« prev   random   next »

0
7

What scares republicans the most about Obamacare

By marcus follow marcus   2013 Aug 11, 2:23am 38,447 views   247 comments   watch   nsfw   quote   share    


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/11/the-gop-is-terrified-obamacare-could-be-a-success.html

But here’s my question: if Republicans are so confident Obamacare will end badly, why not just shut up about it? It’s not like they have the votes to repeal the law—a math problem they still haven’t solved after 37 different tries. Their appeal to the Supreme Court ended in defeat at the hands of a conservative chief justice. And now the bulk of the plan will begin to take effect in just a few months.

At this point, why not sit back and wait for this crazy experiment to self-destruct? Why not let President Obama and the Democrats reckon with the millions of angry Americans who will undoubtedly hate their new insurance or their new insurance protections?

Because Republicans are terrified that Obamacare could actually work

#politics

« First    « Previous    Comments 207 - 246 of 246    Last »

208   marcus   ignore (10)   2013 Sep 2, 2:54pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Bap33 says

and as usual you just skip ahead, attack a personal issue, skip ahead, attack a personal view, skip ahead ...... must you not stay on point? Do you suffer from ADHD or some other made-up-for-undisciplined-asses issue?

Wtf ??

This coming from the guy who wrote this.Bap33 says

corporations do not vote
welfare sucking hyper-breeding scum do, as do drugged up dopeheads, as do constant-victims (lazy people of color, lazy/ugly people, ect).
and worst of all is the able bodies scum that like keeping the dependants down by handing them wealth. The same people that understand how bad it is to feed a bear in the woods just dont graso how bad it is to remove the need to be productive from men, or the need to choose mates wisely from women.

What America needs less of is forced wealth redistribution, less welfare, less EPA (and everyone of it's sub-groups), to end the entire puplic funded school system, and less liberalism/progressiveism/leftism/anti-freedom/anti-self-reliance/anti-God/anti-Jew/anti-Americanism. We need less Holder, Pelosi, Clinton, Obama, and Sharpton. Less rap, less criminal behavior, less pervertion, less sexual deviant behavior, less time watching TV, less time on the internet, less time spend doing nothing. And less anger. I thought you dope-head hippy types were all about peace and love.

And shortly thereafter

Bap33 says

on point two you fail to factor in personal accountablity, freedom and liberty. I am forced to pay for the bad choices of other voters, to the great benifit of a political party I find to be anti-AMerican, and disgusting.

IT's so stupid Bap. This isn't a personal attack. It's just a fact. What kind of moron takes all the things that they don't like in society and pins them on a political party? I'm assuming it's someone who has WAY WAY too much propaganda in their life.

This point of view alone should help you to understand how you're being used by powers that hold very few of your beliefs. To them you're just a peasant whose vote they can get by playing up the the 3 Gs, God, Guns and Gays. They need fundamentalists and dimwitted rednecks to win elections. And you buy their bullshit hook line and sinker.

Man did they ever see you coming.

Gullible sucker.

209   Homeboy   ignore (2)   2013 Sep 2, 4:38pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

AverageBear says

Homeboy says

Not as big a deal as millions of people not being able to get health insurance AT ALL, which was the case before Obamacare

So, safe to say you are talking about the health care of illegal aliens? Because

No. Why the fuck would you say that? US citizens with pre-existing conditions have been unable to get healthcare. What, do you live under a rock? Try paying attention to the world around you once in awhile.

AverageBear says

Shifting 716 Billion dollars from Medicare (ie, stealing this from older American retired citizens who worked/lived here there entire lives, and had this earned money taken away by obama w/ the flick of his pen), and using it to cover medical costs of illegal aliens.

What the fuck are you talking about? No, illegal aliens are not eligible for ACA. You right-wing blowhards are just making shit up now. Just telling whatever lie you feel like. Pathetic.

AverageBear says

Tell me Homeboy (because no liberal will answer this question): Why has Obama granted thousands of waivers for this awesome law call Obamacare (or ACA)?? Hmmm?

Why do you say "no liberal" will answer that question? I've never heard of any liberal refusing to answer it. The waivers are news to me, so I looked it up. Factcheck.org says 222 waivers have been granted, not "thousands", and they are for only one year, to give employers a break on upgrading their insurance plans until ACA is fully implemented in 2014.

AverageBear says

So much, that companies big and small are holding off on expanding, and hiring new/more employees?

Do you have any actual data showing that business expansion has halted as a result of ACA?

210   Homeboy   ignore (2)   2013 Sep 2, 4:40pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Bap33 says

demoncrats forcibley remove the wealth from producers and hand it over to those they have deemed worthy. That is anti-American.

demoncrats/liberals/progressives have no moral anchor beyond "self". That is why they embrace deviant behavior. And they are sick sick sick sick-os.

I find your personal attacks so empty and weak ... I kinda pitty you a bit, little fella.

Mmmmm....you sure love drinking that Fox News Kool Aid, don't you?

211   Homeboy   ignore (2)   2013 Sep 2, 4:41pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

marcus says

This confirms a theory of mine about Baps thinking.

You really believe there's any thinking going on there?

212   marcus   ignore (10)   2013 Sep 3, 12:20am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Homeboy says

Bap33 says

demoncrats/liberals/progressives have no moral anchor beyond "self"

Funny, I thought the republican party was the one that's all about selfishness.

Rationalize low taxes for themself (at the cost of the country via indebtedness). Bullshit rationalization for ending public schools. I guess it's just a coincidence that this is gaining steam right before whites become a minority.

"We don't wan't to pay for their education."

What's more selfish than denying one of the most basic tenets of Americans, going way back.

Only an idiot could successfully rationalize such selfishness.

213   Bap33   ignore (7)   2013 Sep 3, 3:25am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Homeboy says

US citizens with pre-existing conditions have been unable to get healthcare

not true. healthcare is avbailable to all. I think you meant health insurance for pre-exisitng conditions, and that is also false, it just costs more.

214   Homeboy   ignore (2)   2013 Sep 3, 6:08am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Bap, you are in denial. You also have no clue what you're talking about. I certainly did not mean to say "health insurance for pre-existing conditions", as I doubt such a thing even exists. There is health insurance, and insurance companies are free to DENY policies to people who HAVE pre-existing conditions, just like an auto insurance company might turn you down for a policy if you've had 10 auto accidents in the last year.

As of right now, an insurance company does not HAVE to give you a health insurance policy if they don't want to. Starting in 2014, thanks to ACA, they DO have to give you a policy.

C'mon Bap, did you really miss this? It was in all the papers.

215   Homeboy   ignore (2)   2013 Sep 3, 4:50pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

http://www.cnbc.com/id/39646830

The four largest health insurance companies in the US denied coverage to more than half a million individuals because of their pre-existing conditions from 2007 to 2009, according to a congressional investigation.

Ready to crawl out from under that rock yet, Bap?

216   APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch   ignore (43)   2013 Sep 3, 8:57pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Homeboy says

C'mon Bap, did you really miss this? It was in all the papers.

Yes, vicious lies spread by snarling, America-hating Stalinists in the media who are sworn enemies of the greatest healthcare system in the universe. It's a fact that the entire staff of the New York Times was standing on the roof of the newspaper watching and waiting for the planes to hit the towers on 9/11 and cheered when the first explosions ripped through the buildings. Why do you hate facts?

217   HydroCabron   ignore (1)   2013 Sep 3, 10:48pm     ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

It is developments like this which make me glad that this land will soon be under Sharia Law. The Christians who pretend that Jesus took a degree in economics at Chicago and then became a follower of Rothbard-Mises-Bastiat will finally have to shut up and go to Mecca with the rest of us.

Allahu Akhbar!

218   Bap33   ignore (7)   2013 Sep 4, 3:49am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Homeboy says

http://www.cnbc.com/id/39646830



The four largest health insurance companies in the US denied coverage to more than half a million individuals because of their pre-existing conditions from 2007 to 2009, according to a congressional investigation.


Ready to crawl out from under that rock yet, Bap?

dude .. you said "health care" .. and I said you must have meant "health insurance" because EVERYONE has access to health CARE. Everyone. You, me, wetbacks, old people, AIDS people, ANYONE that walks into the hospital will get friggin CARE. Period.
Now, as i said, you mistakenly put "health care" where you meant "health INSURANCE" ... the two are not the same.

Who is under the rock now? Feel good? I feel kinda bad when you make it sooooo easy. NEXT.

219   Bap33   ignore (7)   2013 Sep 4, 3:50am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Bap33 says

Homeboy says



US citizens with pre-existing conditions have been unable to get healthcare


not true. healthcare is avbailable to all. I think you meant health insurance for pre-exisitng conditions, and that is also false, it just costs more.

just incase you missed it the first time. You really try too hard to be a penis.

220   Bap33   ignore (7)   2013 Sep 4, 3:52am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

oh, and insurance is absolutly available (maybe not from "the big 4") but at any rate it may be put at a price so high that direct pay is cheaper.

221   Homeboy   ignore (2)   2013 Sep 4, 4:27am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Bap33 says

dude .. you said "health care" .. and I said you must have meant "health insurance" because EVERYONE has access to health CARE. Everyone. You, me, wetbacks, old people, AIDS people, ANYONE that walks into the hospital will get friggin CARE. Period.

Now, as i said, you mistakenly put "health care" where you meant "health INSURANCE" ... the two are not the same.

You are such a giant douche.

222   Homeboy   ignore (2)   2013 Sep 4, 4:29am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Bap33 says

oh, and insurance is absolutly available (maybe not from "the big 4") but at any rate it may be put at a price so high that direct pay is cheaper.

Bullshit.

That's your problem. You are so far in denial, you don't even understand why we needed healthcare reform. You thought everything was just fine, LOL. That explains your whole attitude; you're just fucking clueless.

223   Homeboy   ignore (2)   2013 Sep 4, 4:29am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Bap33 says

You really try too hard to be a penis.

I could never be as good at it as you are.

224   AverageBear   ignore (2)   2013 Sep 4, 11:14pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Homeboy says

AverageBear says

So much, that companies big and small are holding off on expanding, and hiring new/more employees?

Do you have any actual data showing that business expansion has halted as a result of ACA?

------------------------
Well, I don't have the data yet, but I do have a powerful union boss who felt he was duped by Obama, and his ACA. Even Trumka, an Obamacare lover, is now a jilted lover, verifying the FACT that MANY companies are scaling back workers hours to less than 30 hours a week to avoid Obamacare penalties.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/09/04/afl-cio-president-trumka-employers-restructuring-workforce-29-12-hour#ixzz2dwtDWx9o

...."In the past several months, the left and their media minions have pushed back against claims businesses are trimming worker hours to avoid ObamaCare.

During a recent interview, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said employers are "restructuring their workforce to give workers 29 and a half hours so they don't have to provide them healthcare."

...."RICHARD TRUMKA, PRESIDENT AFL-CIO: The Affordable Care Act does need some modifications to it, because as it does right now, what's happening is, you have employers that the law says if you pay your, if your employees work 30 hours or more a week, you've got to give them healthcare. So they're restructuring their workforce to give workers 29 and a half hours so they don't have to provide them healthcare. They’re also doing some taxing to nonprofit plans to pay for for-profit plans.

Not what the President and his allies in the media are telling you, is it?"......

225   Bap33   ignore (7)   2013 Sep 5, 3:29am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Homeboy says

Bap33 says



dude .. you said "health care" .. and I said you must have meant "health insurance" because EVERYONE has access to health CARE. Everyone. You, me, wetbacks, old people, AIDS people, ANYONE that walks into the hospital will get friggin CARE. Period.

Now, as i said, you mistakenly put "health care" where you meant "health INSURANCE" ... the two are not the same.


You are such a giant douche.

is that what you call people who are correct and point out where you are wrong? Interesting.

226   Homeboy   ignore (2)   2013 Sep 5, 4:00am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

AverageBear says

Well, I don't have the data yet,

Exactly. So the rest of your post is irrelevant. I have posted data showing that the increase in part-time employment all happened BEFORE Obamacare, and that Obamacare has not caused any increase in the percentage of people who are employed part time. You have posted absolutely NO data.

And even if companies DID hire part-time employees rather than full-time, why is that bad? If they're doing it for the purpose of avoiding giving their full-time employees any benefits, then so what? Who wants a full-time job with no benefits anyway? That's shitty.

227   Homeboy   ignore (2)   2013 Sep 5, 4:01am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Bap33 says

is that what you call people who are correct and point out where you are wrong? Interesting.

Nope, it's what I call people who are douches, like you.

228   Bap33   ignore (7)   2013 Sep 6, 8:12am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

lmao ... ok, move along little fella ... grown folks are talking now.

229   Homeboy   ignore (2)   2013 Sep 6, 12:42pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Bap33 says

lmao ... ok, move along little fella ... grown folks are talking now.

Then stop interrupting them with your childish jabbering.

231   Homeboy   ignore (2)   2013 Sep 14, 4:23pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

GRACE123 says

Homeboy,

I understand your frustration. I said at the beginning of this thread that My husband and I together make $ 75,000 a year and buy our insurance independently. (Blue Shield of Ca) We are now paying $772 a month with a $10,000 deductible. He is 61 and I am 55. We have watched are premiums rise dramatically, just like you. We feel very fortunate that we do not have any pre existing condition, and at least can get insurance, however, it is becoming unaffordable. I also understand that our premiums will rise in the independent market. If I go on the health Exchange for California and put in my information, the rate is around $1100.00 a month.

FYI, coveredca.com has been updated. Looks like the rates are going to depend where you live. I put in an L.A. zip code and it says you can get a bronze plan, which is only half the deductible you currently have, for the same price you currently pay. That's without any subsidy. Pretty good deal, eh?

232   AverageBear   ignore (2)   2013 Sep 16, 2:24am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The latest on Obama's promise where you can keep your doctor... OK, please look to the left and cough...

- This info NOT brought to you today by some 'neo-con' (as I'm sometimes incorrectly described as), but the beloved LA Times. Enjoy...

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-insure-doctor-networks-20130915,0,2814725.story

...."The doctor can’t see you now.

Consumers may hear that a lot more often after getting health insurance under President Obama’s Affordable Care Act.

To hold down premiums, major insurers in California have sharply limited the number of doctors and hospitals available to patients in the state’s new health insurance market opening Oct. 1.

New data reveal the extent of those cuts in California, a crucial test bed for the federal healthcare law.

These diminished medical networks are fueling growing concerns that many patients will still struggle to get care despite the nation’s biggest healthcare expansion in half a century.

Consumers could see long wait times, a scarcity of specialists and loss of a longtime doctor.".......

233   curious2   ignore (0)   2013 Sep 16, 4:37am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

The title of the thread probably reflects the OP's pathological need to troll, but if the Republican party had not become so odious, this legislation would already have created a solid Republican majority:

"Obamacare remains highly unpopular as implementation looms"

"Opposition hits new highs"

But Republicans fail to realize, the reason this legislation was able to take over the Democratic party (and thus the republic) was because the Republican party has itself been taken over by religious fanatics calling themselves "conservative". Just as this legislation is not truly liberal, the Republican neocons and religious fanatics are not truly conservative. Liberals believe in letting people live their own lives according to their own beliefs. Conservatives believe in limited government, conserving resources (including the environment). Neither set of beliefs is represented anymore by either major party. The Democrats require mandatory dependence, while the Republicans launch faith-based crusades at home and abroad. Both major parties scare anyone who is paying attention. For most people, the Republicans are even more scary than the Democrats.

234   FortWayne   ignore (4)   2013 Sep 16, 5:16am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

What scares me about the plan is that every single special interest group with lobbying power will get all kinds of subsidies and waivers (courtesy of taxpayers)... while I and the rest will be stuck paying the bill.

That's what scares me, and that's not far fetched. Because many corporations and unions have already gotten waivers from paying into Obamacare, but are asking for Obamacare subsidies... beautiful system ain't it?

235   AverageBear   ignore (2)   2013 Sep 16, 9:25am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

curious2 says

But Republicans fail to realize, the reason this legislation was able to take over the Democratic party (and thus the republic) was because the Republican party has itself been taken over by religious fanatics calling themselves "conservative". Just as this legislation is not truly liberal, the Republican neocons and religious fanatics are not truly conservative.

--------------------------------------
Curious, I respectfully disagree.. I think you will find waay more RINOs and liberal Republicans than you will find religious "Pro-Lifer" Republicans... There was a time where you could find MANY fiscal conservatives in the Democrat party. The last one being Joe Lieberman. And since he didn't toe the party line, he got thrown under the bus, only to survive as an independent. JFK was a fiscal conservative. If you go back to his 1960 campaign, you'll discover (much to Ted Kennedy's chagrin when he was alive) that he was FOR tax cuts. I don't think you'll find any Democrat senator today for tax cuts today. My point is that liberalism (fiscally and socially) has infected both parties more than "pro-lifer" republicans has infected the GOP. It's not hard to see this history... The legislation called Obamacare (or ACA), is VERY liberal. Taking 716 billion from Medicare (and the elderly that funded this) to fund free healthcare for illegals or legal free-loaders sounds pretty liberal to me.

236   anonymous   ignore (null)   2013 Sep 16, 9:30am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Ncaabb has a 35 second shot clock

That piss poor excuse of a pro sport nba, uses the 24 sec shot clock

Maybe you were using another political sports rope a dope, in that 35 secs only feels like 24, thanks to tbe bernankflation

237   Homeboy   ignore (2)   2013 Sep 16, 10:16am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

AverageBear says

The legislation called Obamacare (or ACA), is VERY liberal. Taking 716 billion from Medicare (and the elderly that funded this) to fund free healthcare for illegals or legal free-loaders sounds pretty liberal to me.

Lie.

238   Vicente   ignore (0)   2013 Sep 16, 3:20pm     ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

marcus says

Because Republicans are terrified that Obamacare could actually work

So wrong!

It doesn't have to "work".

It could really suck, or just be medium bad.

But it there's not a line like THIS to get basic meds:

Or if there aren't at least thousands of cases of this:

You know, the Obama Death Panels putting down Grandma, well...

They have staked a LOT on painting ACA as a sign of the EndTimes or something, and if it doesn't deliver, then the GOP looks like:

239   Homeboy   ignore (2)   2013 Sep 18, 2:21pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Wow, the republifucks are going absolutely berserk now trying to sabotage ACA. They even came up with their own "replacement" which is a complete joke. If that piece of trash bill ever sees the light of day we will be right back to square one. Actually, we would be even worse off than we were without ANY reform. Fortunately, it doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of ever becoming law. But the GOP is continuing to do the political equivalent of an ape flipping out and throwing its shit all over the place. They just signed their own death warrant.

After the GOP implodes, maybe the Democrat party can become the new conservative voice, and somebody can form a true liberal party to oppose them. That would be nice.

240   marcus   ignore (10)   2013 Sep 18, 2:41pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

sbh says

Goddammit!, it's terrible to be a boomer who remembers American political history.

I agree. When I was a kid, there was a Republican Senator in Illinois (Chuck Percy) who was substantially to the left of virtually all of today's democrats.

Back then, some of us thought republicans were evil, but that was because of the politics of division. The truth is as you say. Most were quite moderate compared to today.

241   marcus   ignore (10)   2013 Sep 18, 2:46pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Homeboy says

They even came up with their own "replacement"

I still say that what this is TOTALLY about, is the fear of how successful Obamacare will be.

Here's a couple scary questions for republicans. What if it retains the name Obamacare, after it evolves and they get most all the bugs out? What if it becomes popular enough that they can't fight it anymore, and they have no choice but to admit it's good, and yet it still retains the name Obamacare ?

Ouch !

242   curious2   ignore (0)   2013 Sep 18, 3:30pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

sbh says

it will be the next iteration of SS and Medicare.

Respectfully, I doubt that. While the administration has put up a brave front, many Democrats sound as desperate as the Republicans to get away from Obamacare; in fact, Democrats in Minnesota declared even the word Obamacare unspeakable, calling it a racist word, and reducing it to the legislation that dare not speak its name. I continue to think what really scares Republicans about Obamacare is that even though people will continue to dislike it, the massive spending will produce a financial tsunami of campaign "donations" keeping its supporters in power.

243   Vicente   ignore (0)   2013 Sep 18, 4:49pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

marcus says

What if it becomes popular enough that they can't fight it anymore, and they have no choice but to admit it's good, and yet it still retains the name Obamacare ?

Social Security is actually the OASDI.

Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance.

But that doesn't flow, so almost nobody calls it that.

Yeah once it becomes entrenched, the GOP will slide into some other term they might even deign to use ACA. They won't be able to milk the anti-Obama thing forever he'll be out of office in 3 years and before you know it there'll be a whole generation who will barely remember him. It'll actually be to slight disadvantage to them to keep his name alive in connection with it.

244   finehoe   ignore (0)   2013 Sep 19, 1:24am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

curious2 says

the massive spending will produce a financial tsunami of campaign "donations" keeping its supporters in power.

Just the opposite. Health-care reform isn’t going anywhere. But that hasn’t stopped Republicans from using it to raise money from gullible Teabaggers who want it defunded.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09/18/the-obamacare-swindle-it-s-not-what-you-think.html

245   AverageBear   ignore (2)   2013 Oct 10, 1:43am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

marcus says

AverageBear says

So where are these fiscal democrats?

Obama is fiscally conservative. He put the wars on the books.

......."He Put the wars on the books", that were approved by democrat senators....

I'm not going to even bother researching if Obama 'put the wars on the books'. One just has to realize this.....

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/9/obamas-national-debt-rate-on-track-to-double/

....."President Obama likes to say that raising the nation’s borrowing limit “won’t add a dime” to the federal debt, but he neglects to mention that the government already has borrowed the equivalent of more than 60 trillion dimes since he took office.

When Mr. Obama became president in January 2009, the total federal debt stood at $10.6 trillion. This week, it hit $16.7 trillion — an increase of 57 percent. In the same time frame under President George W. Bush, total federal debt rose 38 percent. Under President Clinton, it rose 32 percent....."

Bush W wasn't a conservative, and Obama sure isn't a conservative. What a silly idea to suggest Obama is fiscally conservative. Growing federal gov't and collecting more power is fiscally conservative? Dramatic increases in food stamps, SSD, etc is fiscally conservative?

246   humanity   ignore (0)   2013 Oct 10, 3:36am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

AverageBear says

I'm not going to even bother researching if Obama 'put the wars on the books'. One just has to realize this.....

That's one of the reasons you can not comprehend what this is about.

AverageBear says

When Mr. Obama became president in January 2009, the total federal debt stood at $10.6 trillion. This week, it hit $16.7 trillion — an increase of 57 percent. In the same time frame under President George W. Bush, total federal debt rose 38 percent. Under President Clinton, it rose 32 percent....."

Interesting how the only time they let a democrat be President, mind you a conservative one, is when his hands are totally tied on spending.

I'm not going to explain to you why the debt has gone up so much under Obama, because you either can not understand, or you already do, and just like to spread the propaganda, figuring some of the retards out there will enjoy it.

But for them I will note that spending already committed to before Obama, combined with a massive recession combined with (lower GDP than projected -->lower tax revenues projected) was the recipe for that explosion in the deficit.

The actual truth is that spending has risen less with Obama than any president in many decades. That fact comes from the CBO.

http://crfb.org/blogs/fiscal-fact-checker-how-much-has-spending-increased-under-president-obama

The economy has shrank in the great recession, so even with the small spending increases, we have a problem. Timing is everything. It was great to be Reagan. He increased spending at a time when conditions were perfect for him to only see positive results from it (other than the huge percentage increase in the deficit).

« First    « Previous    Comments 207 - 246 of 246    Last »


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions