Still Trying to Decode Obama

People may be still trying to decode Obama, but there is no such ambiguity about the Republican Party which is at it's lowest party affiliation EVER .. half of the party affiliation of the Democratic Party which stands at 56%
 
TuTu Monroe said:
The author hit the nail right on the head. It would be funny, if it weren't so damn true and pathetic. The people who voted for this guy are nuts.

"He really is trying to engineer a government takeover of health care. His health-care plan may be the single worst thing he could do for America’s long-term fiscal health."
Click to expand...

Are folks still going on about this nonsense?

Every country that has a universal medical plan, a medical plan run or paid for by the government, started out with the same system now in force in the US. IE: The "Pay or Suffer" system.

Not one country has reverted back to the "Pay or Suffer" system. Not one single county. Out of dozens and dozens of countries not one reverted back to the barbaric, inhumane, "Pay or Suffer" system.

As I mentioned in another thread universal medical care has been debated by every possible nationality, creed, religious affiliation, political persuasion, color and age on the planet! There is not one country that reverted back to the old way.

What is the problem? What is it that people don't understand? The proof, the evidence, is all over the world.

There is not one country where a politician has campaigned on reverting back to the old way. No country has reverted back and no country is planning to revert back and no country is even discussing or considering reverting back.

Accusations about poor medical care and financial ruin are all nonsense. From the richest to the poorest, from the most capitalistic to the most communistic/dictatorial, not one country has reverted back. Not one!

What is there to discuss?


//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

TuTu Monroe said:
The author hit the nail right on the head. It would be funny, if it weren't so damn true and pathetic. The people who voted for this guy are nuts.

Peter Wehner - 06.17.2009 - 1:30 PM
I recently devoted a piece to trying to decode President Obama. In reading more of his comments, I’ve noticed a tendency that now almost qualifies as a reflex: the more strongly the president denies something — and especially, the more he mocks his critics and feigns amusement at what they say — the greater the odds are that he will do what he denies.
In an interview yesterday, the president said, “I think the irony … is that I actually would like to see a relatively light touch when it comes to the government.”
Of course; examples of his “light touch” abound during the first five months of his presidency.
During his press conference discussing his first 100 days in office, Obama said, “And that’s why I’m always amused when I hear these, you know, criticisms of, ‘Oh, you know, Obama wants to grow government.’ No. I would love a nice, lean portfolio to deal with, but that’s not the hand that’s been dealt us.”
Why would anyone think Obama wants to “grow government”? Isn’t it clear by now he wants to limit it?
While speaking at a town hall forum in New Mexico last month, Obama insisted that the “long-term deficit and debt that we have accumulated is unsustainable.”
They are, and they certainly seem to be a primary concern of the president, who is clearly doing everything humanly possible to reduce the deficit and the debt.
At a June 1 White House Press event, Obama asserted, “What I have no interest in doing is running GM.”
Why would he even need to say that? Why would anyone think he wants to run GM?
During a health care event in Green Bay, Obama said: “And the reason [he supports his so-called “public insurance option”] is not because we want a government takeover of health care — I’ve already said if you’ve got a private plan that works for you, that’s great.” And speaking to the AMA, Obama said, “Health-care reform is the single most important thing we can do for America’s long-term fiscal health.”
It is; and we all know Obama is doing everything he can to oppose a government takeover of health care.
During his presidential campaign, Obama ridiculed those who said he was interested in reading Miranda rights to terrorists. During a “60 Minutes” interview with Steve Kroft, Obama was emphatic: “Now, do these folks deserve Miranda rights? Do they deserve to be treated like a shoplifter down the block? Of course not.”
No-sir-ee; such a thing would never happen on his watch.
Here’s the thing, though: in every one of these instances Obama is not only doing something different than what he said, he’s doing very nearly the opposite of what he says. Obama’s “light touch” is turning out to be as intrusive a set of actions by the federal government as we have seen. He is “growing government” in record-shattering ways. Facing a staggering deficit and debt, Obama has decided to hit the accelerator rather than pump the brakes when it comes to federal spending. Facing a deficit and debt he calls unsustainable, Obama is adding trillions to them. He actually is running GM. He really is trying to engineer a government takeover of health care. His health-care plan may be the single worst thing he could do for America’s long-term fiscal health. And his Justice Department has acknowledged that FBI agents have read terrorist suspects their Miranda rights.
Let’s stipulate that most politicians use words in an elastic and imprecise manner, that often their account muddles rather than clarifies things, and that what they say doesn’t always correspond to what is. Even with all of that, President Obama seems to be carving out some fairly exclusive rhetorical real estate for himself.
No one doubts Obama speaks exceedingly well; he uses soothing words that come across as reassuring and reasonable. The problem comes when you examine what he says versus what he does. And by that standard, Mr. Obama is turning out to be almost promiscuously misleading. He is not yet Bill Clinton, who belongs in a category all his own — but Obama is taking up residence in the same zip code, which is troubling enough. And for those of us who thought Obama, whatever his political ideology, would bring intellectual integrity to his words and his tenure, it is disappointing. It is hardly the change we were promised. But I imagine that it will catch up with him sooner or later — and when it does, the man who promised to be the antidote to cynicism will only deepen it.
commentarymagazine.com
Click to expand...
 
apple0154 said:
Are folks still going on about this nonsense?

Every country that has a universal medical plan, a medical plan run or paid for by the government, started out with the same system now in force in the US. IE: The "Pay or Suffer" system.

Not one country has reverted back to the "Pay or Suffer" system. Not one single county. Out of dozens and dozens of countries not one reverted back to the barbaric, inhumane, "Pay or Suffer" system.

As I mentioned in another thread universal medical care has been debated by every possible nationality, creed, religious affiliation, political persuasion, color and age on the planet! There is not one country that reverted back to the old way.

What is the problem? What is it that people don't understand? The proof, the evidence, is all over the world.

There is not one country where a politician has campaigned on reverting back to the old way. No country has reverted back and no country is planning to revert back and no country is even discussing or considering reverting back.

Accusations about poor medical care and financial ruin are all nonsense. From the richest to the poorest, from the most capitalistic to the most communistic/dictatorial, not one country has reverted back. Not one!

What is there to discuss?


//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Click to expand...

:hand: :hand:

Most excellent post
 
Right apple. Because once elitists control life and death, they will rarely give up that power..

A plethora of sucky systems is not good evidence of why we should reduce ours to such a state.
 
blackascoal said:
Who the fuck appointed you?

His comments are far more cogent than anything that has ever come out of your mouth .. or fingers.
Click to expand...

Why don't you eat a pound of shit, then take a tums and a nap, then go shoot yourself. Then resurrect back to life and go have sex with a vampire dog, get turned into vampire then suck bunch of blood from a dirty jew.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Why don't you eat a pound of shit, then take a tums and a nap, then go shoot yourself. Then resurrect back to life and go have sex with a vampire dog, get turned into vampire then suck bunch of blood from a dirty jew.
Click to expand...

You need serious help brother .. and a healthy dose of maturity wouldn't hurt either.
 
blackascoal said:
People may be still trying to decode Obama, but there is no such ambiguity about the Republican Party which is at it's lowest party affiliation EVER .. half of the party affiliation of the Democratic Party which stands at 56%
Click to expand...
True, while it's dropped to 28% for Republicans.
 
apple0154 said:
Are folks still going on about this nonsense?

Every country that has a universal medical plan, a medical plan run or paid for by the government, started out with the same system now in force in the US. IE: The "Pay or Suffer" system.

Not one country has reverted back to the "Pay or Suffer" system. Not one single county. Out of dozens and dozens of countries not one reverted back to the barbaric, inhumane, "Pay or Suffer" system.

As I mentioned in another thread universal medical care has been debated by every possible nationality, creed, religious affiliation, political persuasion, color and age on the planet! There is not one country that reverted back to the old way.

What is the problem? What is it that people don't understand? The proof, the evidence, is all over the world.

There is not one country where a politician has campaigned on reverting back to the old way. No country has reverted back and no country is planning to revert back and no country is even discussing or considering reverting back.

Accusations about poor medical care and financial ruin are all nonsense. From the richest to the poorest, from the most capitalistic to the most communistic/dictatorial, not one country has reverted back. Not one!

What is there to discuss?


//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Click to expand...
TuTu is pwned!!!!
 
cawacko said:
I have family members who are well educated and successful who have voted for Republicans in the past, voted for Obama and will probably vote for Republicans again at some point in the future. Saying people are nuts who voted for Obama is just as dumb as an idiot like uscitizen saying everyone who voted for Bush is stupid.
Click to expand...

Well....you have to admit...it wasn't their best moment! LOL
 
Whomever said:
CAW holds a grudge becuase I called unfolding events on the war and the economy better than he did.

He an epicurus seem to hate me for being correct.
Click to expand...
That's just not true. Cawako and Epicurious are completely fair and unbiased. They hate everyone, including you! LOL
 
apple0154 said:
Are folks still going on about this nonsense?

Every country that has a universal medical plan, a medical plan run or paid for by the government, started out with the same system now in force in the US. IE: The "Pay or Suffer" system.

Not one country has reverted back to the "Pay or Suffer" system. Not one single county. Out of dozens and dozens of countries not one reverted back to the barbaric, inhumane, "Pay or Suffer" system.

As I mentioned in another thread universal medical care has been debated by every possible nationality, creed, religious affiliation, political persuasion, color and age on the planet! There is not one country that reverted back to the old way.

What is the problem? What is it that people don't understand? The proof, the evidence, is all over the world.

There is not one country where a politician has campaigned on reverting back to the old way. No country has reverted back and no country is planning to revert back and no country is even discussing or considering reverting back.

Accusations about poor medical care and financial ruin are all nonsense. From the richest to the poorest, from the most capitalistic to the most communistic/dictatorial, not one country has reverted back. Not one!

What is there to discuss?


//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Click to expand...
Seriously. This is what you have? None of them went "back"?

There is nothing man made that is more infinite than a government program. This isn't evidence that the systems are better, just that they are government programs. When government programs go bad, they just "tweak" them a little and pretend it fixes them or ignore it and say things like, "It won't fail for 20 years so there is no reason to fix it now!" We'll ignore that France is now showing signs of having to ration care in the near future, that Germany and Britain already do it... They didn't go "back" so it must mean that it is perfect and preferable.
 
apple0154 said:
Are folks still going on about this nonsense?

Every country that has a universal medical plan, a medical plan run or paid for by the government, started out with the same system now in force in the US. IE: The "Pay or Suffer" system.

Not one country has reverted back to the "Pay or Suffer" system. Not one single county. Out of dozens and dozens of countries not one reverted back to the barbaric, inhumane, "Pay or Suffer" system.

As I mentioned in another thread universal medical care has been debated by every possible nationality, creed, religious affiliation, political persuasion, color and age on the planet! There is not one country that reverted back to the old way.

What is the problem? What is it that people don't understand? The proof, the evidence, is all over the world.

There is not one country where a politician has campaigned on reverting back to the old way. No country has reverted back and no country is planning to revert back and no country is even discussing or considering reverting back.

Accusations about poor medical care and financial ruin are all nonsense. From the richest to the poorest, from the most capitalistic to the most communistic/dictatorial, not one country has reverted back. Not one!

What is there to discuss?


///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Click to expand...
Of course they haven't reverted back. Once a government gets it's grubby hands on people, it's there to stay.

Many of the countries you are talking about have deficits and they have to ration the health care. The older a person gets, the less care they receive. Hell, these old people are going to die anyway, so who cares is their attitude.

I am not going to allow the government to tell me what tests I can get and what tests I can't get and decide if I live or die.That's why I have always hated HMO's.

The majority of people in this country say we need health reform, but not Obama's government control program.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top