Obama Care Defense Undercut By Testimony

[unregistered]

 

[koalabear]

OOPS!

 

[unregistered]

 

[TexasWife25]

Theres no such thing as "Obamacare"

 

[NeverEndingMe]

Theres no such thing as "Obamacare"

thank god you earn your money on your back as even you can't screw that up

 

[unregistered]

 

[TexasWife25]

I just assumed you were attempting to inform with this thread. I figured you'd want to know, that your link is immediately suspect, when it uses made up words like "Obamacare". Kind of like people who claim to speak of facts, instead of opinion, but use "Owebama" .

 

[koalabear]

TexasHusband

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/AT-120215-bull-horn-02.photoblog600.jpg

 

[unregistered]

 

[VaticanAssassin]

Theres no such thing as "Obamacare"

It is a lot easier to say/type Obamacare than Patient Protection and Affordable Care act of 2010..... Don't ya think?

 

[NeverEndingMe]

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/AT-120215-bull-horn-02.photoblog600.jpg

oh now, she loves the obama bullshit. sadly she's a low priced escort

 

[TexasWife25]

So, you deny the existence of that testimony?

Never said that, I said it puts the facts of the article in suspect when the author uses terms like that.

It is a lot easier to say/type Obamacare than Patient Protection and Affordable Care act of 2010..... Don't ya think?

Yes, and I don't specifically care when individuals use it. But its not acceptable in what is supposed to be an unbiased article, full of facts, not opinion.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

Never said that, I said it puts the facts of the article in suspect when the author uses terms like that.



Yes, and I don't specifically care when individuals use it. But its not acceptable in what is supposed to be an unbiased article, full of facts, not opinion.

Goggle show 11.9 million new articles using Obamacare. I am guessing some are reputable.

Come on, no matter what side of the fence you are on it is hard to debate the the administration is double dealing here.

Randomly discrediting something because a word is used, that is not a word, but is widely accepted as a word, is ridiculous as this sentence...

 

[Disgustipated]

Yes, and I don't specifically care when individuals use it. But its not acceptable in what is supposed to be an unbiased article, full of facts, not opinion.

Here is a thread vettebigot made that should tell you everything you need to know about his dishonest posting.

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=735473&highlight=opulence

Have fun!

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Never said that, I said it puts the facts of the article in suspect when the author uses terms like that.



Yes, and I don't specifically care when individuals use it. But its not acceptable in what is supposed to be an unbiased article, full of facts, not opinion.

It's not an article, it's an editorial.

 

[TexasWife25]

Goggle show 11.9 million new articles using Obamacare. I am guessing some are reputable.

Come on, no matter what side of the fence you are on it is hard to debate the the administration is double dealing here.

Randomly discrediting something because a word is used, that is not a word, but is widely accepted as a word, is ridiculous as this sentence...

I never said I discredited it, I said it makes me question the integrity of the author.

 

[Sean]

the penalty that the health care law imposes on individuals who do not purchase health insurance constitutes a tax.

"The practical operation of the minimum coverage provision is as a tax law,"

Different. Not same.

/thread.

 

[garbage can]

Seems they just can't keep their lies about Obama Care straight:

OMB director undercuts legal case for Obamacare byPhilip Klein Senior Editorial Writer

]

When I heard that today, I almost shit.

However, I suspect Obama and his merry band of jesters, with the help of the press, will manage to suppress this ramifications of this story.

 

[mercury14]

It's not an article, it's an editorial.

Vette never, EVER knows the difference.

 

[garbage can]

I never said I discredited it, I said it makes me question the integrity of the author.

TW25...When you hear the testimony of the OMB guy, then listen to Obama'a no new taxes on peeps under 200K, you don't need to know the integrity of the author.

I heard it all today.

 

[garbage can]

Vette never, EVER knows the difference.

Listen up, Merc...........

 

[mercury14]

Listen up, Merc...........

Ah yes, another conservative who confuses opinion for fact on a regular basis. How ya' doing?

 

[garbage can]

Ah yes, another conservative who confuses opinion for fact on a regular basis. How ya' doing?

Uhmm, Merc, I heard the testimony of the OMB guy on the radio today.

 

[TexasWife25]

TW25...When you hear the testimony of the OMB guy, then listen to Obama'a no new taxes on peeps under 200K, you don't need to know the integrity of the author.

I heard it all today.

The only people suggesting Obama plans to tax the poor, are right wing nut cases. His budget came out this week, it CLEARLY shows exactly who he plans to tax. He is calling for large tax increases, but its not on the poor.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

The only people suggesting Obama plans to tax the poor, are right wing nut cases. His budget came out this week, it CLEARLY shows exactly who he plans to tax. He is calling for large tax increases, but its not on the poor.

another example, I want the rich to be hit hard by taxes to that I don't have to pay a damn thing