Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

President Obama goes on the offensive, prepares to slam Republicans

page: 5
14
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   
I guess it doesn't matter how many times the facts are presented to Liberals, they still don't understand taxing the rich more (even 100%) won't make a dent in the federal ledgers and definitely won't help the federal deficit that Obama has jacked up to 17 trillion.




posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by rickm
reply to post by macman
 


But what about the 1993 bill which was supported by John McCain, Orrin Hatch, Charles Grassley, Robert Bennet, and Chris Bond and other senate republicans?
Bill Frist supported the individual mandate before Obama supported it.


Yes, let him keep denying that Republicans were in favor of this being a national healthcare program (until Obama supported it) - he's just making himself look less and less intelligent.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by kaylaluv
 


Yep, me too dumb to know what is this and what is that.
Duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh......


whitehouse12.com...
I didn't seem to find Govt Run Healthcare.

Nor do I see it on many individual Reps sites or platforms either.


SO...............................................



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by kaylaluv
 


Yep, me too dumb to know what is this and what is that.
Duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh......


whitehouse12.com...
I didn't seem to find Govt Run Healthcare.

Nor do I see it on many individual Reps sites or platforms either.


SO...............................................


Well, duhhhhh, Obamacare won't be on their 2012 platform. What are you even talking about - Govt run healthcare? Obamacare isn't govt run healthcare - it involves privately run insurance companies with an individual mandate to purchase insurance - which received overwhelming republican support - until 2009 when Obama proposed the exact same mandate.

Maybe you think the New York Times is a liberal rag too?

www.nytimes.com...

It wasn't just a think-tank idea - and it wasn't solely approved by the republicans as a state-run program. Deny all you want - facts are facts.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


It shows the GOP supported it then and don't now just because it was proposed and pushed by a democrat



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by kaylaluv


It wasn't just a think-tank idea - and it wasn't solely approved by the republicans as a state-run program. Deny all you want - facts are facts.


STATE-RUN.
You just proved my point.
Thank you.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by rickm
 


Yep, because I see it on many many past GOP platforms.



There is a spin that you and your buddy are pushing through.

STATE run initiative is different from FEDERAL run.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by kaylaluv


What's really stupid is people who don't know the true history of Obamacare.

www.dailykos.com...



What's really stupid is people who know the true history of Romneycare from 2006-2009, but voted for Obamacare anyway instead of learning from it and changing their stance.

en.wikipedia.org...

Massachusetts admits that even though they are covering more people, the plan has done NOTHING to bring down the cost of health care in the state and more of it is being subsidized by the federal government than ever before.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by kaylaluv


It wasn't just a think-tank idea - and it wasn't solely approved by the republicans as a state-run program. Deny all you want - facts are facts.


STATE-RUN.
You just proved my point.
Thank you.


Your comprehension skills are seriously lacking. It WAS NOT only approved by Republicans for state use. It WAS approved by Republicans for national use.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Deetermined

Originally posted by kaylaluv


What's really stupid is people who don't know the true history of Obamacare.

www.dailykos.com...



What's really stupid is people who know the true history of Romneycare from 2006-2009, but voted for Obamacare anyway instead of learning from it and changing their stance.

en.wikipedia.org...

Massachusetts admits that even though they are covering more people, the plan has done NOTHING to bring down the cost of health care in the state and more of it is being subsidized by the federal government than ever before.



Hey, I don't really like Obamacare either. I think it was a typically stupid Republican idea. I am angry that Obama didn't play hardball to force a single-payer healthcare system. I think Obamacare has a few good elements in it (like pre-existing conditions, etc.), but overall, I would have much preferred Obama's original choice of a single-payer system. I could only dream that Obama will try to overhaul the whole thing in his 2nd term and bring back the single-payer -- but I know that's just a dream.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by kaylaluv
 


Must be more of the stupid going around.

DUH...............
As I still can't find in the GOP platforms where it states as such.

Other than a bill in 93 that died as your smoking gun, don't really see anything else.

Maybe was that bill used to head off Clinton's Health Care??? Maybe???
edit on 12-11-2012 by macman because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Hey, I don't really like Obamacare either. I think it was a typically stupid Republican idea. I am angry that Obama didn't play hardball to force a single-payer healthcare system. I think Obamacare has a few good elements in it (like pre-existing conditions, etc.), but overall, I would have much preferred Obama's original choice of a single-payer system. I could only dream that Obama will try to overhaul the whole thing in his 2nd term and bring back the single-payer -- but I know that's just a dream.


Unfortunately, with a federal government that has sent out payments in error to the tune of $125 Billion - $150 Billion per year for the last four years, I don't anticipate that number getting smaller if we allow the federal government to be responsible for health care payments.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by macman
Maybe was that bill used to head off Clinton's Health Care??? Maybe???


Well, yeah... they thought it was a great alternative to Hillarycare - or they wouldn't have proposed it. The GOP didn't want to take private insurance companies out of the equation - I'll give you 3 guesses why. Sooooo, the individual mandate was their dumb idea to keep private companies in business making money - while somehow bringing the cost of insurance down, and making sure everyone got insurance. The overwhelming majority of Republicans were in favor of the mandate - as a NATIONAL program. When healthcare reform got totally scrapped - genius Romney decided to take this "wonderful" Republican idea and use it in his state.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by kaylaluv
 





Maybe you think the New York Times is a liberal rag too?


Of course it is. They have been carrying Liberals water for a long long time.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Variable
reply to post by kaylaluv
 





Maybe you think the New York Times is a liberal rag too?


Of course it is. They have been carrying Liberals water for a long long time.


Don't tell me you think Fox is really "fair and balanced".
Facts are facts - you can't dispute them. The fact is, the Republicans, as a whole, favored the insurance mandate - until Obama included it in his reform.



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   
This is how the media had it planned all along. If the republicans don't agree to higher taxes, when the financial collapse comes the media literally has a bomb to drop on the GOP. They'll blame the situation on the fact that republicans didn't raise taxes and like the sheep people are, they'll believe it. A majority of the media in this country is pro-democrat.

The fiscal cliff is actually part of the solution. Everyone in washington talks about spending cuts but have we actually seen any? No. Printing money is not a get out of jail free card, it's just another way to default. Interest rates have to rise. If a bank fails, they have to fail. Right now i think republicans should just agree to a democratic plan and then duck for cover. At least they can say they agreed to a democratic plan and this is where it got you.
edit on 11/12/2012 by JackBauer because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock
reply to post by muse7
 


Its not going to help the middle class to tax the "rich". Its just not.


Right, because despite decades of proof that higher tax rates on the wealthy have resulted in the best economic times (for a myriad of reasons I won't get into here, as facts typically fall on deaf ears when it comes to this topic), this time it is suddenly not going to work the way it always has, simply because "it's just not.". Why is that? Black magic? Or, possibly we've entered the Bizarro World Universe where increasing taxes on the rich somehow isn't going to work the way it always has in the past?



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   
Seems that the reelected CIC, Øbama, is busy firing all the zeroes he thought were valuable appointments (State/Treasury/Fed Reserve/ others) and a slew of holdover fascists from the former Bush administration...including the intrigues with Ambassador Stevens re: Benghazi-arms & mercenaries


found this very oddball report... well, only odd because i have not been following the authors line of thought on a daily basis as i do with other alternative mews/opinion sites
kindly scan the whole 3 minute read here:
www.ascensionwithearth.com...


HPere's some of the meat on the bone in this edition:
TITLE: Monday, November 12, 2012
Benjmain Fulford: World intervention saves Obama, prevents World War 3





Obama now has a totally different set of handlers and teleprompter script writers than he did in his first term.

The agenda he is expected to follow is to set the stage for a swords to plowshares transition of the military industrial complex.

He is also expected to oversee the dismantling of the Federal Reserve Board.


[...]

Obama is now a high priority assassination target of the Nazi/Bush faction, according various sources.





peke you interest?
i wonder just whom are the sources for the Authors claims ....and just what/whom is this White Dragon entity that appears to be sponsering Øbama in his 2nd term?


thanks
edit on 12-11-2012 by St Udio because: Ps & Qs
edit on 12-11-2012 by St Udio because: (no reason given)
extra DIV



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by muse7
 


i think he NEEDS TO GO AFTER CORPORATIONS THAT DONT PASY THEIR FAIR SHARE IE G.E. TEXOCO , EXXON



posted on Nov, 12 2012 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by muse7

REPORT: Obama Prepares To 'Barn-Storm' The Country, Slamming Republicans, If They Don't Cut A Fiscal cliff deal




One scenario the official discussed included the president barn-storming the country, telling the public that Democrats will put forward a bill to restore middle class tax cuts as soon as Congress convenes, and calling on them to pressure Republican congressional leaders to stop holding those tax cuts hostage in exchange for tax cuts for wealthier Americans.



So basically the deal is: Before January 1, Obama tries to get the GOP to freeze middle class taxes, and let upper-class (above $250K) taxes go back to pre-Bush levels. The GOP doesn't want to do this, and wants all the taxes to be held down together. This is a major sticking point. But they all go up on Jan. 1, and then the plan is for Obama to hector the GOP into just cutting middle class ones.


Source

Less than a week into his second term and Obama is already looking more aggressive than he ever was in his first term. Looks like he won't let Republicans have their way this time around, and he's prepared pressure Republicans into raising taxes on the wealthy.

Asking millionaires and billionaires to pay a little bit more is reasonable. In fact, it's horrible that they're fighting to avoid paying their fair share when the middle class is hurting--and when these same Republicans scream on and on about the horrors of the national debt.

Give those Republicans hell!
edit on 11/11/2012 by muse7 because: (no reason given)


The "wealthy" already pay more than their fair share.

When will the bottom 50% begin paying theirs?





new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join