Okay, so I do realize that this forum is "US Political Madness", but...

reply to post by jimmyx


You too [ FYI - "too" means "also" ]......

Your brilliance is dazzling.

Do some homework ( not always easy ).

Start some topics.

Back up your comments.

It's easy !!

reply to post by neo96


Neo, can you edit your post above so that it is readable. I get it, but it was hard.

Originally posted by Krazysh0t
reply to post by Flatfish

 

Wait so answer this. Do you honestly believe that the Obama administration is on the level and has done nothing wrong or subversive within the last 5 or so years? That they have the nation's best interests at heart? That the PPACA is truly a good thing (not the idea of universal healthcare mind you, the actual bill PPACA)?

Do you believe the administration is telling the truth right now when they say that Syria has definitely attacked their citizens with chemical weapons? You know despite the fact that UN inspectors JUST got there and this would be the absolute worst time for someone to do such a thing, or the fact that Assad is currently winning the war and wouldn't need to utilize such a tactic.

How about the NSA? You know Obama has gotten on television multiple times to tell us that they aren't spying on Americans and every time he does Snowden releases more damning evidence to the contrary.

Are all these things just lies perpetuated by the Republicans to character assassinate the current Presidential Administration?

This wasn't directed towards me, but I'll answer your questions since they are actual questions and not just "Obama is the antichrist, the evidence is right in front of you...but of course I can't provide it" non-sense that others are rambling about.

1. Do you honestly believe that the Obama administration is on the level and has done nothing wrong or subversive within the last 5 or so years?
- No, I don't. I don't believe any administration is "on the level" and has done nothing wrong or subversive. If you can find me a 100% clean administration in the entire history of our nation, go for it. I don't expect or require perfection from anyone, especially politicians that by their very nature have to play a balancing game of doing what's right, doing what their constituents want, and doing what is needed.

2. That they have the nation's best interests at heart?
- Yes, I do believe they have the nation's best interests at heart. To say otherwise is to go down a crazy conspiracy hole of implying Obama is anti-America and wants to destroy the nation. The problem here is that what YOU think is best for the nation may not be the same as what Obama thinks is the best for the nation. Furthermore, what you think is best for the nation may not be the same as what I think is best for the nation. But just because the opinions differ, doesn't mean the motives are sinister...which is what your question (and right wing rhetoric) implies.

3. That the PPACA is truly a good thing (not the idea of universal healthcare mind you, the actual bill PPACA)?
- It's truly a step in the right direction and 1000% better than doing nothing. There are many flaws with it, people who understand the healthcare industry knew this from the beginning...but it is always better to fix some things even if it doesn't fix everything. Some of the best parts of the ACA were left out because Obama wanted to be seen as a compromiser, that is why the public option (best part of the ACA) was sacrificed early on, because that is what republicans were most opposed to. So Obama, thinking he would be the good guy and republicans would reciprocate, agreed to get rid of the public option. But we still got rid of pre-exisiting conditions (that is worth it by itself), getting rid of annual caps, adjusting the age children can stay on their parents insurance due to the shifting nature of college, graduate school and the workplace (kids are entering the workforce later in life now as compared to decades ago), and self employed people can finally get a comparable group rate insurance policy without an outrageous premium.

4. Do you believe the administration is telling the truth right now when they say that Syria has definitely attacked their citizens with chemical weapons?
- I have not heard him make such a definitive statement. I have heard him use the words "alleged" and that they need to continue looking into it. If you have a source that says otherwise, please share it.

5. How about the NSA? You know Obama has gotten on television multiple times to tell us that they aren't spying on Americans and every time he does Snowden releases more damning evidence to the contrary.
- This is probably an item that I part with most left wingers on. I have always been fine with electronic surveillance. Whether it is cell phone data (metadata, not actual conversations) or internet traffic. I have never been able to wrap my head around people being surprised that the NSA is doing this when it has always been thought that they do anyway. I don't expect privacy on the internet, it is a public space, I don't own most things I write on the internet, so why be angry that it is shared?

Ran out of space, but hopefully that answers some of your questions.

reply to post by jimmyx

if the corruption was worse than Nixon, Obama would have already been impeached by the house of representatives. the republicans have continually held hearings in regards to this goal, and have failed to bring charges. apparently, your definition of corruption does not pass the smell test, even with the republican majority in the house. maybe you should present the "evidence" you have right in front of you, to the people that can impeach him, instead of trying to convince us.

The House won't impeach YET !

The 'Trial' phase is conducted in the Senate [D].

If both were [R], then different story.

If you think 'they' aren't working on impeachment - think again.

There's sooo much evidence, it's taking the lawyers forever to assemble the 'case'.

reply to post by AlienScience

3. That the PPACA is truly a good thing (not the idea of universal healthcare mind you, the actual bill PPACA)?
- It's truly a step in the right direction and 1000% better than doing nothing.

You forgot to mention one thing....

It may prove to be 1000% more costly too !!

All at our expense and all for profit of the criminals in the sloppy system.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Now .. wanna' talk about DISHONESTY?

Yes.

...even nabbing the support of a handful of rainmakers aligned with President Obama and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel...

'Aligned with'. Not from?

...the hedge fund run by liberal billionaire George Soros...

'Run by' him. Not from him?
FlyersFan's Link

Nice spin though.

reply to post by BritofTexas


You don't think that SOROS knows exactly what is going on?
You don't think those bundlers got permission from Soros before donating?
Yeah .... okay.

reply to post by Flatfish


Having the whole administration saturated with corporate interests isn't corruption?
Have you seen the venn diagrams? There's one JUST for Monsanto.

Obama was a puppet from the get go, it was easy to see, his sponsors have been involved in politics forever, they run the game and have been running the game for a long, long time.
And they in turn get their directives from think tanks and other shady organisations, essentially a conglomerate of governments bodies, globalist institutions, corporations, secret societies, plutocrats, banks, media, the military industrial complex and the initelligence community.
Of course then there's factions, but they all seem to be working for similar goals, the question is who ends up in charge, and if there's even a good faction among them.

....No, you're right, Obama is not corrupt..

reply to post by beezzer

And you don't find it a bit unusual for sites like Mediamatters, HuffPo, etc. NOT to carry topical stories about the president?

I think it is clear to say that you don't really spend much time on HuffPo. Here are some articles done with a quick search that are against Obama or his policies.

www.huffingtonpost.com...
www.huffingtonpost.com...


Here is the thing, these are actually valid criticisms of Obama and his policies. Unlike Obama getting a new dog while we are in a recession, or going on vacation, or using false unemployment numbers (when it is the same formula used forever), or death panels, or

Originally posted by SunnyDee
reply to post by jimmyx

 

THe republican only have the house. If they try to impeach it will not pass in the senate. The republicans probably don't want to give a reason for the dems to attack them. They just wait out the 3 years and work harder this next time.

At least that's what I've read. Personally it pisses me off that they don't at least try to impeach, there is certainly more that enough with all the lies to go forward with an impeachment.

Again, look from the outside....they all work together!

yeah...but you only need to look at the republicans in the senate filibustering EXECUTIVE CABINET NOMINEES ONLY
since 1952, when Eisenhower was elected, through each republican presidential term, there has been only 9 filibusters on executive cabinet nominees for all the (R) presidents...in Obama's term alone, there has been 16 already and he has more than 3 years to go
www.washingtonpost.com...
here's a more in-depth version of obstruction in the Obama presidency from republicans as a whole
crooksandliars.com...

reply to post by xuenchen

There's sooo much evidence, it's taking the lawyers forever to assemble the 'case'.

If there is "sooo" much evidence, can you please post one solid verifiable piece of evidence that shows Obama has done something impeachable?

I am seeing this a lot from people..."Obama has done sooo much wrong"..."Obama is sooo corrupt"...."Obama has broken soooo many laws"...but that's it, no specific examples.

I even had one person tell me that he broke so many laws, they can't even post just one. But more often, you get the reply of "he has broken so many, if you don't know already I'm not going to show you"...or the self-defeated "google it".

Originally posted by FlyersFan
reply to post by BritofTexas

 

You don't think that SOROS knows exactly what is going on?
You don't think those bundlers got permission from Soros before donating?
Yeah .... okay.

I have no idea if he does or not and neither do you.

You did however accuse another Poster of dishonesty while claiming this...

Originally posted by FlyersFan
...his big financial backers are Soros and Rahm Emannuel. YIKES!

Something your own source doesn't even state.

Dishonesty?

reply to post by AlienScience


The chance of a lifetime is before you.

Both are good for new threads !!

Go and get 'em !!

Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by AlienScience

3. That the PPACA is truly a good thing (not the idea of universal healthcare mind you, the actual bill PPACA)?
- It's truly a step in the right direction and 1000% better than doing nothing.

 

You forgot to mention one thing....

It may prove to be 1000% more costly too !!

All at our expense and all for profit of the criminals in the sloppy system.

And it may not.

Insurance premiums may tick up a little, but it will be for policies that are actually going to cover your medical bills and not deny them due to "pre-exisiting conditions".

If we had a public option, we wouldn't have the cost issue...but some group of people didn't like that idea.

Originally posted by AlienScience
reply to post by xuenchen

 

There's sooo much evidence, it's taking the lawyers forever to assemble the 'case'.

If there is "sooo" much evidence, can you please post one solid verifiable piece of evidence that shows Obama has done something impeachable?

I am seeing this a lot from people..."Obama has done sooo much wrong"..."Obama is sooo corrupt"...."Obama has broken soooo many laws"...but that's it, no specific examples.

I even had one person tell me that he broke so many laws, they can't even post just one. But more often, you get the reply of "he has broken so many, if you don't know already I'm not going to show you"...or the self-defeated "google it".

I read some in a legal publication.

I'll find and post asap.

Keep in mind too, it's not illegal to lie to the public.

They are very careful.

Originally posted by AlienScience

Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by AlienScience

3. That the PPACA is truly a good thing (not the idea of universal healthcare mind you, the actual bill PPACA)?
- It's truly a step in the right direction and 1000% better than doing nothing.

 

You forgot to mention one thing....

It may prove to be 1000% more costly too !!

All at our expense and all for profit of the criminals in the sloppy system.

And it may not.

Insurance premiums may tick up a little, but it will be for policies that are actually going to cover your medical bills and not deny them due to "pre-exisiting conditions".

If we had a public option, we wouldn't have the cost issue...but some group of people didn't like that idea.

""If we had a public option, we wouldn't have the cost issue...but some group of people didn't like that idea.""

Yep..

Democrats Killed the Public Option

They had the power of majority in Congress and Executive.

But HOW would a P.O. be 'cheaper' ??

reply to post by AlienScience


Ok I have followup questions based on the answers you gave me to the original questions as well as some followup information. First off here is a link to CBS news talking about the government's position on the chemical attacks (take note it is not a right wing site):

www.cbsnews.com...

Basically the article says that the government has already made up its mind about Syria and gives some dubious reasons as to why. But don't take my word for it go ahead and read the article. Bush went to war with Iraq along similar lines of "proof."

Second off I'm not a Republican (I've already mentioned that in this thread, but I guess you missed that), I'm a Libertarian and hold views from both Democratic and Republican platforms. I consider myself moderate. I could care less about Republicans. They screw things up just as badly as the Democrats do.

As for the questions. When I asked about the President being subversive I meant if you believe that the President being overly so. I am well aware that every administration since forever has secrets, but can you honestly say that this President works towards the goal of better America? Because he may say he is, but everything he's done up until now seems to suggest otherwise.

The President and his administration has been known to skew statistics or blow isolated events (Boston Bombing, Martin/Zimmerman case, and Sandy Hook to name a few) into something huge to gain support for his positions. By doing this he is demonstrating the ideal that "the ends justify the means." Do you agree with this position?

The PPACA while having a few good things took the entire premise of what it was supposed to be (Universal Healthcare) and threw it out the window in favor of mandatory healthcare. So can you explain to me how it is a good thing that we went from the option to pay for overpriced health to being forced to pay for overpriced healthcare is a good thing? (Again I MUST stress this is about the PPACA not universal healthcare which I believe in)

So you are ok with the NSA spying on you? I mean I've always been aware that the NSA had the capability of spying since I saw Enemy of the State and that came out in 1998 (and most likely had the capability long before that movie came out). That doesn't mean I am ok with it. Do you honestly believe there is nothing wrong with the statement "If I'm not doing anything wrong then there is nothing to worry about"?

I have more questions I'd like to ask, but they would be brand new topics so I'll leave it at this.

Originally posted by SunnyDee

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by SunnyDee
If you think Benghazi was a non-scandal, you don't understand the true implications of all the actions that took place in that event.

I have actually delved down into the testimony,transcripts, and documents of the 15 plus investigations and hearing the GOP sponsored...the assertation that the President of the United States gleefully allowed Americans to die is false. And the real scandal is the stark difference between how a terrorist attack is recieved by the GOP depending on whom is in the Whitehouse.

please post some of your findings. I'd really like to see the most significant, seriously..

PM me what you think supports the specific claims of Scandal with Benghazi, what exactly you think the scandal is and why and I can respond via PM...It's a much bigger discussion...and I am not going to bury this thread with off-topic Benghazi links or excerpts.

Originally posted by jimmyx

Originally posted by SunnyDee
reply to post by jimmyx

 

THe republican only have the house. If they try to impeach it will not pass in the senate. The republicans probably don't want to give a reason for the dems to attack them. They just wait out the 3 years and work harder this next time.

At least that's what I've read. Personally it pisses me off that they don't at least try to impeach, there is certainly more that enough with all the lies to go forward with an impeachment.

Again, look from the outside....they all work together!

yeah...but you only need to look at the republicans in the senate filibustering EXECUTIVE CABINET NOMINEES ONLY
since 1952, when Eisenhower was elected, through each republican presidential term, there has been only 9 filibusters on executive cabinet nominees for all the (R) presidents...in Obama's term alone, there has been 16 already and he has more than 3 years to go
www.washingtonpost.com...
here's a more in-depth version of obstruction in the Obama presidency from republicans as a whole
crooksandliars.com...

According to your link in the washington post. None of the nominees were stopped from receiving the office. And 1560 have been appointed by Obama. So what's your point? Yes, the republicans fillibuster? Did it matter?

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by SunnyDee

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by SunnyDee
If you think Benghazi was a non-scandal, you don't understand the true implications of all the actions that took place in that event.

I have actually delved down into the testimony,transcripts, and documents of the 15 plus investigations and hearing the GOP sponsored...the assertation that the President of the United States gleefully allowed Americans to die is false. And the real scandal is the stark difference between how a terrorist attack is recieved by the GOP depending on whom is in the Whitehouse.

please post some of your findings. I'd really like to see the most significant, seriously..

PM me what you think supports the specific claims of Scandal with Benghazi, what exactly you think the scandal is and why and I can respond via PM...It's a much bigger discussion...and I am not going to bury this thread with off-topic Benghazi links or excerpts.

I think you have just dodged my question. That is not right. You state things and then don't back it up with anything with a link and then try to turn it around and make me do your work. You don't have to bog this thread down, just name one or two of the GOP sanctioned report sections that prove your point.

If you are not willing to back up your comments when you clearly state you have done a lot of research on GOP sanctioned reports on Benghazi, you are not believable. Like I said previously, I don't think you have any interest in learning any truths, or sharing apparently.