That's, like many of your complaints, is not true.

If you want to argue that Congress is insulated from the real world, you have no argument. Which is why they can vote AGAINST Obamacare, because they will never have to worry about losing their homes to pay for crippling medical bills.


The Republicans have offered nothing constructive to this process after the passage of the bill. They are zero engaged in fixing it, only scuttling it. At this point, they have gone beyond constructive criticism, passed through principled resistance, took a long leisurely trip through pandering, and have reached a heretofore unknown plateau of obstructionism - political masturbation.

So while the great conservative white male circle jerk of opposition to ObamaCare continues, energy is taken away from more productive pursuits.

Obama spoke during his campaign, about bringing us together. Unfortunately, his acts have served to exploit and enhance our class, political, and racial differences. Remember the "Rich should pay their fair share", bull shit? Like the rich don't pay what the law requires??

We now know that the IRS instructions to hold up conservative 501(c)[3] groups from being approved, was NOT done by "some rogue IRS agents in Cincinnati", as the President's spokesman stated. No, it was directed by Obama's political appointee, to the IRS, in Atlanta, GA. If you know any IRS agents, they don't DO rogue. They're by the book, people.

Here's another one:

When GM went bankrupt, and was re-born, several dealerships had to be closed.

Obama's directors made sure EVERY single dealership that was allowed to stay in business, was a donor to the Democratic Party. All except for ONE black guy. Does that SOUND to you like someone who is trying to "bring us together"?

What about the Dreamer act that Obama passed (in violation of law and custom), while the Congress was still in session, but not available to pass his bill into law? (and would not have done it).

If he wanted support for a nationalized health care bill (and I agree, we need it), then why not STOP LYING about the cost of it, and give Congress time to study it before they have to vote on it.

In other words, work with Congress, instead of fighting against it.

Whether it's Fast and Furious, The Benghazi attack, the IRS targeting conservatives, or about Obamacare, Obama has lied, lied, and lied some more. I don't expect politicians to always tell the truth - because they talk too much, and have to win elections - but this is Obama's last term in office (no matter what), and he's still lying to us.

And of course, he's ruining the economy, through his damn heavy intrusion of government, into the private sector.

We can't get cheap Canadian oil down a pipeline, WHY? Yes, the Canadians would like to sell it to us, but they will sell it to China, if Obama doesn't change his mind.

History won't be kind to Obama. Well, the media loves him, but historians who are not Obama fan boys, will know better.

Are you saying that the fair share in this case is zero?

I didn't bother giving the bulk of your post any real attention because until you correct this misunderstanding/misdirection that "fair share"=="what the law requires", your arguments are built on sand. Implying that those two concepts are the same is bullshit, putting words in the President's mouth is bullshit.

There are galactic differences in class, politics, and racial prejudice and ignorance, some of which are well documented here. Pointing them out and encouraging discussion is not exploitation, and if those differences are enhanced for you, repent and close those differences.

But V, he heard it on the radio, it must be true. :haha:

funny, I was just thinking that I owe Adak a thanks for providing me such a concise digest of what's being reported on that end of the talk radio spectrum. I do listen myself on a fairly regular basis, maybe once a week. But it's exhausting listening to commercial after commercial with only the scarcest particles of news to break the monotony. Certainly there is plenty of opinion, and tha's fine, editorial input is--no--can be very useful. But the whining and double standards and poutrage (thanks Happy Monkey, I freakin love that word) are not what good editorials, much less good journalism is made of.

I agree. Instead of a trash compactor, he's a trash talk compactor.:D

It's amazing how the Republicans are being led by talk radio. I listen to MSNBC, which has a lot of liberal commentators, and I don't always agree with them. Nor do I see them promoting filibusters.

We really need a sarcasm smiley....

I have tuned in to Fox radio occasionally. Of course I also watch the highlight reels in liberal and mainstream media.

And of course the more egregious displays by lawmakers make the news.

I will say that someone needs to show me an example of liberals so enamored of their commentators as conservatives are of theirs. I see Huffington and Maddow on panels, but I don't see the kind of response that Limbaugh got at CPAC, mostly because liberals don't have a CPAC.

Gathering liberals is like herding cats, mostly because the definition of liberal is 'broad minded'. I give every conservative complaint some consideration. The ones I reject immediately are the ones I have already rejected.

For example, I'm sure there are conservatives who actually believe that we could construct and maintain a wall on our southern border in a cost effective manner that would completely negate the need to do anything on immigration reform if it were only high enough, strong enough, with landmines, turrets, and whatever stretching across 2000 miles.

While monitoring of borders makes sense, the idea of an impenetrable physical barrier is a fictional ideal.

Hey, it worked in Berlin, didn't it?

Definitely need a sarcasm smiley.

But the Berlin wall is a good example. It only had to cover 96 miles. Take the following and multiply by 20.


FYI, I own a piece of the Berlin wall.

@Bruce, you're right!: Congress will be replacing their health care plan, with Obamacare. I love it! :D

If you make up a list of those who have exemptions from it however, you'll be quite surprised how many there are.

I got tired of listening to the griping about Obamacare, long ago. I have just been changing the channel on the radio when it's the subject, lately.

NO! I'm saying people (everyone), will ALWAYS want to pay the least legal amount that they can - just human nature.

Our politicians have been corrupted by special interests who offer to help pay for their reelection next time, if they'll support some special exemption (for something), which will favor their business.

Over the decades, we've accumulated 100's (if not thousands), of these special tax exemptions, which are basically never rescinded. They just go on and on, year after year.

So GE can legally use a bunch of these exemptions, to pay $0 taxes. And that is hellishly WRONG! :mad: But it's also legal. And as long as it's legal, it will be done.

To get a fair tax system, we need to remove 90% of those exemptions - but that would upset the politicians who want their reelection contributions - so we never get it. :greenface

You should read what I wrote, and that IS A QUOTE, from the President, report on the BBC, CNN, Reuters, and all the major news services I've seen. You need to open your eyes, and read, my friend.
Here's some points for you to ponder:

1) I was raised in the Deep South, This was in the days of segregation (separate schools, separate drinking fountains, Jim Crow laws, Democrats running everything down South, etc. Although I'm white, I have forgotten more about racial issues, then you'll ever learn. ;)

2) Every country has large differences in class, politics, etc. Obama has not just discussed them, he has stirred them up - as Saul Alinsky, (the famous community organizer and author of "Rules for Radicals", strongly advises doing).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Alinsky

Alinsky wasn't just A community organizer, he was THE community organizer, in the black communities of Chicago. You know that Obama worked as a community organizer in Chicago before he was elected Senator, right?

Saul's tactics included a lot of violence and chaos, against the city, state, or federal government. Acts that put the target on their back foot, so you could take advantage of any crisis that developed, as a result. You wouldn't be wrong to say that Saul's teachings and influence, were a big part of the reason for the race riots in the black community, during the 60's and 70's.

Some of this was just common sense, if you use a US vs. THEM kind of framework for thinking about it. But Saul took it a good deal further than others, and so does Obama.

As the President, and the one in charge of the head of the Dept. of Justice, (which is looking into prosecuting Zimmerman), Obama the lawyer, knows damn well that he should stay silent about the Zimmerman case.

He even said as much when he earlier said the jury had spoken, etc.

But now we have this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23387496

Anyone with any sense knows Obama's just increasing the odds that Zimmerman will be killed by someone who has been motivated by the Presidents new conference comments.

As someone who knows the black community intimately, AND is a former Constitutional instructor at the University level. Obama KNOWS what he's doing, and he knows what the effect of will be, and he knows it's WRONG.

For him, it's another little subject, to take the news media away from his IRS scandal, so he's anxious to take advantage of it. Which is more the pity, because Obama sounds sincere, and can give a really good speech, sometimes.

Why Steve King can't support immigration reform:
He can't get the image of skinny people with muscular calves out of his head, apparently.

So, the US gets it's own pool of super-legged desert-traveling cargo haulers. Certainly can't say they're lazy.

UPS now routes their trucks to avoid left turns.

The Conservatives took note of this.
Now, their routes all turn right to Alinsky.

They are still looking for a different result....

NY TIMES
JONATHAN WEISMAN
July 23, 2013
House G.O.P. Sets New Offensive on Obama Goals
WASHINGTON — Congressional Republicans are moving to gut many of
President Obama’s top priorities with the sharpest spending cuts in a generation
and a new push to hold government financing hostage unless the
president’s signature health care law is stripped of money this fall.
<snip>
In the Senate, Republicans are circulating a letter to Senator Harry Reid of Nevada,
the majority leader, warning they will not approve any spending measure
to keep the government operating after Sept. 30 if it devotes a penny
to put in place Mr. Obama’s health care law.

Signers so far include the No. 2 and No. 3 Republican senators, John Cornyn of Texas
and John Thune of South Dakota, as well as one of the party’s rising stars, Marco Rubio of Florida.

Source: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Attachment 44953

They only agree on funding level for Homeland Security.