President Barack Obama - Term 1 and 2 Thread

[Boomchild]

Apparently, you seem to to have memory retention problems. I have stated before that I didn't vote for Bush and don't look to his presidency as the right answer to this nation's ills.

Get real. Every dribbling Conservatard in this thread would gladly cast the lever for a third Cheney administration. You know it. Stop lying to yourself. Romney was advocating more of the same, and you guys still lapped it up like creamy shit on a shingle.

Also, for the record I am not old enough to qualify for SS or medicare.

But I bet your parents or people you know are. Why don't you have the courage of your convictions and tell them to stop being dirty lazy mite-infested "moochers" and to stop abetting the welfare state? When you DO qualify for these Democratic programs, will you turn them down? C'mon. Be a man.

Which is common for followers of radical idealists.

Yea, dude. Starting proxy wars in Syria and Libya and following the neo-con status quo is really the hallmark of a "radical." Let's think: FDR created the WPA, Soc Security, FDIC, CCC, and the TVA. Think fast - how many government programs has our radical in chief created? Even his landmark legislation, Obamacare, leaves things in the hands of the HMO executives and shareholders. I guess a giant sweetheart subsidy to the insurance industry, hand written by the industry, is what passes for "radicalism" in 2013. You are a clueless pawn of corporate power.

Wrong again, Didn't vote for Romney either. Do I know people on SS or other government assistance programs?
I think like most people I do. There are people who legitimately need this kind of help and support. I do feel such programs have their place in government. But not in the form it is now. Where there is rampant fraud, abuse and no real oversight. A system where there is no path to assist people that can gravitate off assistance or rewards people for making decisions that keep them on support. If Obamacare is such a windfall deal for private insurance companies then you would see them flocking to participate in the exchanges in every state and that simply is not the case. In fact, a lot of insurance companies have been pulling out of them.

[steveo777]

We all make mistakes. I give people a pass for voting for Obama once, but twice? I'm amazed at how many people still have their nose in his ass and the continued worship, no matter how many times he proves he has fucked up policies, only aimed at hurting America. His continued lies should make any person with any level of intelligence or integrity turn away from him. People who sing his praises are immediately discarded as people who don't support America and condone a liar in the white house, as far as I'm concerned. His whole last campaign was predicated on lie after lie and people actually bought in.

These people that you are referring to are the ones that are getting governmental support and will continue to support the ones that are for these programs. As long as the support keeps coming they will continue to support them.

Which really makes me wonder, just who is Obamacare designed for?
Help me out, if I'm wrong here. Middle class America has coverage through employers or plans that they can afford to pay for themselves. Group plans do not exclude people for having preexisting conditions - group insures everyone, as policy and law related to group coverage. Veterans have VA medical benefits and our retired have Medicare / Medicaid. Most of these plans are not "garbage" as the media would have you to believe. So who do these leave out? The unemployed, the indigent, illegals? I'm sure there are some other groups that have fallen through the cracks, but I fail to see the health care crisis in America, as it were. It just doesn't seem that the bulk of America needed a health care overhaul. So, time to look at the motives, why this law was passed and who it is really meant to serve. $600 million website created with a no bid contract, most likely given to cronies. Suspicious, at least. Socialist governments normally debute by taking over health care, breeding socialism and finally communism. The more I look at it, the more this is about control of citizens, than it is about health care. Doctors and hospitals are already saying they will refuse to participate. Millions are going to lose their insurance and be forced onto the exchanges. Millions of Americans are going to have their backs broken by these new, higher rates and fines. Other millions are going to be given subsidies, often at $5000 per year or more. How many millions can we afford to subsidize at this rate before even more taxes are called for. This model just doesn't work. It is not economically sustainable, unless the earners are literally taxed to NO class. Anyone with a brain can see what is coming.

Ted Cruz sees it. Rand Paul sees it. So does Mike Lee and Marc Rubio. That is why Ted Cruz will not let down, no matter how much of a nut case people think he is. He can already see the end of the movie and it's got nothing to do with the fucking Koch brothers, as the liberals like to insinuate. Obamacare is just a bad deal for every worthy citizen of the USA.

[Boomchild]

Which really makes me wonder, just who is Obamacare designed for?
Help me out, if I'm wrong here. Middle class America has coverage through employers or plans that they can afford to pay for themselves. Group plans do not exclude people for having preexisting conditions - group insures everyone, as policy and law related to group coverage. Veterans have VA medical benefits and our retired have Medicare / Medicaid. Most of these plans are not "garbage" as the media would have you to believe. So who do these leave out? The unemployed, the indigent, illegals? I'm sure there are some other groups that have fallen through the cracks, but I fail to see the health care crisis in America, as it were. It just doesn't seem that the bulk of America needed a health care overhaul. So, time to look at the motives, why this law was passed and who it is really meant to serve. $600 million website created with a no bid contract, most likely given to cronies. Suspicious, at least. Socialist governments normally debute by taking over health care, breeding socialism and finally communism. The more I look at it, the more this is about control of citizens, than it is about health care. Doctors and hospitals are already saying they will refuse to participate. Millions are going to lose their insurance and be forced onto the exchanges. Millions of Americans are going to have their backs broken by these new, higher rates and fines. Other millions are going to be given subsidies, often at $5000 per year or more. How many millions can we afford to subsidize at this rate before even more taxes are called for. This model just doesn't work. It is not economically sustainable, unless the earners are literally taxed to NO class. Anyone with a brain can see what is coming.

Ted Cruz sees it. Rand Paul sees it. So does Mike Lee and Marc Rubio. That is why Ted Cruz will not let down, no matter how much of a nut case people think he is. He can already see the end of the movie and it's got nothing to do with the fucking Koch brothers, as the liberals like to insinuate. Obamacare is just a bad deal for every worthy citizen of the USA.

It's designed for all Americans in the sense that it is just another way to control it's citizens. A way to keep you beholden to government. The healthcare system as it was prior to this so called reform wasn't perfect. There were gaps. Such as affordable coverage for individuals that have preexisting conditions who did not have access to coverage provided through employment and do not qualify for Medicaid or Medicare. So in my mind there should be some regulation in healthcare insurance to address such things. Otherwise people in these situations obtain care at prices no one can afford and everyone else ends up paying for it. Your right that this healthcare reform is not the answer. It was never meant to be that. It is designed to fail. In order to support the case that private healthcare insurance doesn't work in any shape or form therefore, you guessed it, a one payer system is the answer. With respect to Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, Rand Paul etc. while they may have good intentions, they are in the minority and stand no chance of changing anything. The GOP to which is part of their own party demonizes them and works to defeat them. The answers to the problems in our government is not going to come from our legislators. The citizens have to change it.

[Boomchild]

Feelin' a little down or worried? Watch this and you'll feel just fine!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07JVhOPlkLo

[slucero]

another great article on the failure of the ACA...

The Noble Lie of Government Healthcare
http://mises.ca/posts/blog/the-noble-li ... ealthcare/


“If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.”

These words, spoken by U.S. President Barack Obama in various forms and iterations, have become a running joke amidst the rollout of the Affordable Care Act. All across the country, hundreds of thousands of citizens are receiving cancellation notices in the mail. The stringent requirements for insurance plans under the new edict are curtailing many individual policies. A simpleton can grasp the economics: you prohibit something, it goes away. And yet, for years prior, the White House ignored the oncoming train and is now slowly inching away from the wreckage.

This was not the unforeseen consequence of good-intentioned legislation.
According to an investigative report from NBC, the Obama Administration was fully aware of the result its health care bill would have on the marketplace for insurance. A provision written in the original version of the law would have allowed for the grandfathering of existing plans that did not meet the new standards. However, the Department of Health and Human Services rewrote the stipulation to radically narrow the rule, so that an estimated “40 to 67 percent of customers will not be able to keep their policy.” Not one to be a wet blanket, President Obama continued to assuage the public and reassure everyone that their preferred insurance policy would not being going away.

This was a lie. And not one kept close-to-the-chest by a few high-level officials.
House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer admitted that many in his party knew “there would be some policies that would not qualify and therefore people would be required to get more extensive coverage.” A presidential election and a litany of Senate seats were won based on the falsehood that America’s health insurance market would not be totally disturbed.

The admission of guilt may have ramifications for supporters of big government.
In the short term, it undermines the President and the promises he makes going into the future. But voters are fickle and have a memory prone to lapses. When the subsidies start flowing, they will begin to smile again. The balancing act will be whether the boost in tax benefits outweighs being forced to pay a higher cost for what was once a cheaper product. Those who are net beneficiaries will be content while the losers may sulk but will ultimately accept the “new normal.”

The deceit behind ObamaCare is nothing new in the practice of governing.
The state’s monopoly power makes it a natural target of suspicion. Even the most ardent worshiper of socialism is still wary that his nation’s controllers will turn on him. He keeps an ear out for fiction spun by his rulers but will not question larger injustice as long as he is fed well enough. Even with the preponderance of lies, there is still the naive hope “good folks” will soon come along who have a deep aversion to dishonesty. The white knight never arrives, but optimism prevails.

The happy voter is the one who refuses to grasp the obvious point that government serves as a vehicle for the worst in society to play out their violent fantasies. As Hayek put it, “the unscrupulous and uninhibited are likely to be more successful” in operating the machinery of total intimidation. It is always from the throne of authority that the worst deeds are accomplished. This includes mass aggression against property as well as the truth. The productive capacity of society is decimated enough by government’s necessarily parasitical operation; the public’s concept of verity is challenged by the various ministries of agitprop that disguise their actions as beneficial rather than schemes of plunder.

The false characterization needed to sustain Obama’s signature piece of legislation was another variation of Plato’s noble lie. In his widely heralded Republic, the classical philosopher wrote on the necessity of the few lording over the many to achieve harmonious social relationships. These “philosopher-kings” could govern best by spreading falsities that would have the “good effect” of making the underlings “more inclined to care for the state and one another.” One could call this a textbook lesson in the art of ruling over a dim and detached populace.

Perhaps the best exponent of the noble lie was the late, neoconservative king Irving Kristol, who held political theorist Leo Strauss as a strong intellectual influence. Kristol affirmed what many thinkers before him found when it comes to truth:

“There are different kinds of truths for different kinds of people. There are truths appropriate for children; truths that are appropriate for students; truths that are appropriate for educated adults; and truths that are appropriate for highly educated adults, and the notion that there should be one set of truths available to everyone is a modern democratic fallacy. It doesn’t work.”

In many ways, this statement is completely accurate. In a democracy, the people must be corralled. They must get behind measures that ordinarily wouldn’t receive a lick of support outside of a few special interests. The naked, unvarnished truth is a dangerous weapon against tyranny. So it must be distorted to fit the agenda of collectivists, statists, dictators, and despots. Anything will do to assure for maximum support with minimum resistance.

Had President Obama been upfront about the full ramifications of his health care edict, the public may have turned.
It’s one thing to apply for and receive a subsidy. It’s another to disrupt lives and force people to take action they otherwise wouldn’t. Outside disturbances are a nuisance to common folks trying to make the best go at their lives. Like a dog with its tail between its legs, the Administration is now backtracking on its own selling point. In a recent press hearing, White House spokesman Jay Carney, the quivering apparatchik of social democracy, was quick to ignore past statements and highlight the benefits of the health care bill. He told Fox News correspondent Ed Henry,

Well, let’s just be clear, what the President said and what everybody said all along was that there were going to be changes under brought about by the Affordable Care Act that create minimum standards of coverage — minimum services that every insurance plan has to provide.

So goes the guarantee of “if you like it, you can keep it.”
As progressive columnist Clarence Page admitted to radio host Hugh Hewitt, it was “one of those political lies, you know.” The promise will eventually find itself lodged somewhere in the memory hole along with the guarantee of liberty in a security state. The state itself is a great lie. It purports to be the great savior of mankind. The political class likens itself to the great deliverance from struggle and despair. The reality ends up not as rosy.

Kristol was right on one thing: not everyone accepts the truth.
They will self-deceive to feel comfortable in their own skin. It is this weakness the politician will manipulate for his own aggrandizement. Honesty and truth are always a virtue. And that’s why they are wholly absent from the halls of power.

[Memorex]

This article by Edward Snowden was published Sunday in Der Spiegel.

In a very short time, the world has learned much about unaccountable secret agencies and about sometimes illegal surveillance programs. Sometimes the agencies even deliberately try to hide their surveillance of high officials or the public. While the NSA and GCHQ seem to be the worst offenders – this is what the currently available documents suggest – we must not forget that mass surveillance is a global problem in need of global solutions.

Such programs are not only a threat to privacy, they also threaten freedom of speech and open societies. The existence of spy technology should not determine policy. We have a moral duty to ensure that our laws and values limit monitoring programs and protect human rights.

Society can only understand and control these problems through an open, respectful and informed debate. At first, some governments feeling embarrassed by the revelations of mass surveillance initiated an unprecedented campaign of persecution to supress this debate. They intimidated journalists and criminalized publishing the truth. At this point, the public was not yet able to evaluate the benefits of the revelations. They relied on their governments to decide correctly.

Today we know that this was a mistake and that such action does not serve the public interest. The debate which they wanted to prevent will now take place in countries around the world. And instead of doing harm, the societal benefits of this new public knowledge is now clear, since reforms are now proposed in the form of increased oversight and new legislation.

Citizens have to fight suppression of information on matters of vital public importance. To tell the truth is not a crime

[steveo777]

Friends, if you agree that Obamacare is bad, please watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxWMbqxgMDo

[The_Noble_Cause]

Friends, if you agree that Obamacare is bad, please watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxWMbqxgMDo

Easy for you to say. You've got your single payer socialist Medicare. Hypocrite.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Maybe TNC can explain to us again about those oh so doveish liberals and how only they can stop wars.

The Democratic Party, historically, is the party of war (Vietnam - JFK/LBJ, Wilson - WW1, FDR - WW2 etc). Too stupid to realize the difference between a liberal and a Democrat? Better educate yourself, son. When it comes to US foreign policy, there is one party in charge.

[The_Noble_Cause]

It's designed for all Americans in the sense that it is just another way to control it's citizens. A way to keep you beholden to government.

WRONG. Government provided coverage increases freedom. Right now in Canada, people are free to pursue their interests, switch careers, or start a small business (and in general pursue"life, liberty, and happiness) without fear of losing their employer-based healthcare. Healthcare should never have been tied to private business and employment in the first place. Horrible, antiquated idea.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Which really makes me wonder, just who is Obamacare designed for?
Help me out, if I'm wrong here. Middle class America has coverage through employers or plans that they can afford to pay for themselves. Group plans do not exclude people for having preexisting conditions - group insures everyone, as policy and law related to group coverage. Veterans have VA medical benefits and our retired have Medicare / Medicaid. Most of these plans are not "garbage" as the media would have you to believe. So who do these leave out? The unemployed, the indigent, illegals?

Glad you realize you're out of touch. The number one employer in this country is no longer the middle class Ford assembly line worker providing for his family. It's the under-employed Walmart and McDonalds worker. Many of whom have bachelor's degrees and beyond. And guess what? They do not have coverage. If you have to ask "who in modern America does not have healthcare", then the odds are you do not know alot of Americans.

[trekman]

Friends, if you agree that Obamacare is bad, please watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxWMbqxgMDo

Excellent video. Passing it on!

[Boomchild]

It's designed for all Americans in the sense that it is just another way to control it's citizens. A way to keep you beholden to government.

WRONG. Government provided coverage increases freedom. Right now in Canada, people are free to pursue their interests, switch careers, or start a small business (and in general pursue"life, liberty, and happiness) without fear of losing their employer-based healthcare. Healthcare should never have been tied to private business and employment in the first place. Horrible, antiquated idea.

[Boomchild]

It's designed for all Americans in the sense that it is just another way to control it's citizens. A way to keep you beholden to government.

WRONG. Government provided coverage increases freedom. Right now in Canada, people are free to pursue their interests, switch careers, or start a small business (and in general pursue"life, liberty, and happiness) without fear of losing their employer-based healthcare. Healthcare should never have been tied to private business and employment in the first place. Horrible, antiquated idea.

Yeah sure it is. That's if you buy into theory that people make career choices solely based on the health coverage they will have. People do factor this into their career choices but it's not their single deciding factor as you want to believe. Healthcare coverage is not the driver of people's freedom to pursue life, liberty and happiness. If it is then just how have people been able to do these things in the U.S. prior to mandated healthcare? Government mandated healthcare is not freedom of choice. Your stuck with the government dictating the rules, determining what is covered and what is not, setting deductibles etc.. B.O. just proved this point with the whole "If you like your insurance you can keep it" which has now been exposed to be simply not true. Only if it meets the government's dictated rules. Which by the amount of coverage cancellations mounting you don't have a choice. As opposed to a free market system where companies compete for your business and offer a much wider array of options.[/quote]

[Memorex]

I agree that healthcare should not be tied to employment. And it's not. Anyone can buy a policy for the right price. But those prices as insanely high. So something had to be done for sure. But forcing people to buy coverage is not right and forcing them to buy coverage they will never use (i.e. a single man buying maternity coverage) is not the answer.

You say it should not be tied to employment, but one of the hallmarks of the legislation is that it fines employers for not providing health insurance. So you are still creating a system where people will make career choices based partly on insurance, especially if employers continue to cover some of the costs.

The freedom that you are increasing for some is being taken away for others. Many of us will have to pay a lot more, thus reducing my freedom.

I don't have all the answers but I know this legislation is far less about health care than control. This wasn't some noble effort to care for the sick. It is not a thoughtful solution. Thoughtful solutions are implemented over time, a piece at a time. This is manipulation at it's worst. The thing is - you know it. I know it. But somehow we can't discuss it. If you can sincerely look at the totality of what has transpired and you still defend it and the process, it's highly dishonest. That's all I'm saying.

[slucero]

The nations largest employer is the US government at 21,800,000

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

[Memorex]

How come people say health insurance should not be tied to employment, but then the government tries to attract employees with health insurance? In fact, they make the tax payers foot most of the bill.

I don't know. Sounds like a lot of people want everything both ways.

[Boomchild]

How come people say health insurance should not be tied to employment, but then the government tries to attract employees with health insurance? In fact, they make the tax payers foot most of the bill.

I don't know. Sounds like a lot of people want everything both ways.

If it wasn't for health coverage offered through employment many people would be without it. Many people would pay higher premiums through individual plans and more then likely have less coverage for their dollars plus higher deductibles. Many would not qualify or could not afford coverage because of preexisting conditions which under employer group plans is not an issue. Now with the new reform laws, employers are choosing not to offer coverage and pay the fine, reduce the options and quality of their offerings and some are structuring their employee work hours so that they are not required to offer coverage. So the only option people effected by this will have is to go to the exchanges. Which they could pay more in premiums, have higher deductibles and possibly less coverage for the same dollars as the plan they did have through employment. Then factor in that if the government does not reach the amount of younger, healthy citizens to sign up to make the program work the premium costs could be raised or the system could
fail all together.

[slucero]

The irony is that is was a shortage of labor during World War II that encouraged employers to offer health insurance as an added benefit to the employment package. Soon after it was a commonplace for employers to provide health insurance - and the government to provide tax incentives to do it.

[trekman]

But Wait!! I NEVER said that!!!

http://youtu.be/J7T31rWcWns

[The_Noble_Cause]

That's amazing isn't it? Sadly, some people, like TNC, will excuse it away. I agree with Congressman Gowdy, The Won should have the Noble Prize for Fiction. Shameless, pathological liar.

I didn't lose my plan. Sounds to me like these people had shitty insurance or pretty lousy careers. Maybe they should stop being so lazy and try to work a little harder and advance themselves. I mean, hey, that's what the Conservative auto-response would be.

[Memorex]

That's amazing isn't it? Sadly, some people, like TNC, will excuse it away. I agree with Congressman Gowdy, The Won should have the Noble Prize for Fiction. Shameless, pathological liar.

I didn't lose my plan. Sounds to me like these people had shitty insurance or pretty lousy careers. Maybe they should stop being so lazy and try to work a little harder and advance themselves. I mean, hey, that's what the Conservative auto-response would be.

Do you have insurance as an individual or employer?

[slucero]

Obama denies ‘you can keep it’ videotaped promises
http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/05/obama ... -promises/

President Barack Obama told his enthusiastic supporters Monday night that he never promised what video recordings show him promising at least 29 times.

The videos show Obama promising 300 million Americans that “if you like your health-care plan, you will be able to keep your health-care plan, period.”

But that’s not what he really said, Obama announced Monday in a speech to about 200 Organizing for Action supporters, gathered at the St. Regis hotel in D.C.

“What we said was you could keep it if it hasn’t changed since the law was passed,” he told Obamacare’s political beneficiaries and contractors.

That claim is not supported by his videotaped statements, which don’t include any mention of his new “if it hasn’t changed” exception.

But the newly-revealed exception is justified by a higher-priority promise in Obamacare, Obama declared.

“If we had allowed these old plans [to continue]… then we would have broken an even more important promise — making sure that Americans gain access to health care that doesn’t leave them one illness away from financial ruin,” he announced.

“So the bottom line is, is that we are making the insurance market better for everybody,” he declared, prompting loud applause by supporters eager to ignore his three years of fraudulent statements.

Obama’s higher promise is now causing the cancelation of insurance policies chosen by at least 3.5 million Americans.

The cancellations are spreading from the individual market to the small-group market. For example, Kentucky’s Department of Insurance has reported that 150,000 people in small-group plans — typically created for employees of small companies — are losing their insurance.

Obama urged his supporters to counter the political effect of the many cancellations by highlighting good-news stories, and by reassuring people who have lost their insurance that they can buy new Obamacare-compliant policies.

“I realize that can be scary for people if they just get some [cancellation] notice like that… we’ve got to make sure that we’re getting them the right information,” he said.

But he also tried to downplay the Obamacare-caused cancellations, which are creating a wave of bad publicity that is hammering his poll ratings and his political clout.

“People are acting like this is some new phenomenon… every year there was churn in this individual market” before the law was passed, he complained.

But Americans’ complaints are subordinate to his political goals, he suggested.

“We decided we need to build something better, no matter how hard it is,” he declared.

Under that better progressive-managed system, some people’s health-care costs are going to jump, but it will be good for them, Obama said.

“Some Americans with higher incomes will pay more on the front end for better insurance with better benefits and better protections that could eventually help them a lot, even if right now they’d rather be paying less,” he announced.

Obama’s deceptive statements were deliberate and were intended to bolster Obama’s ability to get Obamacare passed in 2010 and him reelected in 2012, according to aides cited in a Wall Street Journal article Saturday.

“Simplification and ease of explanation were a premium, and that was true throughout the process,” Jon Favreau, who was Obama’s senior speech writer, told the journal’s writers.

Despite Obama’s new claims to his supporters, his “if it hasn’t changed” exception is not recorded in even one of his many videotaped “you can keep it” promises to Americans.

“We will keep this promise to the American people… if you like your health-care plan, you will be able to keep your health-care plan, period,” Obama said June 23, 2009.

“If you like your insurance plan, you will keep it. No one will be able to take that away from you. It hasn’t happened yet. It won’t happen in the future,” Obama told voters on April Fool’s Day, 2010, after the law was signed.

He repeated the unqualified promise in the run-up to the 2012 election. “If you’ve got health insurance…. you keep your own insurance, you keep your own doctor,” he declared in one of the three presidential debates.

However, Obama didn’t spend all of his Nov. 4 speech denying the videotapes.

He did confess that he and his aides may have made some mistakes, such as failing to manage the development of the Obamacare website.

“We got [Obamacare] done. Now, let’s face it, a lot of us didn’t realize that passing the law was the easy part.”

[Boomchild]

Obama denies ‘you can keep it’ videotaped promises
http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/05/obama ... -promises/

If the GOP was smart they should start running PSAs focusing directly on this topic. Show all the major clips before and his pathetic attempt to back peddle now. But of course they won't. Instead you'll get appearances by Karl Rove and his stupid white board spewing his out of touch philosophy.

[slucero]

Obama denies ‘you can keep it’ videotaped promises
http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/05/obama ... -promises/

If the GOP was smart they should start running PSAs focusing directly on this topic. Show all the major clips before and his pathetic attempt to back peddle now. But of course they won't. Instead you'll get appearances by Karl Rove and his stupid white board spewing his out of touch philosophy.

Nah.. Rove is on the outs with the RNC...

2014 will be the RNC against Obamacare and the lies..

[The_Noble_Cause]

2014 will be the RNC against Obamacare and the lies..

Right. Sure. Sure. And Benghazi is even bigger than Watergate. Nobody cares.

[Memorex]

2014 will be the RNC against Obamacare and the lies..

Right. Sure. Sure. And Benghazi is even bigger than Watergate. Nobody cares.

I agree that it seems people don't care as much as I think they should. But do you think it's less of fuck up than watergate? That would surprise me.

[steveo777]

Obama denies ‘you can keep it’ videotaped promises
http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/05/obama ... -promises/

If the GOP was smart they should start running PSAs focusing directly on this topic. Show all the major clips before and his pathetic attempt to back peddle now. But of course they won't. Instead you'll get appearances by Karl Rove and his stupid white board spewing his out of touch philosophy.

Nah.. Rove is on the outs with the RNC...

2014 will be the RNC against Obamacare and the lies..

The democrats I know think they have the house and the senate in the bag for 2014

[slucero]

2014 will be the RNC against Obamacare and the lies..

Right. Sure. Sure. And Benghazi is even bigger than Watergate. Nobody cares.

I agree. Nobody cares. Therein lies the problem, not that I'd expect you to care, at all.

[Boomchild]

2014 will be the RNC against Obamacare and the lies..

Right. Sure. Sure. And Benghazi is even bigger than Watergate. Nobody cares.

I agree that it seems people don't care as much as I think they should. But do you think it's less of fuck up than watergate? That would surprise me.

Correct me if I am wrong but no one got killed in the watergate scandal. As opposed to Benghazi where Americans serving our country were left to die because people who took an oath to protect and defend them did nothing. All because it wouldn't look good for The Messiah's image during an election.