patrick.net

Homeboy says

smaulgld says

There! I agree with Jimmy Carter I am a Carter bot!

You agree with Jimmy Carter? You believe Obama has "done the best he could under the circumstances?" Interesting. I don't know that I'd agree with you.

He has done the best he could based on trying to implement a monumental task.

It doesn't diminish the fact that he is failing

smaulgld says

He has done the best he could based on trying to implement a monumental task.

That's not what Carter said. He was referring to Obama's ENTIRE presidency.

On how he would evaluate the Obama presidency so far:
JC: “He’s done the best he could under the circumstances."

smaulgld says

Washington Post turns Rushbot!!!!

Gives Obama's statement 4 Pinocchios -their worst rating.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2013/10/30/obamas-pledge-that-no-one-will-take-away-your-health-plan/

Wait. You mean Obama lied? Gee, that's the first time you've ever said that... in the last 5 minutes.

Homeboy says

smaulgld says

He has done the best he could based on trying to implement a monumental task.

That's not what Carter said. He was referring to Obama's ENTIRE presidency.

On how he would evaluate the Obama presidency so far:

JC: “He’s done the best he could under the circumstances."

Basically ACA is his whole presidency- it is a broadly ambitious plan named after him.
It is what he will be remembered by.

Homeboy says

smaulgld says

Washington Post turns Rushbot!!!!

Gives Obama's statement 4 Pinocchios -their worst rating.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2013/10/30/obamas-pledge-that-no-one-will-take-away-your-health-plan/

Wait. You mean Obama lied? Gee, that's the first time you've ever said that... in the last 5 minutes.

Do you think he lied, and does it matter?

the retrospective on this is that

the bill passed with zero republican votes in 2009 and many of the dems that voted for it got replaced in 2010

republicans at the congressional and state level did everything they could to obsfucate- from trying to defund to states not setting up the exchanges

All major legislation has to have SOME bi partisan support. Can anyone give me an example of any major legislation where there wasn't some bi partisan support?

USA Today Now a Rushbot- Adopts Rush talking points

Obama vows repeatedly you can keep your doctor

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2013/10/30/healthcare-plans-obama-doctors/3313365/

Call it Crazy says

Wow, When Bill Maher, the black dick sucking liberal ObamaBot turns on Obama, things are definitely NOT well in Liberalville...

GOP like a blonde, poop never stinks. Any odor must be Negro next door, so let's double down on denial and CONSERVATISM that'll solve it!

Everyone else (Libruls!), sometimes there's an odor. They acknowledge it, perhaps harrass parties into fixing shortcomings. It's called honesty.

smaulgld says

Obama vows repeatedly you can keep your doctor

Rushbot Smaulgld repeats same republican talking point 20 times in same thread. Homeboy yawns.

Call it Crazy says

Wow, When Bill Maher, the black dick sucking liberal ObamaBot turns on Obama, things are definitely NOT well in Liberalville...

Maher is not necessarily liberal. Sometimes he is, sometimes he isn't. Perhaps you are confusing him with Olbermann?

smaulgld says

Do you think he lied, and does it matter?

Jesus Christ. We established that his statement wasn't literally true about 4 pages ago. Try to keep up, m'kay?

Does it matter? It matters, but it's not the end of the world as we know it, although you wouldn't know from the way you are carrying on about it.

The far more important question is: since they've been saying for 4 years that there will be minimum standards of coverage for health insurance policies, how is it that you weren't aware of that fact?

But I know YOU won't answer MY question, even though I answered yours, because you Rushbots only repeat talking points over and over, and never say anything meaningful.

smaulgld says

Basically ACA is his whole presidency- it is a broadly ambitious plan named after him.

It is what he will be remembered by.

Not what Carter said.

Homeboy says

smaulgld says

Basically ACA is his whole presidency- it is a broadly ambitious plan named after him.

It is what he will be remembered by.

Not what Carter said.

True and rush also didn't compare obama to Reagan or the two bushes the way I did

If you like your lies, you can keep your lies, Period.

smaulgld says

All major legislation has to have SOME bi partisan support. Can anyone give
me an example of any major legislation where there wasn't some bi partisan
support?

AND:

smaulgld says

the bill passed with zero republican votes in 2009

AND:

smaulgld says

republicans at the congressional and state level did everything they could to
obsfucate- from trying to defund to states not setting up the exchanges

Not only did you answer your own question, but you even showed(some of) the results of the non-cooperation from the republicans. I'll highlight some of the important stuff that you conveniently left out. 42 times the republicans tried, and FAILED to defund/overturn the PPACA legislation. Then, the Supreme Court found the legislation to be constitutional, with the deciding vote made by the Chief Justice, a republican and nominated to the bench by a republican president. Of course the stupifyied mania didn't stop there and the republicans proceded to shut down the government and even wanted to try to defund it, but smarter heads prevailed.

Does that about sum things up?

sbh says

smaulgld
says

To answer your question I would be complaining and I am sure Republicans
would attack me as an unamerican democrat

+1 Well played. I don't agree with you a lot of the time, but you aren't a
categorical right winger, and I give you props for that.

Maybe not a categorical right winger, but definitely a camouflaged right winger. Glibertopians are in essence mulligan-republicans, whereas they always vote republican and hate all things liberal/progressive or even inclusive, but by not being a typical right wing extremist they can vote for GW Bush, and then pretend to hate him and all his shitty policies and legislation. I reall yfind it amusing when the glibertopians try and use their f-ed up economic theories to justify their racism and other shortcomings, instead of having the convictions to admit their faults/and things that they hate.

upisdown says

reall yfind it amusing when the glibertopians try and use their f-ed up economic theories to justify their racism and other shortcomings, instead of having the convictions to admit their faults/and things that they hate.

I find it amusing that you can generalize in such a way to project convictions of others with no basis for such characterizations.
That is a classic form of false argumentation

smaulgld says

I find it amusing that you can generalize in such a way to project
convictions of others with no basis for such characterizations.
That is a
classic form of false argumentation

LOL, and yet you never denied ANY of my descriptions of glibertopians/mulligan republicans OR their behavior. Shocking.

Teabag morons wear their hatred and stupidity proudly, but not the glibertopians/mulligan republicans as they like to cloud it in some tax cut-preferred and deserving types of legislation dogma. Both types are equally ridiculous and annoying, but at least with the teabag ones you absolutely know not to take your eyes off of them.

upisdown says

Teabag morons wear their hatred and stupidity proudly, but not the glibertopians/mulligan republicans

Name calling is another form of false immature argumentation

upisdown says

LOL, and yet you never denied ANY of my descriptions of glibertopians/mulligan republicans OR their behavior. Shocking.

Generalizations stated as fact form the basis for all sorts of unjust characterizations like racism, sexism etc, so I won't comment on your generalizations.

smaulgld says

upisdown
says

Teabag morons wear their hatred and stupidity proudly, but not the
glibertopians/mulligan republicans

Name calling is another form of false immature argumentation

It's THEIR name that THEY came up with. And morons is fitting, just watch THEIR behavior.

Any sane and rational person won't disagree with that, either.

smaulgld says

Generalizations stated as fact form the basis for all sorts of unjust
characterizations like racism, sexism etc, so I won't comment on your
generalizations.

As I posted previously, shocking. Or that there's no defense of those things, as you're smart enough to not try and defend any of them.

smaulgld says

Generalizations stated as fact form the basis for all sorts of unjust
characterizations like racism, sexism etc,

So what is it called when YOU do the very same thing?

upisdown says

Not only did you answer your own question, but you even showed(some of) the results of the non-cooperation from the republicans. I'll highlight some of the important stuff that you conveniently left out. 42 times the republicans tried, and FAILED to defund/overturn the PPACA legislation. Then, the Supreme Court found the legislation to be constitutional, with the deciding vote made by the Chief Justice, a republican and nominated to the bench by a republican president. Of course the stupifyied mania didn't stop there and the republicans proceded to shut down the government and even wanted to try to defund it, but smarter heads prevailed.

Does that about sum things up?

Correct, and therein lies the problem there is not enough bi partisan support for the act which makes implementation difficult enough without technical incompetence in building the website

upisdown says

smaulgld says

Generalizations stated as fact form the basis for all sorts of unjust

characterizations like racism, sexism etc,

So what is it called when YOU do the very same thing?

Incorrect. Call me out on it when I make sweeping generalizations. Call me out on it when I call people names and make ad hominem attacks.

HydroCabron says

I am in totally in favor of wealth distribution. The government should use force to redistribute wealth.

I heart wealth distribution!

....Just like Greece, and some of the other deadbeat southern European nations. Now that's a model to emulate..... yay.

Security risks in healthcare.gov were known before launch

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57610029/healthcare.gov-had-inherent-security-risks-4-days-before-launch/

Resulting in this

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/claim-obamacare-user-sent-other-peoples-eligibility-letters_765771.html

If you like your identity, you can keep you identity, period. (well maybe most people can)

Homeboy says

The far more important question is: since they've been saying for 4 years that there will be minimum standards of coverage for health insurance policies, how is it that you weren't aware of that fact?

Because someone emphatically stated 20+ times and in the state of the union address otherwise.

If you like your plan, you can keep your plan, period

upisdown says

Teabag morons wear their hatred and stupidity proudly, but not the glibertopians/mulligan republicans as they like to cloud it in some tax cut-preferred and deserving types of legislation dogma. Both types are equally ridiculous and annoying, but at least with the teabag ones you absolutely know not to take your eyes off of them.

Mulligan republicans?

smaulgld says

Homeboy says

The far more important question is: since they've been saying for 4 years that there will be minimum standards of coverage for health insurance policies, how is it that you weren't aware of that fact?

Because someone emphatically stated 20+ times and in the state of the union address otherwise.

If you like your plan, you can keep your plan, period

Wow, then you really are an idiot.

AverageBear says

knowing it would spend HUGE amounts of money we didn't have

What you think you know isn't actually reality.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/CP/

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GINIALLRH

We actually "have" the money for the "ObamaCare" subsidies to the middle class and below. We just have to raise taxes a bit to get it.

As for no Republican support, they had plenty of input in the process -- getting dozens of amendments into the bill -- but their refusal to sign off on the result was simply politics, just like their refusal (to a man) in 1993 to go along with the Clinton tax raises. They certainly took credit for the resulting balanced budgets when they arrived though!

This was a bill GWB coulda passed, save for the part about jacking up taxes on the rich 3.8 pp this year. Funding the subsidies that make the mandate possible is what torpedoed the Gingrich alternative to "HillaryCare", too.

That's what this "repeal and replace" song and dance is all about, the rich trying to snake out of the higher tax burdens PPACA is slapping on them.

90% of the problem in this country is simply the rich taking too much out of the middle classes, and our shitty healthcare system is a large part of that.

List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure(PPP)_per_capita

PPACA doesn't solve anything (on the cost side) but like SSA (which started a lot smaller than it is now) it's the camels nose in the tent of the private insurance market.

AverageBear says

Just like Greece, and some of the other deadbeat southern European nations

No, just like Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Holland.

The happiest and most wealthy countries on the planet.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2013/10/29/the-worlds-happiest-and-saddest-countries-2013/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_international_investment_position_per_capita

They're real-world examples of how "Robin Hood" redistribution works -- better than what we're doing at least.

And also the benefits of having your own currency and maintaing trade surpluses by running a weak, er "competitive" currency regime.

And also small, homogenous nation-states that actually give a shit about their fellow citizens.

"Got mine fuck you" and "Let 'em die!" isn't part of their political vocabulary.

Idiot and moron!

for believing the repeated words of the president
"If you like your plan, you can keep it PERIOD."

I don't understand the Swedes.

Isn't it better to label anything left-leaning, or even moderate, as outright communism, and then rise above it all, on a flying carpet of false equivalence, and say both the right and the left are petty extremists?

Doesn't this give me an out, or am I missing something?

smaulgld says

Idiot and moron!

You're also a douche.

Fairly objective recap of obama care
http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21588929-barack-obamas-supporters-are-worried-he-terrible-manager-whoops?fsrc=scn/tw/te/pe/whoops

some Rushbot said

So adult of you....

You don't know the meaning of the word. I have cut and pasted all the times you have repeated the same right-wing talking point, JUST IN THIS THREAD. Would it surprise you to learn that you have done it 17 times so far, in 17 separate posts?

Adults do not respond to arguments by merely repeating the same sentence over and over. That is what children do. Not only are you an idiot, but you are a childish idiot, and a troll. I am merely stating a fact. That is an accurate assessment of you.

1. -12 million people WON'T be able to keep their healthcare even though in the State of Union Obama said they could

2. Obamacare hits at integrity (you can keep your plan!)

3. "IF YOU LIKE YOUR HEALTH CARE PLAN YOU CAN KEEP YOU PLAN"- Barrack Obama countless times

4. Twenty -three times from the Head of Obama Care
If you like your plan you can keep your plan

5. If you like your plan... you can keep your plan

6. If you like your plan ...

7. If you like your plan...

8. If you like your plan..

9. If you like your plan....

10. "If YOU like YOUR plan you can keep YOUR plan."

11. Gives Obama's statement 4 Pinocchios

12. Do you think he lied, and does it matter?

13. Obama vows repeatedly you can keep your doctor

14. If you like your lies, you can keep your lies, Period.

15. If you like your identity, you can keep you identity, period. (well maybe most people can)

16. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan, period

17. "If you like your plan, you can keep it PERIOD."

Call it Crazy says

You're the IDIOT here.. You're making a reference that I made those 17 points, but guess what.... It wasn't me...

Eh, whatever. You're both mindless Rushbots. Might as well be the same guy.

Call it Crazy says

So adult of you....

Call it Crazy says

Talk about an Idiot and a troll, you don't even know who you're replying to....

That explains why you think Obamacare is so wonderful... those few brain cells that you have aren't hitting on all cylinders today...

So... this is you being "adult"? LOFL. You couldn't make this stuff up.

Call it Crazy says

Must be as fried as that turkey in your avatar!!!

It's a duck.

Bellingham Bill says

No, just like Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Holland.

The happiest and most wealthy countries on the planet.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2013/10/29/the-worlds-happiest-and-saddest-countries-2013/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_international_investment_position_per_capita

They're real-world examples of how "Robin Hood" redistribution works -- better than what we're doing at least.

Actually, Sweden is cutting back on their welfare because it's becoming too expensive and they can't afford it. Sweden became a very rich country decades ago when they followed more free market principles but then fell into the European style welfare mentality, which hurt them. Now, they're going back to how they got so rich before and away from a being a nanny state.