(February 12, 2014 at 1:57 am)là bạn điên Wrote:(February 11, 2014 at 4:53 pm)Isun Wrote: Obama has been less effective then I would like, but look at the his handicap.Michele?
My biggest problem with Obama is he's a super conservative, and just as a toady of crony capitalism and big business. Keep in mind this is coming from a Progressive, and Obama and the Democrats just do not represent liberals, let alone progressives.
(February 12, 2014 at 1:57 am)là bạn điên Wrote:(February 11, 2014 at 4:53 pm)Isun Wrote: A party that couldn't care less about their country. A party who is very pleased and works hard to not create jobs.What are you talking about?
Republicans gutting the middle class, for the benefit of the oligarchs and corporations, and blaming it all on the poor. Democrats are guilty too, but they're still not as bad as the Republicans.
(February 12, 2014 at 1:57 am)là bạn điên Wrote:(February 11, 2014 at 4:53 pm)Isun Wrote: A party that has made it their number 1 objective to oppose everything that Obama advocates.Are you talking about the republicans party? they are the opposition. Why would they support the president? Democrats opposed Bush when he was president
(February 11, 2014 at 4:53 pm)Isun Wrote: How many presidents have had to work under that kind of handicap? Not many you can bet.An opposition party that acted against them?
Obama could nominate the most conservative, Republican friendly judge or other appointee, and the Republicans would oppose and filibuster the appointment purely on the basis that they were an Obama appointee. That's a level of knee-jerk hyperbole and opposition-for-the-sake-of-opposition that grinds the working of government to a halt.
If Obama appointed the Risen Christ to the Supreme Court, it would not surprise me in the least if the Republicans filibusters the appointment.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/40c0f/40c0fdb7d89801417a53a39e74903de2f6febdd5" alt="Dodgy Dodgy"
(February 12, 2014 at 1:57 am)là bạn điên Wrote:(February 11, 2014 at 4:53 pm)Isun Wrote: As to whether Obama lied about losing one's insurance? They didn't lose their insurance, they just had the policy changed. Quite different. It's just a game that republicans are playing pretending that they lost their insurance.Rubbish, it was an outright lie. he said 'if you like your policy you can keep it'. They couldn't.
Yeah, some people could no longer keep their insurance. Know why? In many cases it simply wasn't insurance, in others it was the companies themselves being dishonest. The insurance companies used this transition time to use people's ignorance and scare tactics to try an up-sell more expensive plans to their customers; never telling them that it would be possible to find a plan with comparable coverage for less on the exchanges. Paying $724 a month for a 'plan' with a $10,000 deductible is not insurance. Paying $50 a month for a plan to cover prescriptions that only cover up to $50 a month, is not a plan.
Anybody that had something like those, would have to get new insurance; but the plan they had before was not 'insurance', it was the companies taking their money with nothing to show for it.
Special Investigation: How Insurers Are Hiding Obamacare Benefits From Customers
![[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]](https://i.imgur.com/E3WvRwZ.gif)