Like Archinect on Facebook.
Sign up to our mailing list.
President Obama: He's been called out on one of his highest-profile promises.
Obama's 'You Can Keep It' Promise Is 'Lie Of The Year'
by Mark Memmott
December 13, 2013 6:45 AM
President Obama's oft-repeated promise that "if you like your health care plan, you can keep it" according to the fact checkers at the Tampa Bay Times' nonpartisan PolitiFact project.
PolitiFact says that:
"Boiling down the complicated health care law to a soundbite proved treacherous, even for its promoter-in-chief. Obama and his team made matters worse, suggesting they had been misunderstood all along. The stunning political uproar led to this: a rare presidential apology.
"For all of these reasons, PolitiFact has named 'If you like your health care plan, you can keep it,' the Lie of the Year for 2013. Readers in overwhelmingly agreed with the choice."
"Obama's ideas on health care were first offered as general outlines then grew into specific legislation over the course of his presidency. Yet Obama never adjusted his rhetoric to give people a more accurate sense of the law's real-world repercussions, even as fact-checkers flagged his statements as exaggerated at best.
"Instead, he fought back against inaccurate attacks with his own oversimplifications, which he repeated even as it became clear his promise was too sweeping."
PolitiFact's 2012 "lie of the year" was Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney's claim that Jeep was moving U.S. production to China. In 2011, it chose a claim by Democrats that Republicans had "voted to end Medicare." The 2010 big "lie" was the charge made by Republicans that Obama was pushing "a government takeover of health care." ( <-- to the 2010 'lie' I would comment: with all the 'single payer' talk as the only way to fix the system, by pelosi and others, we now know that wasn't a lie, ha!)
The first lie of the year "award" was 2009's claim from Sarah Palin and other conservatives that Obama's health care plan would create "death panels."
Other contenders for the 2013 lie of the year title included:
— Republican Sen. Ted Cruz's assertion that members of Congress would be exempt from the new health care law.
— Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann's claim that the IRS would be "in charge" of "a huge national database" containing Americans' health care records.
— Conservative columnist Ann Coulter's comment that "no doctors who went to an American medical school will be accepting Obamacare."
Oh, Ted Cruz, will you ever stop lying?
And welcome back, FRaC, haven't seen you stirring the pot around here in a while. :)
Since you've raised the topic of Presidential difficulties with the truth, maybe we should also talk about Bush / Cheney's lies that took us into Iraq, chasing non-existent WMD - with all the resultant loss of life and treasure. By comparison, the President's statements were, at best, inconsequential fibs. Obama's statement caused some citizens what is, at best, an inconvenience. How could that possibly compare to the enormous losses attributable to Bush / Cheney's deliberate lies?
My neighbor who is a doctor disagrees with Ann Coulters statement above. As should anyone with half a brain.
Oh should have read closer. LOL
@babs: so it shouldn't be a lie... because bush was worse. gotcha.
spot on babs, spot on. backbite. the difference between a lie that cost no lives, and a lie that cost thousands, priceless. so, sure, the truth is that explaining the ACA in a way that repubelicans wouldn't use to ass fuck those that need this law - me - is complicated. however, as we all fucking know; there was no wmd in iraq, and thousands of troops died, and even tens of thousands of iraqis had to die for that lie. so if you want to compare the two, and rationalize them to some kind of moral equivalency, then go and be my guest, clown.
Obama and his admistration - along with neocon hawks- did lie about the usage of chemical weapons in Syria as well as about the nature of the "opposition" factions. Seemingly, at the very last week/day/minute, he withdrew from the attack against Syria. We have yet to know accurately why but it might have been the readiness of iran and hizbullah to wage a full-on war against US bases (ie Gulf Arab countries) in retaliation. He wasn't perhaps ready for a-at least- mini-world war.
He and co. also lied about Libya.
beh, its a tradition, US presidents (or those who pull their strings - whether one views presidents as semi-puppets or not) covering up their true intentions for waging wars...the recent round: Clinton with Yugoslavia, Bush with Iraq and Afghanisan and Obama with Libya and almost-Syria (we have to see if it'll remain that way or if he'll have amendments down the line.)
I think it will be more helpful for you to draw the distinction between an external foreign policy lie and an internal policy lie...two categories.
FRaC: I'll grant you that the President deserves criticism for some of his ACA comments and for his administration's abysmal handling of the ACA rollout.
Having said that, I'm not sure all the smug crowing at this news by conservatives is warranted since Republicans were awarded this same honor in 3 of the previous 4 years - and all three 'runners up' to the award this year also were Republicans. The preponderance of 'big lies' still seems to rest with the right.
And, to his credit, President Obama is - to the best of my knowledge - the only one of the aforementioned to issue an apology for his mistakes. I think that conveys character - character this is sorely lacking in the others.
I think Dick Cheney's daughter Lis messed up when she called out her sister Mary's Marriage. It has to be all said for a political move to becoming Senator of Wyoming, like her old man.
@b3tadine[sutures]: i'm just acknowledging the large amount of obama fanatics dismissing this as if it shouldn't count simply because bush has his own laundry list. might as well bring up nixon at this point if we're keeping partisan score. it is entirely possible that the person who's positions you agree with is still a lying bastard!
no need to call people names like clown. it only invalidates your own credibility.
"no need to call people names like clown. it only invalidates your own credibility"
backbay, isn't it hypocritical that people of that sort (beta whatever) want to moralize on the basis of whats wrong and whats right and yet their conduct exposes them as people who, lets be honest, are really nonchalant about what is right or wrong? is it their stupidity...is it for them just an exercise in rhetoric on this forum to formulate moral positions that they are unable to match...not sure. somewhere in between?
one should ask whether such a person will indeed lose his or her credibility among a group of many others who are equally hypocritical and morally/ethically if not also intellectually vapid . If Hitler was amongst them and he knew how to buddy up and get cozy with their sort, they'd accept him without an eyeblink.
totally bummed, I misinterpreted the thread title as "lay of the year". Was expecting some sexy pictrues here :(
And besides, america is nothing but lies. And anybody wasting effort arguing eithr rep or dem is nothing but a clueless fucking idiot whoes' clearly surrendered his mind's sovereignty to america's fascist propaganda.
It should be a rule of thumb that anyone who quotes Anne Coulter and Michelle Bachmann all in one post should never be allowed to post about poltics ever again.
if you want to improve health insurance in america, blaming the president isn't helpful or useful.
for some cases, it was the insurance company's choice to remove a given plan. in those cases, it would make more sense to be upset with the insurance company. the president didn't actually write the ACA legislation, turns out our legislatures do that. so if our legislature made a mistake when writing the law, they should share in the blame. if there was a provision that required insurance companies to maintain their existing policies in certain cases, but that language was removed during the legislative process, that would fall on the legislatures rather than the president.
the president has already said insurance companies are allowed to keep the plans they scrapped if they want to. if what you're concerned about is that people are losing their plans, then you should be praising the president for listen to people and trying to fix it. to do anything else would require an act of congress. because that's what the ACA is. it's an act of congress. voting for people that don't listen and keep trying, unsuccessfully, to scrap it entirely isn't working.
tammuz, blind hatred of america does not give you moral high ground. you have no perspective on history. it's just 'hate america' and leave it at that. talking about 'hipocricy' while your telling someone else their stupid is ridiculous. you even close your statement with a hitler reference, as if declaring godwin's law is somehow less 'intellectually vapid' than the people you're criticizing. it might help if you came to terms with your own inadequacies before criticizing others.
there's no "blind hatred of america" On the contrary, most people who are critical and/or outright despise America are the ones with their eyes open.
It's the defenders of Amreica who are blind—assuming they are not the criminally complicit profiteers running the show.
Even the "American Revolution" is bullshit. It was a war of independence but their was not revolution. Did they sack London? Did they overthrow the king? Nope, they negotiaed a settlement, hardly anything revolutionary about that. And 200+ years later, it remains a country of duped drones.
Lies require intent, last I checked.
i don't think that's true handsum. some people do have a 'blind hatred' of america. you've shown you are also upset with people like the rothschilds right? so your venom isn't really as directed at america as it's directed at a group of people who have done bad things, and alien lizard people. what your upset with seems to be broader than what tammuz is upset with. at least from my perspective, you don't necessarily lack perspective the way he does.
i am an american. i know lots of americans. there are a lot of us who never killed a native american or a child, we're not satanic, we're not psychopaths. to push hatred of america, rather than a few things some americans did, is stupid. to suggest the hateful bad things people have done are limited to americans or even western civilization is stupid. someone with just a bit of perspective would at least try to understand the alternative positions of the people they're criticizing.
i live my life the best i can. that's the same for most real people i've met; even conservatives and people i disagree with. maybe we're duped in some ways, but we're still doing the best we can to make the best communities we can. there is nothing wrong with that.
firstly, my criticism regarding thanksgiving is not expressive of any hatred, blind or otherwise, towards americans. it is a great wrong that needs to be addressed and has not been to date. And is also there persistent racism towards native indians? yes, this is not to be doubted (this has been discussed at length in the pertnent thread). Since the US seeks to lecture others on human rights and uses human rights issues as alibis to conquer, pillage and kill..., why shouldn't people of the international community (those who have not bent over to be sodimized by US interests in the first place) point out to the hypocrisies of that country?
secondly, i would mind my own business if indeed the american foreign policy minded its own business - instead, it intrudes into our region, supplies arms to al qaeda,works with the repressive anti-democratic head-chopping puppet state of Saudi Arabia, works hand in hand with the only remaining explicitly racist colonial outpost in the world (israel), vetos for it every time that Israel is held to accountability for murder and throwing people out of their homes. Let alone the assassinations, the dirty financial wars, etc etc.
The list of wars conducted by the US abroad, against people of other countries throughout the world is phenomenal - this included wars conducted in my region and the detrimental impact that it has on our daily lives. As a principle, and irrespective of the actual administration heading the US, the reasons given for these invasions are fabricated (including Obama's against -covertly or not- Libya and Syria) and the real reasons lie are actually rooted in the imperial hubris of certain elite in the US that drag the unfortunate rest of the US into this and kills their sons and daughters needlessly in unjust wars.
So, of course, the US is going to cultivate itself animosity, for you it may be impersonal and a matter of history (the logic that goes: "well if its not us, its someone else"). But for innocent people who get killed by your drones, for innocent people who get tortured by your army who have conquered someone else's lands to acquire priviledges in that country, people who live the tragic impoverishing consequence of your country's (in tandem with others, I have also expressed antipathy towards Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, Israel, France...etc) successive generational policy of continual destabilization of the Eurasian region ...there are hordes of reasons for a hatred of the US - a consequential hatred, not a blind hatred. a hatred based on observing the cause-effect. The US should mind its business and its critics would then mind their business.
Secondly, in no way does my stance contradict that of, for instance, HandsumCa$hMoneyYo's. I have made it clear from the get go that I am not against americans. Personally, I believe your usual american is duped - his/her media is distortive, the food industry serving him or her is distortive, the pharmaceutical industry likewise, the state monitors him or her in order to trap him or her in the system.. and so on...poverty and disease is on the rise. and s/he is really a victim in this. When I point out my dislike of the US, is it not towards the american public, it is towards the dynamic head, the cancer, that feeds on the US body and by extension spreads around the world.
HandsumCa$hMoneyYo has mentioned the Rothschilds and we could also include largely- in this historical network- the bilderberg group and so on. I do not have to specify this and by not specifying this I am not guilty of generalizing. Once the idealogies, be they zionist/imperialist/neoliberalist and so on, have taken on the shape of a government, this government is to be condemned. claiming that they are mere puppets does not exonerate them. Therefore there is no contradiction whatsoever.
Let me be even more suggestive. I believe that the same cancer that feeds on the US fed on european countries leading and during WW2, financing them against each other. Britain was, albeit on the winning side, left an economic disaster. At that point, the rich banking elites - after sucking up the blood of europe- relocated to the new power and latched on to it.
Unfortunately, I doubt that this will register in your head curtkram. I wish you would stop making irrelevant claims. I am not about blind hatred and I really have no ideology to spread. I care about what is just. That should be the common denominator for us all - not throwing ridiculous claims based on your being american and my being not-american or your being pro-american and my being anti-american. this would be puerile.
Americans are complicit in a lot of really bad shit and unfortunately they just cannot seem to register. It may very well be the flouride in the water. Or the aspartame in the diet soda. Or the mercury in the vaccines. Or the 80% monsanto gmo corn. Shit, USA is literally a toxic place.
I'm actually a bit surprised to findm myself agreeing tammuz so frequently because I was initially annoyed with his anti-thanksgivign agenda. I tend to think the the thanksgiving holidy is about the only thing good in america. but that's a tangent.
tammuz at least sees a lot of the bullshit of america for what it is. and when those truths are seen then it becomes really difficult not to hate on usa. And there is notheing blind about taht.
so what are you? canadian? palestinian? you used the pronoun "we" or "our" a few times...
how has the 'native american' issue not been addressed? are those of us who own land as non-native-americans supposed to cede it to the people you feel are the rightful owners? would it be good enough to send in more fbi agents? do we need to send more tax money to reservations? i don't where you live to see persistent racism against native americans or native indians, but i've met a fair number of both and have not seen it. the stuff i read from your postings in the other thread were mostly stuff that happened hundreds of years ago. after that i got tired of your lack of perspective and inability to understand what was actually happening in those time periods. i certainly understand poverty and crime persists on reservations, but the agreement made between those reservations and the us government gives them a lot of autonomy in governing themselves. in a lot of modern cases of native american injustice, it's largely due to inaction on the part of american government and a lot of people on those reservation want the american government to stay out. it's a difficult and complicated problem. you wouldn't understand that if it didn't fit into the narrative you want to sell. you just think you have another excuse to blindly hate america. still blind. still lacking perspective.
i'm pretty sure your statements register with me. i'm pretty sure i'm not the one who's too dumb to try to understand other people's point of view. you blame america for a lot of things. you lack the perspective to understand most of those situations from an american's point of view or from the united state's government's point of view. for example, the american government is publicly opposed to the israeli settlements. you should probably be happy about that, since it's a step in the right direction. on the other hand, i'm not going to give you a gun if you want to shoot me. that would be stupid. if it's anything more than blind hate, that should make sense to you.
You can call it a cancer feeding on the US & Europe but it's really an odd collection of secret societies. They are real. And they do seem to have a long term (on the scale of centuries & millenia here) agenda. But why? Or to what end?
Are we unwitting players in an intergalactic drama? Is it simply a strain of ruthless brillance carefully protected in order to dominate fellow men?
Our species is supposedly 200,000 or so years old yet historical records only cover aboutthe most recent 5% of this. But we do know that many indigenous natives had oral traditions of their "gods battling in the heavens" and many cultures have legends of dragons. In other words, who to say that they're weren't dragon space alien fighting in space above earth 50,000 years ago?
I don't know but things that I used ot think were totally batshit nuts seem less ridiculous the more I study the world.
adn speaking of lie of the year, how perfect that today the federal reserve throws a party for it's 100th birrthday!
tammuz at least sees a lot of the bullshit of america for what it is. and when those truths are seen then it becomes really difficult not to hate on usa. And there is nothing blind about that.
the united states isn't 13 evil bloodlines. we certainly have people who do bad things, and a concentration of wealth in certain spots that has made things worse, but those fairly isolated people and events are not what makes up this country. what makes up this country is a bunch of decent people like me who are just trying to live the best we can in the environment we find ourselves in. moving to the west bank or london or pretty much anywhere else isn't going to change that, since there are bad people everywhere. i don't want to be in a bus that a palestinian terrorist blows up no matter how justified someone might think that is. i don't want a tire filled with gasoline tossed around my neck and lit on fire no matter how justified someone else thinks that might be.
i don't want the koch brothers poisoning my drinking water eiother, and i don't want monsanto tainting my food. most americans don't. to assume otherwise seems irrational. granted there are a lot of americans who are duped into thinking it's safe, but those people aren't going to listen to reason any more than tammuz. thus the 'blind' part of the hatred. they can't bring themselves to try to understand what else is going on, outside the narrow view of what they want to believe and what they're comfortable with.
troll troll troll. I saved myself some time and didn't read past maybe the 12th troll post.
On a side note away from the pickering. Rep. or Dem. A simple fact remains... The government can't regulate people into behaving the way the government and latest political platform that was needed to get elected wants. The Dodd Frank Act puts some new restrictions on wall street, but given enough time, it will invent a new way to try to take on the same risks as before. Just wait and see.
The government putting in new health care laws will only motivate employers into either making everyone part-time and work less than 29 hours or less, if the didnt have health care before, or firing them. I've know this first hand owning a private company that employees 500+. The people that weren't covered pre-ObamaCare, because their job wasnt good enough to provide it, are generally the people at the most risk to lose their job because the employer couldnt afford their position with the addition expense of paying for their health care. And the next step in the process is.... you guessed it taxing them for not being able to afford the very healthcare. Ironic, very much so.
I'm a fairly conservative rep. that being said it would nice if everyone could have health care and this law actually "worked" but as long as there is a system for people take benefits from the system without contributing toward the system, it will be bound to fail.
Any please. i challenge you to find anyone who's healthcare rates actually went down for 2014. Seriously. Find me one.
holy shit, the goverment really was after old dirty bastard!
So the OP Lie about keeping your policy was a lie in the making right from the moment the health insurance industry realized that this law will make them honor the policies, the contracts, that they made. This cuts into profits and the insurance industry has spent lots of money trying to get Obama-care Haters elected and then to do everything to slow down delay and derail the law including intentionally ratcheting up the annual cycle of policy cancellations that occur all the time no mater who is president, and then if you ever call an insurance company you get lies and if you specifically ask for an ACA compliant plan they say things like this is a good value and when I ask them again for the 4th time they say no this plan is not ACA compliant. The insurance companies are still selling plans that will have to be canceled due to non compliance with the law come January first and then those folks who used the insurance industry not the government exchanges are going to get bombarded by anti ACA propaganda along with letters explaining why they have no healthcare and they are now going to have to pay the fines when they file income taxes.
If you are ever lonely and want lots of phone calls try signing up for heath care insurance on a non government marketplace website. They are required to tell you that the government exchanges don't work and they are not supposed to offer you plans that they have to offer that are ACA compliant.
Bottom line the Health insurance industry made Obama's Little lie a big lie he still was not telling the whole truth on the keep your policy if you want it, I think the problem is Americans are not trusted to understand a complicated legislative initiative so things are generalized and thus we have lies.
Lets have this disaster play out and then we can realize that a single payer system like all North American countries all Europe and all the industrialized trading partners we keep losing jobs to have. Lets see how competitive American cars and planes are once healthcare is a government run service like schools or fire departments some waste but no shareholders to give profits to.
Yes, it's possible that i'm a mnd-con trolled agaent of disinformation meant to obsfucate & confuse.
But, and this should interest architects, America was designed as the New Atlantis. A nation free of ethnic, political and religious affiliations may sound ideal; ideal for corruption, that is. Under this guise, corporations can flourish and freedom (read sovereignty) can be crushed.
That's why the civil war was so crucial. It as absolutiely important for the resistance of the south to be crushed. And after American power could be consolidated and centralized. a project that continues today. Similare efforts are udnerway in europe, but the cultural divisions are much stronger there. People can, and do still fight back. Despite the despicable efforts of Brussels to consolidate power under the euro currency.
All americans are complicit in the terror provided by their state. So what can tehy do other than just trying their best? I't tough because so much of those efforts by Americans are diverted into corporate profits or taxes that are used to fuel the terror.
Oddly enough, it might be the deadbeast on welfare staring at TV who are the best hope of a passive resistance in America. So much of the nutcase conspiracy type talk is becomin mainstream taht it seeams as if the elite bortherhood is now trying to goad the public into outrage. and it just aint' happening. Which is kind o fmind blowing in its own right.
so, handsum, are you suggesting 'turn on, tune in, and drop out?' that was timothy learly. pretty sure he worked for the government.
more people on welfare, or taking away social security so baby boomers don't get their cut of welfare, would just accelerate the next civil war, which would play into the hands of the bad guys, wouldn't it?
I suggest nohting because I'm not smart enough to have figured it out yet.
Moar questions: Waht is fake?
i have a couple answers.
first, the unemployment number is not fake. it may not be what you think it is, and it may not tell you what you want to have measured. 14% may be more accurate to the way you think unemployment should be measured, which is a fine opinion to have, but that doesn't mean their way is fake. it is what it is. their methodology is fairly open, and more than likely they aren't cooking the numbers.
the fed. reserve isn't forging. it's their money to begin with. it's not like someone other than monet painting a monet, it's like monet painting a monet. "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's." imho, you might be looking at what wealth is wrong. greed is a dumb motivator. all the crap you get ultimately belongs to the government. live simple and humble and you'll be happier.
Curtkram, you're simplistic and ignorant/uninformed. The US, in one way or the other, supports settlements. As does Canada by the way.
This is mere masquerade. In reality, US does very little to restrict itself from assisting ISraeli settlement expansion.
Secondly, its very revealing of your mentality to associate palestinian with terrorist . i'm not the one generalizing about americans or other people; its rather you who fall for a derogatory associative portrayal and thus show you for the racist you are.
Lastly: "i'm pretty sure your statements register with me." No, as I suspect, they do not. You yourself are pretty much a dead end. And I don't want to shoot you (figuratively or otherwise), what sort of idiocy is that?
because of a single charity, named "American Friends of Ariel Inc," sends money to israel, that means all of america supports the settlements, despite the stated fact that our government is opposed to the settlements? that is a logic fallacy. it is the single charity supporting the settlements. well done though. if you search the internet long enough, you find something that supports your lies.
a person who blows up a bus full of innocent women and children is probably a terrorist. palestinans aren't exempt from that just because you're dumb. do you support those attacks? or did you not know there were bad people who aren't american? you come across as a little bit ignorant.
"i'm not going to give you a gun if you want to shoot me" is a metaphor. take some time to think and then apply that to the hostilities between the israelis and palestinians.
if you're not palestinian, are you just an angsty teenage emo?
the link states "There are hundreds of these tax-exempt, so-called charities funneling money to illegal Israeli settlements,"
as such it did not limit the entities to American Friends of Ariel Inc. your reading skills are on par with your comprehension skills, abysmal.
In fact, please consult with this list for a list of american based non profit entities that indirectly fund settlements and now the list for american based non profit entities that directly fund settlements
had the US really wished to curtail Israeli settlements, it would take action within the US itself. the US enforces sanctions on historically legitimate countries that are not throwing people outside their homes- sanctions against Iran and Syria, prohibiting money from being sent to them from the US and from outside the US. It is, however, apparently incapable of stopping the flow of money to financing and building illegal settlements from its institutions -whatever form they take. The gestures being made are in actual reality sheer hypocrisy and if you believe these gestures, you are gullible and naive.
Furthermore, do you realize how much of your money goes to this special relationship going on between the US and that irredeemably racist apartheid state?
U.S. taxpayers have contributed more to the Israeli defense budget than Israeli taxpayers in the past three years.
Secondly, whether I am Palestinian or not is irrelevant to the subject. If you are unable to tackle the subject without recourse to person based associations and, further, invective then your issue is not to discuss the topic rationally. So stop asking me for my ID; you're not a check point.
Thirdly, about Palestinians -these people have suffered things that you wouldn't be able to imagine. I know people who's families have been decimated by Israelis, at point blank going all the way to the terrorist Hagganah up to the modern Israeli army. People hiding beneath the corpses of their families so as not to be killed. I know such a person. I also know, personally, a woman who had her entire family wiped out, unarmed peasant and pleasant folk.
Am I giving you a wikipedia link for each of these Israeli terrorists who did this? No. I don't need to. They don't exist on wikipedia, they're too many, they didn't give their names...etc. Using your logic, I should call every Israeli or even Jew a child murdering terrorist.. I should call every US american a murderer and sociopath - count the number of american soldiers who shot and tortured innocent iraqi people, killing whole families, raping iraqi girls...
So, I have far better reason to associate the word "murderer" or whatever with the persona of a US individual or an Israeli individual ...they far surpass these numbered suicide bombers. But I don't because I know that US americans and even Israel citizens are not like that - I don't assume give them a generalizing adjective.
All cats are animals but not all animals are cats. If humankind depended on you to found logic, we would still be swinging from one branch to the other.
You however, have done so with Palestinians, this implicit irrational association.On the contrary, palestinians, en masse, have a rich and long history and cultural sophistication that i have great admiration for.
And yes, I can totally understand the frustration of people defending their homeland. I can totally understand that.
Per the metaphor, I had already indicated that I knew your usage was metaphorical via (in my previous post):
And I don't want to shoot you (figuratively or otherwise)
fig·u·ra·tive adjective \ˈfi-g(y)ə-rə-tiv\
of words, language, etc. : used with a meaning that is different from the basic meaning and that expresses an idea in an interesting way by using language that usually describes something else : not literal
Perhaps it takes a maybe (maybe-not) Palestinian to teach you your own language.
lol architects thinking they know poli sci
'If I should tell a lie I'll cross my heart and I hope to die'
a lie...and an act of fraud
A former senior intelligence official told me that the Obama administration had altered the available information – in terms of its timing and sequence – to enable the president and his advisers to make intelligence retrieved days after the attack look as if it had been picked up and analysed in real time, as the attack was happening.
From the WTF dept: Richard Simmons will save obamacare???
im in jimmy pages castle . . . . . .
The "lie of the year" is a lie because it's all a lie. Every single thing they (media, government) tells you is spun, wrung, unverifiable, twisted, contorted and scripted for mass consumption.
Except sports. You can always go watch the video and see for yourself. Try that with the "news". Any video you get is out of context, mis-described, staged, etc. The rare piece that's not is from some poor bastard filming with his smart phone who the police beat the living shit out of.
Lots of stories out there. The important thing to remember is that they are just stories.
Miles, good day to you, sir.
Actually, no problem getting videos on many news stories, either.
Don't bash me about the source of this -- no idea who the uploader even is. I just searched on youtube and posted the first one. Let's go to the tape...
BO is the biggest lying sack of shit since the last president, who was the biggest lying sack of shit since the one before him, and so on. See a pattern?
I should have said they (media, government & corporations). Sorry. It's all advertising, trying to get you to buy something. Health insurance, guns, spaghetti-O's, tar sands, Dewar's, terrorism, Chevys, the police state, etc., etc., etc.
This is what's interesting. Most folks are quickly blaming the president, yet, by law the Office of the President can't dictate policies with regards to the activities of insurance companies. By law, the president can offer incentives to insurance companies to make their insurance to subscribers(you and me)cheaper. The insurance industry is a multi-multi-billion dollar industry(if not, a trillion-dollar industry). The reason why most insurance companies were against the ACA is because it affects their bottom line. In the past, and even now, insurance companies has done two things. Insure themselves AND pass the buck to you and me. Insurance companies have blamed inflation and nowadays both inflation and the president for the astronomical cost of insurance, eventhough the cost of insurance has increased, prior to the current president taking office. Was it the president that lied, or was it the insurance companies that turned their backs on the president, making him look like a liar? The president does not benefit from this "lie", but the insurance companies do. But then again, it is "business as usual" for insurance companies.
The legislation was written by insurance company lobbyists. Nobody in congress even bothered to read the 2200 pages of it. BO would have signed a roll of toilet paper if it had "health care" written on it.
How is it that Clinton was worth < $1m in 1992 and is worth an estimated $80m today?
Could the "anonymous " donors to Bill and Hillary's Presidential library fund be a factor? Talk about a complete bitch selling out her country. But socialism is always for the masses, never for the criminals at the top.
Actually, it's the other way around. The banksters got bailed out with taxpayer money and taxpayers got doubly screwed - first by the banks, then by having to bail them out. Meanwhile their massive profits go untaxed. Socialize the losses, privatize the gains.
Trillions in corporate welfare, nothing for the citizen except the tax bill to pay for it.
Chris Moody, what you say rings true. I was one of those whose insurance was terminated, and it wasn't healthcare.gov that made it difficult for me to get new insurance as much as it was the insurance company that terminated my old insurance policy and that were to be my insurers again. I breezed through the government website, and then it took several weeks of many frustrsating phone calls with the insurance company to get my new policy confirmed just in the nick of time.
interesting thing about the current republican party. if they believed in personal responsibility, they would take responsibility for the legislation they have a right to write, introduce in the house, debate, modify, amend, and vote on. instead, they blame someone who can't do any of those things. whine and cry and blame everyone else for your problems. what else would expect from people elected to fail at passing a budget and fail at keeping the government running?
There is little difference between the two (one?) parties. They both gorge themselves on fat corporate dick and then screw us for sport. The only difference I see is that for the most part the Republicans fuck you in the face while the Democrats fuck you behind your back.
As Steven said, it's difficult not to be cynical. While the vast majority is against unlimited money in elections, war, NSA spying, the Keystone pipeline, the drug war, reducing unemployment benefits / food stamps, etc., etc., etc., all of these things are rammed up our collective asses by corporate politicians.
This thread is so last year, but so is Obama (as he is this year as well). Anyway, relevantly...