18 Crazy Right-Wing Myths About Obama Debunked
This topic is locked to prevent further replies.
Jan 24, 2014 22:38:18 #
fom wrote:
whole keg really just for irritateing you?
you don't irritate me at all. I just point and laugh at all you communists.
Jan 24, 2014 22:45:35 #
Coos Bay Tom
Loc: coos bay oregon
you mean I can't have my kool aid. I especially like ras Barry. I live in my own house not a commune I guess thats where communists live
LurkingTom wrote:
you don't irritate me at all. I just point and laugh at all you communists.
Jan 24, 2014 22:51:10 #
fom wrote:
you mean I can't have my kool aid. I especially like ras Barry. I live in my own house not a commune I guess thats where communists live
now you're catching on....
Jan 24, 2014 22:56:09 #
fom wrote:
whole keg really just for irritateing you?
:lol:
Jan 24, 2014 23:00:01 #
Jan 25, 2014 04:17:11 #
Fom, be careful thanking a conservative, they may start believing that they amount to something!
fom wrote:
gee thanks.
Jan 25, 2014 07:18:52 #
Coos Bay Tom
Loc: coos bay oregon
Actually I was trying to be sarcastic. I could have lit into bmac but I was trying to see if he would say something truthful. alas he did not. next time I'll slap him down.funny how the come out like they are one intelligent authority on just about every thing political. In the end they are mostly brain washed minions.
Raylan Wolfe wrote:
Fom, be careful thanking a conservative, they may start believing that they amount to something!
Jan 25, 2014 09:55:46 #
Raylan Wolfe wrote:
Obamacare Delivers Knockout Blow to GOP as Majority of People Like What the ACA Offers Them
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/01/24/obamacare-delivers-knockout-blow-gop-majority-states-expanded-medicaid.html
A new CBS poll released Thursday shows that the majority of people like what the ACA offers them.
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/01/24/obamacare-delivers-knockout-blow-gop-majority-states-expanded-medicaid.html
A new CBS poll released Thursday shows that the majority of people like what the ACA offers them.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Raylan,
I went to the url you posted, took the poll there concerning the ACA and found the following results:---------------------
The Total Number of people who voted in this poll: 69,886
1) Do you believe it is governments role to mandate health insurance coverage for its citizens?
87% voted: No, it should be a personal decision left up to every individual.
12% voted: Yes, government should protect the wellbeing of its citizens.
1% voted: Im not sure.
2) Do you believe the quality of American healthcare will decline under Obamacare?
86% voted: Yes, there will not be enough resources to handle the increase in insured patients.
12% voted: No, When more Americans have access to medical care the U.S. will be a healthier nation overall.
2% voted: Im not sure.
3) Opponents of Obamacare cite cost as one of their biggest concerns. Do you expect your taxes to increase once Obamacare is fully implemented?
88% voted: Yes, Americans will have to suffer more taxation to "pay" for others healthcare.
12% voted: No, insurance premiums paid by the individual insured will pay for the program.
4) Would you like to see Obamacare repealed?
87% voted: Yes, I am for repealing Obamacare.
12% voted: No, I think Obamacare is good for America.
1% voted: Im not sure.------------------
raylan: I posted the above ACA poll for your education, please read it.
(Thanks for the post)
:| :| :roll:
1oldgeezer
Jan 25, 2014 10:43:43 #
Alicia
Loc: NYC
1OldGeezer wrote:
--------------------------------------------------... (show quote)
I find it interesting that those answering "yes" range between 86 and 88% of those responding. All the percentages are too close for each question. Who designed he poll and directed the lead line? Therefore, I'm wondering about the background and political leanings of those who responded to this poll.
Just being skeptical as I am of every new thing presented to me.
Jan 25, 2014 11:08:01 #
Coos Bay Tom
Loc: coos bay oregon
I'm with you Alicia
Alicia wrote:
I find it interesting that those answering "yes" range between 86 and 88% of those responding. All the percentages are too close for each question. Who designed he poll and directed the lead line? Therefore, I'm wondering about the background and political leanings of those who responded to this poll.
Just being skeptical as I am of every new thing presented to me.
Just being skeptical as I am of every new thing presented to me.
Jan 25, 2014 11:23:02 #
Alicia wrote:
I find it interesting that those answering "yes" range between 86 and 88% of those responding. All the percentages are too close for each question. Who designed he poll and directed the lead line? Therefore, I'm wondering about the background and political leanings of those who responded to this poll.
Just being skeptical as I am of every new thing presented to me.
Just being skeptical as I am of every new thing presented to me.
Alicia,
It is good to be skeptical, that means you are thinking, that is what we need more than anything else.
I simply went to the url that was posted by Marvin? and took the poll that was there; the poll was of only those people who went to that url, you can do the same thing if you wish and you would be part of the statistics.
It was a left leaning blog for sure: My post was verbatim of the poll questions and results (copied and pasted into my post).
If you remember, Marvins post was about poll results implying that most persons liked the new health care law. That was a misrepresentation.
My post was exactly what I said it was, the questions and answers of about 66,000 persons who visited the url posted by Marvin and took the poll. Go see for yourself.
Point: You SHOULD be skeptical of ALL polls. (even those posted by Marvin).
1oldgeezer
Jan 25, 2014 11:47:05 #
Jan 25, 2014 12:01:24 #
Did you read, in totality, the "Decision Making at the White House, by James Pfiffner? It makes a case against everything you've been saying for months and backs up my contention that Obama is a slightly left of center centrist who has done little different that his predecessors.
Except if you'll note Pfiffner's depiction of Iraq War policy in the White House of George W. Bush compared to Afghan Was policy under Obama.
You might want to read things in detail before you post them as proving your point. this particular article doesn't.
cut and paste, cut and paste. Stuff you haven't even read.
Except if you'll note Pfiffner's depiction of Iraq War policy in the White House of George W. Bush compared to Afghan Was policy under Obama.
You might want to read things in detail before you post them as proving your point. this particular article doesn't.
cut and paste, cut and paste. Stuff you haven't even read.
Blade_Runner wrote:
Jan 25, 2014 12:22:22 #
You also might take a look at "feds to take control of natural gas production" written a few years ago.
Since the, there has been no such federal control of natural gas production since this article was written, especially in fracking, which continues to be under state control, you might come to the conclusion that the author was wrong about the impact of the EO. At least that's what a thinking person would do.
And natural gas production, which has been increasing since 2006, has really gone through the roof. If there has been federal control it has done nothing but increase production sharply.
Obama has limited, or attempted to limit, leasing offshore areas for exploration in policies consistent with the states with shoreline bordering those areas to be leased. With the exception of the ANWR in Alaska, where production on federal lands currently borders the reserve on both sides.
California, Oregon and Washington (state) have long opposed leasing lands of their shorelines as have most East Coast states. In granting federal eases, Obama has done nothing more than follow what the states that will get the greatest impact from opening such off-shore leases want. Again, this isn't statism, it's bowing to state's wishes.
California's opposition comes from the spill from an offshore rig in the early 1970s. When diving the kept beds in this area some 15 years later, I saw softball-sized gobs of tarry oil still that remained in regular intervals (every 3-5 foot) on the seabed and the beds were not as healthy as beds further north nor inhabited with the variety of sea life as the beds up north. Some 15 years later.
Since the, there has been no such federal control of natural gas production since this article was written, especially in fracking, which continues to be under state control, you might come to the conclusion that the author was wrong about the impact of the EO. At least that's what a thinking person would do.
And natural gas production, which has been increasing since 2006, has really gone through the roof. If there has been federal control it has done nothing but increase production sharply.
Obama has limited, or attempted to limit, leasing offshore areas for exploration in policies consistent with the states with shoreline bordering those areas to be leased. With the exception of the ANWR in Alaska, where production on federal lands currently borders the reserve on both sides.
California, Oregon and Washington (state) have long opposed leasing lands of their shorelines as have most East Coast states. In granting federal eases, Obama has done nothing more than follow what the states that will get the greatest impact from opening such off-shore leases want. Again, this isn't statism, it's bowing to state's wishes.
California's opposition comes from the spill from an offshore rig in the early 1970s. When diving the kept beds in this area some 15 years later, I saw softball-sized gobs of tarry oil still that remained in regular intervals (every 3-5 foot) on the seabed and the beds were not as healthy as beds further north nor inhabited with the variety of sea life as the beds up north. Some 15 years later.
Jan 25, 2014 12:28:50 #
'Obama admits he want's socialism for America" is nothing but trying to compare the five and ten year plans under Stalinist Soviet Union and Maoist China to a vague something Obama is doing to the economy, which the author never really spells out.
This follows the fringe right theme that anyone who succeeds in business in the US does so through elbow grease, entrepreneurial spirt and moxie while anyone who fails in business does so because of government interference and regulations.
This follows the fringe right theme that anyone who succeeds in business in the US does so through elbow grease, entrepreneurial spirt and moxie while anyone who fails in business does so because of government interference and regulations.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.