Tell us why Catholics should get an obamacare exemption but not Scientologists or Christian Scientists?
Prediction Time... 2014
- Thread starter Damocles
- Start date
Tell us why Catholics should get an obamacare exemption but not Scientologists or Christian Scientists?
I agree with all of this except that I think Obama's approval ratings will creep very slowly higher as Obamacare becomes more accepted.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Because Obama arbitrarily grants exemptions with little reason or rationale?
Just look how his admin arbitrarily protected 'certain' stock holders in GM and let the rest of them lose it all. His admin completely voided the corporate structure in order to make Obama look better to a certain voting block.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
I am not sure it will be more accepted, but IF it is, then I would agree about his ratings sliding up with that greater acceptance. Personally I think you are going to really start seeing the head aches arise from people losing plans, not keeping their doctors etc...
I am sure the media will keep whining about that, but the reality will likely be different. We will hear about individual situations where people do lose a doctor or a plan, but on the whole that will not happen and generally the people are smarter than the media hype.
The reality won't be different, Jarod. All Obama did was to delay it by giving them just one more year (remember when doing that was so bad that Obama was willing to keep the government shut down before it happened?) before their letters take effect. Although it will be worse this October when the companies are also going to start sending out the letters. It will be epic. And no, it hasn't been long enough for everybody to want to turn to single payer as socialists want.
....and continuing cost increases. This will come into reality when the budget busting costs hit States for pushing low income/poor people into Medicare coverage who previously did not qualify for it.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
except that on the whole it will happen more often than not.
1) Obama did not say that giving one more year was so bad he was willing to keep the government shut down, he said he was not going to negotiate in such a situation, but that once the government negotiations were over he would consider it. It appears he did consider it and then did it. Please don't lie with revisionist addenda's to promote the team just because they wear one color jersey over the other. "What I've said is that I will talk about anything," ..."We can't make extortion routine as part of our democracy." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/08/obama-government-shutdown_n_4065090.html
2) We will see.
I guess we will see.
I didn't say he "said" that. That is a disingenuous view. The reality was he was willing to keep the government shut down in order to keep in place something that he ultimately had to push off due to the reality that his "signature law" was a danger to his political goals of the next election year. He did what he always does, pushes it to what he believes will be just after the next election.
In politics actions, not words, mean things, Jarod.
Ironically, had he negotiated, the letters wouldn't have gone out at all and people would still be thinking his "signature law" was a good thing. Thankfully he didn't, and it is more unpopular now than ever.
He did not ever suggest that postponing by a year was so bad he had to keep the government shut down. He explained that negotiation under the situation the House Republicans created was not good for America. It would have been akin to negotiating with terrorists in that it would encourage more of the same.
Yep dunce; nothing dishonest about Obama pretending that by not talking with the majority party in the house he had nothing to do with the Government shutdown as the PRESIDENT and equating the opposition as terrorists.
God you are one dumb hyper partisan dunce.
But let's also not forget the LIE that the shutdown would harm the "recovery". A recovery that truly never was.
There was a time when Presidents were responsible for what occurs in Government because they are in charge of it; but not Obama. He has nothing to do with just about anything. It's those gosh darned Republicans in the minority.
The DEA gun running scandal, the IRS scandal, the loss of embassy staff lives in Benghazi, the continuing economic malaise, the failures of the Obama web site implementation, etc. etc. etc. The President has nothing to do with them; it is all a racist sinister plot by the Republican Party and their racist TEA party followers to make the most inexperienced, inept, disengaged, hyper partisan ideologue in the history of the Presidency, look bad. It cannot possibly have anything to do with him.
Ugh, the President did not say he would not talk to the opposition party, or Congress in general. He said he would not negotiate under the situation that they had created.
Again. Actions count, not the attempt to justify them after the fact. He stubbornly kept the government shut down for something he later found he had to do anyway.
In politics it is the actions that mean things. At least legislation would have something to do with arbitrary changes to his "signature law" rather than Executive fiat. He isn't a king, he doesn't get to both legislate and execute law, it is, IMO, time to stop his acting like one.
Bullshit, that sstatement was not after the fact.
What was it he had to do after the fact that he was unwilling to do when the Republicans elected to shut down the government unless their staffers got a servere benefits cut?
On what issue? I can name explicitly where Grind diverges from libertarian thought and have several times.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
why would I 'forget' YOUR predictions?.....