a bit more skeptical. Hillary may have ALOT of 'splainin' to do......
Jeff, What difference at this point does it make? On another note, how do you come to the conclusion that Obama had a mandate for the ACA? Not one Republican voted for it. Not only that but many backroom deals (our money being used to bribe senators) with Democrats to get them to vote for it. A lot of what he said about the ACA was either greatly misrepresented or outright lied about when he was "selling" it to legislators and the American people. Now you have Democrats running away from it in hopes of being re-elected. How do you define mandate in regards to the ACA? I find it curious in your original response to my question you didn't mention Benghazi, the IRS attacking opposition groups to the DNC, NSA and I think I'm forgetting a couple but anyway. Are those irrelevant? Oh, the Arizona Gun running stone wall Obama put up on the Holder investigation. Would you agree or disagree that if what Bush did made him a "liar" based on the statements Obama has made to the American people, would you say Obama is "pathological liar"?
I completely agree with you on the Transparency and not just with Obama but all administrations. |
| 2013-10-30 9:10 PM in reply to: NXS |
| Member 169 | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting Originally posted by NXS Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by Left Brain I think I would have to echo PM's comments. President Obama is the leader of our country, and I respect that.....but really, he has done NOTHING to increase our standing in the world. You can point to Obamacare if you like it, and you can say he stood down the Tea Party, but his foreign policy decisions have been abysmal. Aren't we withdrawing from multiple wars at the moment? And we have reached a deal to get a hostile, tumultuous nation to destroy their chemical weapon arsenal. I would say that is at least something. Would you say Bush increased our standing in the world? Comparing this President to the last I would say he has done a better job. And exactly how much of Syria's stockpile has been destroyed? And since it is so peaceful now in Syria I guess you are going to vacation in Damascus next year. BTW, it was Mr. Putin who brokered that deal and with Mr. Obama's response, our influence in the region was handed over to the Russians. N. Africa and the M.E. is a ticking time bomb thanks to Mr. Obama's foreign policy or lack there of. So what was Obama supposed to do with Syria? Why is it so wrong that some other major countries stepped up to help the situation? It's been what, 3 months and everything in Syria should be absolutely peaceful? And N. Africa and M.E. are a ticking time bomb because of Obama? It has nothing to do with 100's of years problems? This is funny coming from conservatives saying how our government should stay out of our lives and can't do anything right but some how it should have complete influence on century old conflicts around the world. |
| 2013-10-31 7:57 AM in reply to: burhed |
| New user 900 , | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting Originally posted by burhed Originally posted by NXS Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by Left Brain I think I would have to echo PM's comments. President Obama is the leader of our country, and I respect that.....but really, he has done NOTHING to increase our standing in the world. You can point to Obamacare if you like it, and you can say he stood down the Tea Party, but his foreign policy decisions have been abysmal. Aren't we withdrawing from multiple wars at the moment? And we have reached a deal to get a hostile, tumultuous nation to destroy their chemical weapon arsenal. I would say that is at least something. Would you say Bush increased our standing in the world? Comparing this President to the last I would say he has done a better job. And exactly how much of Syria's stockpile has been destroyed? And since it is so peaceful now in Syria I guess you are going to vacation in Damascus next year. BTW, it was Mr. Putin who brokered that deal and with Mr. Obama's response, our influence in the region was handed over to the Russians. N. Africa and the M.E. is a ticking time bomb thanks to Mr. Obama's foreign policy or lack there of. So what was Obama supposed to do with Syria? Why is it so wrong that some other major countries stepped up to help the situation? It's been what, 3 months and everything in Syria should be absolutely peaceful? And N. Africa and M.E. are a ticking time bomb because of Obama? It has nothing to do with 100's of years problems? This is funny coming from conservatives saying how our government should stay out of our lives and can't do anything right but some how it should have complete influence on century old conflicts around the world. With Syria he should have thought before he opened his mouth and talked about a red line. The man needs to learn back door diploma. Whats wrong with other countries stepping up? It depends on who is stepping up. Just look at history. Yes, it is Obama's fault, because he chooses to support the wrong side. Apparently he doesn't know or he doesn't care that the Muslim Brotherhood supports al qaeda, you know the friendly folks who want to destroy us, kill Christians, Jews and establish a caliphate. So yes, the problem is his, its his foreign policy in the region (support the Muslim Brotherhood) that really got this mess going. I noticed you didn't mention how folks in the region feel about us reaching out to Iran and how early in his administration he left a movement to overthrow the gov. there out to dry. |
| 2013-10-31 10:23 AM in reply to: crusevegas |
Expert 2180 Boise, Idaho | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting Originally posted by crusevegas Originally posted by jeffnboise I'm becoming a bit more skeptical. Hillary may have ALOT of 'splainin' to do......
Jeff, What difference at this point does it make? On another note, how do you come to the conclusion that Obama had a mandate for the ACA? Not one Republican voted for it. Not only that but many backroom deals (our money being used to bribe senators) with Democrats to get them to vote for it. A lot of what he said about the ACA was either greatly misrepresented or outright lied about when he was "selling" it to legislators and the American people. Now you have Democrats running away from it in hopes of being re-elected. How do you define mandate in regards to the ACA? It's the law. We had an election-Obama and his signature running platform won. THAT is a mandate. The fact that no Repubs voted for it doesn't mean bubka to me. 95% of repubs voted to keep the govt. shutdown. And frankly, there is nothing being said about ACA that isn't political 'spin' on both sides. Medicare part D rollout was an utter diaster, too. Big Deal! Move along-nothing to see here! I find it curious in your original response to my question you didn't mention Benghazi, the IRS attacking opposition groups to the DNC, NSA and I think I'm forgetting a couple but anyway. Are those irrelevant? Oh, the Arizona Gun running stone wall Obama put up on the Holder investigation. Benghazi-somebody messed up. But not I, you, nor any of the talking heads on TV know what happened. Good people lost their lives in the service of their country. THAT is unacceptable. I want the problems fixed so it doesn't happen again. The 'Blame Game' is nothing but political theater-and it's an insult to those we lost. IRS? No-a couple of individuals who WORKED for the IRS. NSA-Meh, don't care. For every average Joe that get a cell phone tapped-5 world leaders are getting the same thing. Don't do stupid crap and it's all good. To all the people who wanted the Patriot Act....you got it! Fast and Furious-Great Plan (in theory) that went wrong. It was an election year; of COURSE it was gonna get buried. If it had worked, Holder would be a frickin' hero and the Repubs wouldn't have wanted THAT, either. Would you agree or disagree that if what Bush did made him a "liar" based on the statements Obama has made to the American people, would you say Obama is "pathological liar"? Would you agree or disagree that you beating your wife is a bad idea? Come on, mahn! I completely agree with you on the Transparency and not just with Obama but all administrations. B.O. term 2 has been a mitigated diaster. I'm disappointed. If the Repubs were smart, they would stand back and let BO and his policies fail in full view of the American electorate. But they're NOT smart (nor are the Dems) and they've given BO and the Dems political cover for the failures. I think ACA is a great idea (though it's hardly without shortcomings), and to infer/imply that it was ill-conceived is a fools folly. There were some BRILLIANT people advising it. The website is a diaster, but so what-pick up a phone and do it the old fashioned way. 2 yrs from now ACA may not not anything like it does now-but health care in America will be better. Politics and politicians all suck donkey butt. TERM LIMITS for all. (Or a civil revolution within 10-15 yrs.) |
| 2013-10-31 10:51 AM in reply to: jeffnboise |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting Originally posted by jeffnboise Originally posted by crusevegas Originally posted by jeffnboise I'm becoming a bit more skeptical. Hillary may have ALOT of 'splainin' to do......
Jeff, What difference at this point does it make? On another note, how do you come to the conclusion that Obama had a mandate for the ACA? Not one Republican voted for it. Not only that but many backroom deals (our money being used to bribe senators) with Democrats to get them to vote for it. A lot of what he said about the ACA was either greatly misrepresented or outright lied about when he was "selling" it to legislators and the American people. Now you have Democrats running away from it in hopes of being re-elected. How do you define mandate in regards to the ACA? It's the law. We had an election-Obama and his signature running platform won. THAT is a mandate. The fact that no Repubs voted for it doesn't mean bubka to me. 95% of repubs voted to keep the govt. shutdown. And frankly, there is nothing being said about ACA that isn't political 'spin' on both sides. Medicare part D rollout was an utter diaster, too. Big Deal! Move along-nothing to see here! I find it curious in your original response to my question you didn't mention Benghazi, the IRS attacking opposition groups to the DNC, NSA and I think I'm forgetting a couple but anyway. Are those irrelevant? Oh, the Arizona Gun running stone wall Obama put up on the Holder investigation. Benghazi-somebody messed up. But not I, you, nor any of the talking heads on TV know what happened. Good people lost their lives in the service of their country. THAT is unacceptable. I want the problems fixed so it doesn't happen again. The 'Blame Game' is nothing but political theater-and it's an insult to those we lost. IRS? No-a couple of individuals who WORKED for the IRS. NSA-Meh, don't care. For every average Joe that get a cell phone tapped-5 world leaders are getting the same thing. Don't do stupid crap and it's all good. To all the people who wanted the Patriot Act....you got it! Fast and Furious-Great Plan (in theory) that went wrong. It was an election year; of COURSE it was gonna get buried. If it had worked, Holder would be a frickin' hero and the Repubs wouldn't have wanted THAT, either. Would you agree or disagree that if what Bush did made him a "liar" based on the statements Obama has made to the American people, would you say Obama is "pathological liar"? Would you agree or disagree that you beating your wife is a bad idea? Come on, mahn! I completely agree with you on the Transparency and not just with Obama but all administrations. B.O. term 2 has been a mitigated diaster. I'm disappointed. If the Repubs were smart, they would stand back and let BO and his policies fail in full view of the American electorate. But they're NOT smart (nor are the Dems) and they've given BO and the Dems political cover for the failures. I think ACA is a great idea (though it's hardly without shortcomings), and to infer/imply that it was ill-conceived is a fools folly. There were some BRILLIANT people advising it. The website is a diaster, but so what-pick up a phone and do it the old fashioned way. 2 yrs from now ACA may not not anything like it does now-but health care in America will be better. Politics and politicians all suck donkey butt. TERM LIMITS for all. (Or a civil revolution within 10-15 yrs.) Purely from a political standpoint I agree with your point on the Republicans. They would get the most political capital by just getting out of the way. I would change your brilliant to heavily vested special interests advising it. You notice how the medical field (which already has atrociously high prices) loved it and supported it so much. Also, these "brilliant" people have made some really dumb oversights such as only providing subsidies to state run exchanges which is currently being challenged in court. So, I'm a little less confident in their "brilliance". The financial viability of the ACA is no question based on turn out. Do the people sign up for it in the numbers they anticipated. If they do, then they have the revenue stream. Then, do the anticipated cost control mechanisms keep the cost of healthcare down, if they do then they keep the costs down and it works out. I don't like what I'm hearing about the administration placing a gag order on insurance companies so they don't share enrollment numbers. Simply due to the website having so many issues there's no question the enrollment numbers are going to be low, but I would think a "transparent administration" would be willing to allow them to share that information. |
| 2013-10-31 11:25 AM in reply to: jeffnboise |
| Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting Originally posted by jeffnboise Originally posted by crusevegas Originally posted by jeffnboise I'm becoming a bit more skeptical. Hillary may have ALOT of 'splainin' to do......
Jeff, What difference at this point does it make? On another note, how do you come to the conclusion that Obama had a mandate for the ACA? Not one Republican voted for it. Not only that but many backroom deals (our money being used to bribe senators) with Democrats to get them to vote for it. A lot of what he said about the ACA was either greatly misrepresented or outright lied about when he was "selling" it to legislators and the American people. Now you have Democrats running away from it in hopes of being re-elected. How do you define mandate in regards to the ACA? It's the law. We had an election-Obama and his signature running platform won. THAT is a mandate. The fact that no Repubs voted for it doesn't mean bubka to me. 95% of repubs voted to keep the govt. shutdown. And frankly, there is nothing being said about ACA that isn't political 'spin' on both sides. Medicare part D rollout was an utter diaster, too. Big Deal! Move along-nothing to see here!
If he had a mandate he/Senator Reid wouldn't of had to bride Democrats to vote for it. Lets say he had a mandate, what he sold the American people and the legislators was misleading at best and outright lies at worst. What are our unfunded liabilities on medicare and related programs?
I find it curious in your original response to my question you didn't mention Benghazi, the IRS attacking opposition groups to the DNC, NSA and I think I'm forgetting a couple but anyway. Are those irrelevant? Oh, the Arizona Gun running stone wall Obama put up on the Holder investigation. Benghazi-somebody messed up. But not I, you, nor any of the talking heads on TV know what happened. Good people lost their lives in the service of their country. THAT is unacceptable. I want the problems fixed so it doesn't happen again. The 'Blame Game' is nothing but political theater-and it's an insult to those we lost. First we were flat out lied to and now 14 months later we the American people still are kept in the dark...... Remember when you said you wanted more transparency?
IRS? No-a couple of individuals who WORKED for the IRS. Really, honestly, you think it was just a couple of people in the IRS that were responsible for this?
NSA-Meh, don't care. For every average Joe that get a cell phone tapped-5 world leaders are getting the same thing. Don't do stupid crap and it's all good. To all the people who wanted the Patriot Act....you got it! Fast and Furious-Great Plan (in theory) that went wrong. It was an election year; of COURSE it was gonna get buried. If it had worked, Holder would be a frickin' hero and the Repubs wouldn't have wanted THAT, either. IF it had worked? Sorry, I think it worked just how they wanted, with the exception that more information about it got to the public than they wanted. Remember when Obama was pointing to the USA and saying we were the reason Mexico had so many guns (even though a very small percentage of guns actually came from the USA) Obama quit that talking point and hasn't repeated it since his gun running scheme was made public.
Would you agree or disagree that if what Bush did made him a "liar" based on the statements Obama has made to the American people, would you say Obama is "pathological liar"? Would you agree or disagree that you beating your wife is a bad idea? Come on, mahn! Depends on which ex-wife you're referring to OH, did you quit beating your wife? I completely agree with you on the Transparency and not just with Obama but all administrations. B.O. term 2 has been a mitigated diaster. I'm disappointed. If the Repubs were smart, they would stand back and let BO and his policies fail in full view of the American electorate. But they're NOT smart (nor are the Dems) and they've given BO and the Dems political cover for the failures. I think ACA is a great idea (though it's hardly without shortcomings), and to infer/imply that it was ill-conceived is a fools folly. There were some BRILLIANT people advising it. The website is a diaster, but so what-pick up a phone and do it the old fashioned way. 2 yrs from now ACA may not not anything like it does now-but health care in America will be better. Politics and politicians all suck donkey butt. TERM LIMITS for all. (Or a civil revolution within 10-15 yrs.) I like it when people who generally speaking I'm at odds with politically can find common ground. I've put in bold the things I think we agree on and put Italics on the things you're wrong about. If the ACA was about making our health care system better and more affordable it would have included some form of Tort Reform,,,,, nothing, nadda, shot down NOT even seriously discussed. Personal responsibility and the consumer having some form of vested interest in the cost would have been included, instead the ACA actually goes the other way on both Personal Responsibility and the consumer having some incentive in cost control. If you want more healthy people to buy health care, do away with the law that prohibits Emergency Rooms from turning away patients who can't pay. What we have now by definition is NOT insurance I don't know what we want to call it but it's NOT insurance anymore. Why would an otherwise healthy person buy this medical coverage when you can get it to cover something that happened yesterday today? Now people who know they will be paying $1,000 a month and getting benefits of more than that on a regular basis certainly will. Those who had basic no frills plans and negotiated or shopped for better pricing are now stuck with more expensive plans that ultimately will compensate the medical community at a higher rate than those paying cash. My GF works for a large company and when she goes to the same doc I go to gets billed $120 plus a $10 co-pay, when I go I pay cash/credit card and pay $60. While you say we need more government to fix this I say the Government and primarily the Federal Government is the reason we are paying way too much for our health care today. Easy to always blame the insurance companies but in reality they run far more efficiently than the majority of Federally run/controlled programs. If you think we are paying too much for health care today, wait until the next round of Federal "help".
Happy Freaky Halloween Jeff. |
| 2013-10-31 11:44 AM in reply to: crusevegas |
Champion 6993 Chicago, Illinois | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting Originally posted by crusevegas My GF works for a large company and when she goes to the same doc I go to gets billed $120 plus a $10 co-pay, when I go I pay cash/credit card and pay $60. I agree I like it when people can find something to agree on. See when I go to same doctor when I did not have insurance it was $125. With insurance its $30 copay and I think the insurance paid $20 because of the deal between the doctor and the insurance company. |
| 2013-10-31 11:49 AM in reply to: crusevegas |
Expert 2180 Boise, Idaho | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting I like it when people who generally speaking I'm at odds with politically can find common ground.
Happy Freaky Halloween Jeff. back at ya. :0) |
| 2013-10-31 1:33 PM in reply to: tuwood |
| New user 900 , | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by jeffnboise Originally posted by crusevegas Originally posted by jeffnboise I'm becoming a bit more skeptical. Hillary may have ALOT of 'splainin' to do......
Jeff, What difference at this point does it make? On another note, how do you come to the conclusion that Obama had a mandate for the ACA? Not one Republican voted for it. Not only that but many backroom deals (our money being used to bribe senators) with Democrats to get them to vote for it. A lot of what he said about the ACA was either greatly misrepresented or outright lied about when he was "selling" it to legislators and the American people. Now you have Democrats running away from it in hopes of being re-elected. How do you define mandate in regards to the ACA? It's the law. We had an election-Obama and his signature running platform won. THAT is a mandate. The fact that no Repubs voted for it doesn't mean bubka to me. 95% of repubs voted to keep the govt. shutdown. And frankly, there is nothing being said about ACA that isn't political 'spin' on both sides. Medicare part D rollout was an utter diaster, too. Big Deal! Move along-nothing to see here! I find it curious in your original response to my question you didn't mention Benghazi, the IRS attacking opposition groups to the DNC, NSA and I think I'm forgetting a couple but anyway. Are those irrelevant? Oh, the Arizona Gun running stone wall Obama put up on the Holder investigation. Benghazi-somebody messed up. But not I, you, nor any of the talking heads on TV know what happened. Good people lost their lives in the service of their country. THAT is unacceptable. I want the problems fixed so it doesn't happen again. The 'Blame Game' is nothing but political theater-and it's an insult to those we lost. IRS? No-a couple of individuals who WORKED for the IRS. NSA-Meh, don't care. For every average Joe that get a cell phone tapped-5 world leaders are getting the same thing. Don't do stupid crap and it's all good. To all the people who wanted the Patriot Act....you got it! Fast and Furious-Great Plan (in theory) that went wrong. It was an election year; of COURSE it was gonna get buried. If it had worked, Holder would be a frickin' hero and the Repubs wouldn't have wanted THAT, either. Would you agree or disagree that if what Bush did made him a "liar" based on the statements Obama has made to the American people, would you say Obama is "pathological liar"? Would you agree or disagree that you beating your wife is a bad idea? Come on, mahn! I completely agree with you on the Transparency and not just with Obama but all administrations. B.O. term 2 has been a mitigated diaster. I'm disappointed. If the Repubs were smart, they would stand back and let BO and his policies fail in full view of the American electorate. But they're NOT smart (nor are the Dems) and they've given BO and the Dems political cover for the failures. I think ACA is a great idea (though it's hardly without shortcomings), and to infer/imply that it was ill-conceived is a fools folly. There were some BRILLIANT people advising it. The website is a diaster, but so what-pick up a phone and do it the old fashioned way. 2 yrs from now ACA may not not anything like it does now-but health care in America will be better. Politics and politicians all suck donkey butt. TERM LIMITS for all. (Or a civil revolution within 10-15 yrs.) Purely from a political standpoint I agree with your point on the Republicans. They would get the most political capital by just getting out of the way. I would change your brilliant to heavily vested special interests advising it. You notice how the medical field (which already has atrociously high prices) loved it and supported it so much. Also, these "brilliant" people have made some really dumb oversights such as only providing subsidies to state run exchanges which is currently being challenged in court. So, I'm a little less confident in their "brilliance". The financial viability of the ACA is no question based on turn out. Do the people sign up for it in the numbers they anticipated. If they do, then they have the revenue stream. Then, do the anticipated cost control mechanisms keep the cost of healthcare down, if they do then they keep the costs down and it works out. I don't like what I'm hearing about the administration placing a gag order on insurance companies so they don't share enrollment numbers. Simply due to the website having so many issues there's no question the enrollment numbers are going to be low, but I would think a "transparent administration" would be willing to allow them to share that information. Most doctors, except members of the AMA did not support this from the get go. As for the AMA, they knew exactly what this was going to do to people who purchase their own health insurance. They knew it would drive up cost and force carriers to drop coverage, but they supported it anyway because they believe in the socialist single payer system. |
| 2013-11-08 9:30 AM in reply to: Jackemy1 |
Expert 2180 Boise, Idaho | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by Left Brain That right wing hack job "news" program did an absolutely scathing story on Benghazi. This is must see TV.And then there's this foreign policy gem...........shameful.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57609479/60-minutes-benghazi/ I am starting to sense a trend...... CBS Issues "Apology" for incorrect facts on 'scathing' Benghazi story! I'm sensing a trend, too. A trend of continuing lies, slander and misleading the American people. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/cbs-forced-issue-correction-bombshell-132800786.html |
| 2013-11-08 10:51 AM in reply to: jeffnboise |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting Originally posted by jeffnboise Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by Left Brain That right wing hack job "news" program did an absolutely scathing story on Benghazi. This is must see TV.And then there's this foreign policy gem...........shameful.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57609479/60-minutes-benghazi/ I am starting to sense a trend...... CBS Issues "Apology" for incorrect facts on 'scathing' Benghazi story! I'm sensing a trend, too. A trend of continuing lies, slander and misleading the American people. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/cbs-forced-issue-correction-bombshell-132800786.html Hey, welcome to our world. lol (except we never get the apology or correction) |
| 2013-11-08 12:20 PM in reply to: jeffnboise |
Member 465 | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting Originally posted by jeffnboise Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by Left Brain That right wing hack job "news" program did an absolutely scathing story on Benghazi. This is must see TV.And then there's this foreign policy gem...........shameful.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57609479/60-minutes-benghazi/ I am starting to sense a trend...... CBS Issues "Apology" for incorrect facts on 'scathing' Benghazi story! I'm sensing a trend, too. A trend of continuing lies, slander and misleading the American people. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/cbs-forced-issue-correction-bombshell-132800786.html I look forward to 60 Minute's correction if they discover they were mislead in the report. |
| 2013-11-09 7:24 AM in reply to: Jackemy1 |
Master 1440 | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting What credibility would that be? Seriously Quite a few of us viewed him as having none to begin with. |
| 2014-03-20 2:31 AM in reply to: 0 |
Member 1293 Pearland,Tx | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting http://www.ijreview.com/2014/03/122228-sassy-gal-blowtorch-shows-ev... Edited by strykergt 2014-03-20 2:32 AM |
| 2014-03-20 8:19 AM in reply to: strykergt |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Obama's Credibility in Melting Originally posted by strykergt http://www.ijreview.com/2014/03/122228-sassy-gal-blowtorch-shows-ev... Wow, at first i thought it was just a corny shirt burning video but she had some good stuff to say. If a Libertarian minded candidate can survive the primaries there's a pretty big up swelling of anti big government out there. Could be an interesting election season. |
|
|
|
|
| |||
| |||
| |||
| Tell me about Obama Pages: 1 2 |
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK