Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 19 to 27 of 38

Thread: Supremes rule on ObamaCare

  1. #19

    Default Re: Supremes rule on ObamaCare

    Quote Originally Posted by UGLY View Post
    Quick someone post a Sean Hannity video about Obama because he's not biased and only gives complete facts just like miss maddow.

    I recently watched maddow on the bill Maher show and she tried to hide the fact that she's a liberal hack. She also tried to say that she reports the news and doesn't give her opinion. Clearly she has never seen her own show.
    Of course she's biased, but somehow we've all fallen for this falsehood that bias automatically means not factual. We're all biased, but we can present facts to support our bias. The two ARE NOT mutually exclusive.

    Now, in regard to the vidyo that I posted above, what did you find false regarding what she said? You are free to pernt out what is in error, but I suspect that you'll be working at it a while!

    Now, dismante her vidyo for us, ok?
    UNI Panthers...Because it's just right.

  2. #20
    Super Moderator UGLY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    4,934

    Default Re: Supremes rule on ObamaCare

    The fact that spending has increased is a sign that he has not reigned in government, the fact that he got his health care bill passed which is clearly a large expansion of government and tax. The recent executive order in which he dictates that in National Defense Preparedness the government can seize your assets including land is clearly and expansion. The fact that the government has taken over the student loan program also expansion. Expansion of powers to the EPA. Creating Tsars. The NDAA was a broad sweeping expansion of the governments ability to stifle your rights as a citizen.

    So I agree with you that you can present facts and still be biased, but when you mislead the viewer as a supposed news anchor by blatantly leaving out facts I think its wrong. If you are doing an opinion show that's one thing but dont present yourself as a journalist if you are doing opinion.

  3. #21
    Super Moderator UGLY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    4,934

    Default Re: Supremes rule on ObamaCare

    I forgot to mention that under this administration federal employees have increased by 170,000 and the number of regulations have incresed by 100 in the first two years alone. Silly me for forgetting more facts.

  4. #22

    Default Re: Supremes rule on ObamaCare

    Quote Originally Posted by UGLY View Post
    The fact that spending has increased is a sign that he has not reigned in government, the fact that he got his health care bill passed which is clearly a large expansion of government and tax. The recent executive order in which he dictates that in National Defense Preparedness the government can seize your assets including land is clearly and expansion. The fact that the government has taken over the student loan program also expansion. Expansion of powers to the EPA. Creating Tsars. The NDAA was a broad sweeping expansion of the governments ability to stifle your rights as a citizen.

    So I agree with you that you can present facts and still be biased, but when you mislead the viewer as a supposed news anchor by blatantly leaving out facts I think its wrong. If you are doing an opinion show that's one thing but dont present yourself as a journalist if you are doing opinion.
    Quote Originally Posted by UGLY View Post
    The fact that spending has increased is a sign that he has not reigned in government, the fact that he got his health care bill passed which is clearly a large expansion of government and tax. The recent executive order in which he dictates that in National Defense Preparedness the government can seize your assets including land is clearly and expansion. The fact that the government has taken over the student loan program also expansion. Expansion of powers to the EPA. Creating Tsars. The NDAA was a broad sweeping expansion of the governments ability to stifle your rights as a citizen.

    So I agree with you that you can present facts and still be biased, but when you mislead the viewer as a supposed news anchor by blatantly leaving out facts I think its wrong. If you are doing an opinion show that's one thing but dont present yourself as a journalist if you are doing opinion.
    First off, I asked you to disprove what she said in the vidyo (much of it contradicts what you just wrote now). Why did you avoid that, if she is so "incorrect" and "biased?"

    Now, onto the fun. I don't now how to do the fancy quotes and give my commentary below, so I'll just do it in my own way. Your claims are in bold. Enjoy!

    1. The fact that spending has increased is a sign that he has not reigned in government

    Which President hasn't increased spending? You are aware that America has ALWAYS operated in the red, correct? However, and contrary to what AM radio and Wiretap News likes to feed us, spending under Obama has not increased greatly at all. Figures are from the CBO, see his citation below. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-OV1TPHZH0e...ng+chart+2.jpg
    The myth of Obama's spending binge - The Plum Line - The Washington Post

    2. the fact that he got his health care bill passed which is clearly a large expansion of government and tax

    As opposed to the Department of Homeland Security, Prescription Drug benefit, suspension of Habeus Corpus, illegal wiretapping, and secret prisons? Yeah, that sounds lie TINY gubment to me!

    Which taxes have increased, by the way? Taxes Reach Lowest Levels in 50 Years

    3. The recent executive order in which he dictates that in National Defense Preparedness the government can seize your assets including land is clearly and expansion.

    Now, I'm not the sharpest blade in the drawer, but how did this happen without my ever knowing about it?! I find it strange that AM radio and Wiretap News never spoke of this. Where in this order do you see where they can "seize your assets" without due process? Executive Order -- National Defense Resources Preparedness | The White House

    Speaking of Executive Orders. 1,461 Days of The Obama Administration: What Presidents have used Executive Orders

    4. The fact that the government has taken over the student loan program also expansion.

    As opposed to when the Fedril gubment WASN'T issuing Fedrul student loans!? YOWZA! FinAid | FinAid for Educators and FAAs | History of Student Financial Aid

    5. Expansion of powers to the EPA.

    WHICH powers do you speak of, or are you just repeating what AM radio has told you to say? Keep in mind: you said EXPANSION. What expansion?

    6. Creating Tsars.

    First off, Czars. Obama CREATED them!? A Brief History of White House Czars - TIME

    7. The NDAA was a broad sweeping expansion of the governments ability to stifle your rights as a citizen.

    You no longer call for drastic national security measures during a time of war!? Why did you change your mind in January of 2009?

    No, seriously: WHICH expansion, and WHICH rights?

    Looks like you'll be busy for a while...
    UNI Panthers...Because it's just right.

  5. #23

    Default Re: Supremes rule on ObamaCare

    Quote Originally Posted by UGLY View Post
    I forgot to mention that under this administration federal employees have increased by 170,000 and the number of regulations have incresed by 100 in the first two years alone. Silly me for forgetting more facts.
    INCREASED regulations? False. W.H.: Fewer regs than under Bush - Darius Dixon - POLITICO.com

    Increasing Fedrul employees? How did "president" George C- Bush implement his Department of Homeland Security without a MASSIVE increase in Fedril employees? How did "president" George C- Bush implement his Prescription Drug bill without more Fedrul employees?

    Note how Obama has fewer Fedril employees than Ronnie Ketchup IS A Vegetable! Reagan. Total Government Employment Since 1962
    UNI Panthers...Because it's just right.

  6. #24

    Default Re: Supremes rule on ObamaCare

    Look at THIS change in tune! Certainly, some of your important "initiatives" would have curtailed freedom, increased spending, increased regulations, and, in short, done everything that you've "hated" since January of 2009.

    Why the change in tune, Ugly?

    http://www.thewrestlingtalk.com/foru...-election.html

    More gubment expansion and squashing of free speech rights
    http://www.thewrestlingtalk.com/foru...y-council.html
    Last edited by ban basketball; 07-01-2012 at 07:25 PM.
    UNI Panthers...Because it's just right.

  7. #25
    Super Moderator UGLY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    4,934

    Default Re: Supremes rule on ObamaCare

    We arent debating wether or not bush or any other president did anything we are debating about Obama, and if you look at what Obama has done I am right. He might not have increased spending as much based on percentege basis but he still increased spending and resides over the largest deficit we have ever had and it is stil climbing not to mention having deficit remain around 23-24%of gdp.

    Again we arent debating other presidents and just so you know I never supported Bush and that is a fact I have maintained for years even here. When we are talking about the tax increase in the healthcare bill individual mandate is what I am reffering to. And it is exactly what Justice Roberts called and it and what allowed to it to be upheld as law. So it was an expansion of governemtn into the private sector and the lives of the american people while also being a tax on everyone.

    When it comes to the NDAA it had a provision for indefinite detention of american citizens which was struck down in court as unconstitutional.

    It also used to be you would get a student loan from a bank, now we ge them or at least I do directly from the government and I pay them.

    If you want to talk about consolidation, Obama has said he would like to consolidate agencies but has yet to do so, to my knowledge. In terms of the war on terror I think he has done a fine job. In terms of immigration I think beside the deportaion numbers he has done little and with the signing of the DREAM act I liek the direction he is heading.

    I apologise I thought that the EPA had already had it new oversight for new carbon regulations but apparently that has been pushed back due to the fact that it would cost businesses tons of money.

  8. #26
    Super Moderator UGLY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    4,934

    Default Re: Supremes rule on ObamaCare

    Quote Originally Posted by ban basketball View Post
    INCREASED regulations? False. W.H.: Fewer regs than under Bush - Darius Dixon - POLITICO.com

    Increasing Fedrul employees? How did "president" George C- Bush implement his Department of Homeland Security without a MASSIVE increase in Fedril employees? How did "president" George C- Bush implement his Prescription Drug bill without more Fedrul employees?

    Note how Obama has fewer Fedril employees than Ronnie Ketchup IS A Vegetable! Reagan. Total Government Employment Since 1962
    Just because he hasnt added more regulations than Bush does not mean he has not increased the overall number of regulations that are out there. You really need to stop looking backwards in order to defend the presidents record. Let his record stand on its own.
    Did Obama really make government bigger? - Jan. 25, 2012

  9. #27
    Super Moderator UGLY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    4,934

    Default Re: Supremes rule on ObamaCare

    Quote Originally Posted by ban basketball View Post
    Look at THIS change in tune! Certainly, some of your important "initiatives" would have curtailed freedom, increased spending, increased regulations, and, in short, done everything that you've "hated" since January of 2009.

    Why the change in tune, Ugly?

    http://www.thewrestlingtalk.com/foru...-election.html

    More gubment expansion and squashing of free speech rights
    http://www.thewrestlingtalk.com/foru...y-council.html
    Wrong. Im still am for health care reform just not for being made to purchase it, and believe it or not the majority of american agree with me. I think there are other ideas that I like better. I dont know how you read that little bit and could assume anything, but its your world. Wanting it done doesnt mean I would sign off on it getting in any fashion possible.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •