To the ones who just don't get it and think Obama should negotiate~

[Londoner]

The Republican Party increasingly faces a demographic problem when it comes to winning presidential elections.

If the Democrats are able to launch another successful program like Social Security or Medicare, it will constitute the final nail in the Republican electoral coffin.

This is why the Republican Party must shut down government and exercise every trick in the book to STOP ObamaCare. This is why they will propagandize every glitch that occurs as the Affordable Act is rolled out.

There are tens of thousands of hard working American families in Kentucky signing up for ObamaCare. Many have been denied coverage by our current system. Many were unable to afford the insanely inflated premiums. If those Kentuckians successfully get health coverage, it will hurt the Republican Party (who can't afford another popular social program which ties citizens to the democrats).

For these reasons the Republican Party and their lemming voters MUST destroy ObamaCare by any means necessary, including shredding the Constitution by using budgetary tricks to destroy laws they don't like.

 

[westwall]

This is an example of libtard logic, and this administrations utter contempt for the people it claims to represent....



"The National Park Service has ordered the closure of a Virginia park that sits on federal land, even though the government provides no resources for its maintenance or operation.

The Claude Moore Colonial Farm announced on Wednesday that NPS has ordered it to suspend operations until Congress agrees to a deal to fund the federal government.

According to Anna Eberly, managing director of the farm, NPS sent law enforcement agents to the park on Tuesday evening to remove staff and volunteers from the property.

“You do have to wonder about the wisdom of an organization that would use staff they don’t have the money to pay to evict visitors from a park site that operates without costing them any money,” she said.

The park withstood prior government shutdowns, noting in a news release that the farm will be closed to the public for the first time in 40 years.

“In previous budget dramas, the Farm has always been exempted since the NPS provides no staff or resources to operate the Farm,” Eberly explained in an emailed statement.

“In all the years I have worked with the National Park Service … I have never worked with a more arrogant, arbitrary and vindictive group representing the NPS,” Eberly said"


Park Service Orders Closure of Park that Receives No Federal Funding | Washington Free Beacon

 

[rightwinger]

This is an example of libtard logic, and this administrations utter contempt for the people it claims to represent....



"The National Park Service has ordered the closure of a Virginia park that sits on federal land, even though the government provides no resources for its maintenance or operation.

The Claude Moore Colonial Farm announced on Wednesday that NPS has ordered it to suspend operations until Congress agrees to a deal to fund the federal government.

According to Anna Eberly, managing director of the farm, NPS sent law enforcement agents to the park on Tuesday evening to remove staff and volunteers from the property.

“You do have to wonder about the wisdom of an organization that would use staff they don’t have the money to pay to evict visitors from a park site that operates without costing them any money,” she said.

The park withstood prior government shutdowns, noting in a news release that the farm will be closed to the public for the first time in 40 years.

“In previous budget dramas, the Farm has always been exempted since the NPS provides no staff or resources to operate the Farm,” Eberly explained in an emailed statement.

“In all the years I have worked with the National Park Service … I have never worked with a more arrogant, arbitrary and vindictive group representing the NPS,” Eberly said"


Park Service Orders Closure of Park that Receives No Federal Funding | Washington Free Beacon

The Republicans sent 800,000 workers home

Go figure

 

[kwc57]

This is an example of libtard logic, and this administrations utter contempt for the people it claims to represent....



"The National Park Service has ordered the closure of a Virginia park that sits on federal land, even though the government provides no resources for its maintenance or operation.

The Claude Moore Colonial Farm announced on Wednesday that NPS has ordered it to suspend operations until Congress agrees to a deal to fund the federal government.

According to Anna Eberly, managing director of the farm, NPS sent law enforcement agents to the park on Tuesday evening to remove staff and volunteers from the property.

“You do have to wonder about the wisdom of an organization that would use staff they don’t have the money to pay to evict visitors from a park site that operates without costing them any money,” she said.

The park withstood prior government shutdowns, noting in a news release that the farm will be closed to the public for the first time in 40 years.

“In previous budget dramas, the Farm has always been exempted since the NPS provides no staff or resources to operate the Farm,” Eberly explained in an emailed statement.

“In all the years I have worked with the National Park Service … I have never worked with a more arrogant, arbitrary and vindictive group representing the NPS,” Eberly said"


Park Service Orders Closure of Park that Receives No Federal Funding | Washington Free Beacon

The Republicans sent 800,000 workers home

Go figure

No, they tried to fund the government. Harry said no and sent everyone home. Obama concurred. True story!

 

[rightwinger]

This is an example of libtard logic, and this administrations utter contempt for the people it claims to represent....



"The National Park Service has ordered the closure of a Virginia park that sits on federal land, even though the government provides no resources for its maintenance or operation.

The Claude Moore Colonial Farm announced on Wednesday that NPS has ordered it to suspend operations until Congress agrees to a deal to fund the federal government.

According to Anna Eberly, managing director of the farm, NPS sent law enforcement agents to the park on Tuesday evening to remove staff and volunteers from the property.

“You do have to wonder about the wisdom of an organization that would use staff they don’t have the money to pay to evict visitors from a park site that operates without costing them any money,” she said.

The park withstood prior government shutdowns, noting in a news release that the farm will be closed to the public for the first time in 40 years.

“In previous budget dramas, the Farm has always been exempted since the NPS provides no staff or resources to operate the Farm,” Eberly explained in an emailed statement.

“In all the years I have worked with the National Park Service … I have never worked with a more arrogant, arbitrary and vindictive group representing the NPS,” Eberly said"


Park Service Orders Closure of Park that Receives No Federal Funding | Washington Free Beacon

The Republicans sent 800,000 workers home

Go figure

No, they tried to fund the government. Harry said no and sent everyone home. Obama concurred. True story!

No, they used funding the Government as extortion to kill a law that they couldn't do through legislative means

They fucked over 800,000 loyal workers because they did not have the votes to do it in Congress

 

[Foxfyre]

The Republicans sent 800,000 workers home

Go figure

No, they tried to fund the government. Harry said no and sent everyone home. Obama concurred. True story!

No, they used funding the Government as extortion to kill a law that they couldn't do through legislative means

They fucked over 800,000 loyal workers because they did not have the votes to do it in Congress

Nevertheless the GOP house passed three separate bills that would keep those 800,000 (your number) loyal workers on the job. The President and Democrats said nope. It's our way or nothing. End of story.

And like petulant children they are now shutting down facilities that have NEVER been closed in previous government shutdowns and doing their damndest to inflict maximum pain on as many people as possible.

Yet people like you keep defending them to the hilt.

Here's Harry Reids response to a CNN reporter's question re closure of a cancer facility. Her question, "If you can help one child with cancer, why wouldn't you do that?" His response, "Why would we want to do that?" I don't think he really intended it the way it came across--even Harry Reid isn't THAT dumb or probably not THAT cold blooded--but how hard of heart do people have to be to intentionally hurt people when there is absolutely no reason to do so?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTbzgjQlM5s]Harry Reid 'Why Would We Want To' Help One Kid With Cancer - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Zoom-boing]

Wacky Quacky posted:
The individual mandate is so bad I can hardly describe it. To think that the government can punish people, through taxes, because they don't do something should be abhorrent to everyone. What's next, a tax penalty for not voting republican or democrat? According to Roberts, that would be constitutional because it's just a tax.
Ron sez:
So you are good with people behaving irresponsibly. You have no problem paying the medical bills of those who don't have medical insurance. I'm NOT good with having to pay the medical bills of others.
Consider the following; When a person who is ill goes to the emergency room the hospital has to treat them. IF that person cannot pay their bill they have two choices. They can (1) eat the bill and write off the money owed or (2) they can raise their rates of those who can pay. As hospitals are in business to make money they choose option #2. When hospitals raise their rates insurance companies are forced to follow. WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT THOSE WHO ARE BEHAVING RESPONSIBILITY AND WHO HAVE MEDICAL INSURANCE WILL SEE THEIR RATES RISE TO PAY FOR THE DEADBEAT WHO IS TO CHEAP TO BUY INSURANCE. Are you still good with people behaving irresponsibily? If you have any brains you arn't.

3) They can set up a payment plan with the person who received treatment. They did that with me after my son was born.

So now that everyone will have health insurance, hospitals will be lowering their rates, followed by insurance companies. Right?

 

[Eaglewings]

No, they tried to fund the government. Harry said no and sent everyone home. Obama concurred. True story!

No, they used funding the Government as extortion to kill a law that they couldn't do through legislative means

They fucked over 800,000 loyal workers because they did not have the votes to do it in Congress

Nevertheless the GOP house passed three separate bills that would keep those 800,000 (your number) loyal workers on the job. The President and Democrats said nope. It's our way or nothing. End of story.

And like petulant children they are now shutting down facilities that have NEVER been closed in previous government shutdowns and doing their damndest to inflict maximum pain on as many people as possible.

Yet people like you keep defending them to the hilt.

Here's Harry Reids response to a CNN reporter's question re closure of a cancer facility. Her question, "If you can help one child with cancer, why wouldn't you do that?" His response, "Why would we want to do that?" I don't think he really intended it the way it came across--even Harry Reid isn't THAT dumb or probably not THAT cold blooded--but how hard of heart do people have to be to intentionally hurt people when there is absolutely no reason to do so?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTbzgjQlM5s]Harry Reid 'Why Would We Want To' Help One Kid With Cancer - YouTube[/ame]

There is a thread on the Harry Reid here>>http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ould-we-want-to-help-one-kid-with-cancer.html

 

[Eaglewings]

Wacky Quacky posted:
The individual mandate is so bad I can hardly describe it. To think that the government can punish people, through taxes, because they don't do something should be abhorrent to everyone. What's next, a tax penalty for not voting republican or democrat? According to Roberts, that would be constitutional because it's just a tax.
Ron sez:
So you are good with people behaving irresponsibly. You have no problem paying the medical bills of those who don't have medical insurance. I'm NOT good with having to pay the medical bills of others.
Consider the following; When a person who is ill goes to the emergency room the hospital has to treat them. IF that person cannot pay their bill they have two choices. They can (1) eat the bill and write off the money owed or (2) they can raise their rates of those who can pay. As hospitals are in business to make money they choose option #2. When hospitals raise their rates insurance companies are forced to follow. WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT THOSE WHO ARE BEHAVING RESPONSIBILITY AND WHO HAVE MEDICAL INSURANCE WILL SEE THEIR RATES RISE TO PAY FOR THE DEADBEAT WHO IS TO CHEAP TO BUY INSURANCE. Are you still good with people behaving irresponsibily? If you have any brains you arn't.

3) They can set up a payment plan with the person who received treatment. They did that with me after my son was born.

So now that everyone will have health insurance, hospitals will be lowering their rates, followed by insurance companies. Right?

I hope the rates lower its crazy.

About making payments ~ getting something like cancer will bring you down so fast as far as the high costs.

Fortunately I have insurance which is sooo very expensive. I would have lost everything.

I got a bill for 3 months of chemotherapy and it was $64,000.

I went through a year and a half of that, not including the multiple surgeries as well as many unnecessary things.

Total of my treatment was over $300.000

I would not do that again if I had known

People lose their houses and life saving because of getting sick.

Hard working people should not have to go through that.

 

[rightwinger]

No, they tried to fund the government. Harry said no and sent everyone home. Obama concurred. True story!

No, they used funding the Government as extortion to kill a law that they couldn't do through legislative means

They fucked over 800,000 loyal workers because they did not have the votes to do it in Congress

Nevertheless the GOP house passed three separate bills that would keep those 800,000 (your number) loyal workers on the job. The President and Democrats said nope. It's our way or nothing. End of story.

And like petulant children they are now shutting down facilities that have NEVER been closed in previous government shutdowns and doing their damndest to inflict maximum pain on as many people as possible.

Yet people like you keep defending them to the hilt.

Here's Harry Reids response to a CNN reporter's question re closure of a cancer facility. Her question, "If you can help one child with cancer, why wouldn't you do that?" His response, "Why would we want to do that?" I don't think he really intended it the way it came across--even Harry Reid isn't THAT dumb or probably not THAT cold blooded--but how hard of heart do people have to be to intentionally hurt people when there is absolutely no reason to do so?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTbzgjQlM5s]Harry Reid 'Why Would We Want To' Help One Kid With Cancer - YouTube[/ame]

No

They passed three bills to defund Obamacare knowing full well they would result in 800,000 workers being sent home

 

[Zoom-boing]

Wacky Quacky posted:
The individual mandate is so bad I can hardly describe it. To think that the government can punish people, through taxes, because they don't do something should be abhorrent to everyone. What's next, a tax penalty for not voting republican or democrat? According to Roberts, that would be constitutional because it's just a tax.
Ron sez:
So you are good with people behaving irresponsibly. You have no problem paying the medical bills of those who don't have medical insurance. I'm NOT good with having to pay the medical bills of others.
Consider the following; When a person who is ill goes to the emergency room the hospital has to treat them. IF that person cannot pay their bill they have two choices. They can (1) eat the bill and write off the money owed or (2) they can raise their rates of those who can pay. As hospitals are in business to make money they choose option #2. When hospitals raise their rates insurance companies are forced to follow. WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT THOSE WHO ARE BEHAVING RESPONSIBILITY AND WHO HAVE MEDICAL INSURANCE WILL SEE THEIR RATES RISE TO PAY FOR THE DEADBEAT WHO IS TO CHEAP TO BUY INSURANCE. Are you still good with people behaving irresponsibily? If you have any brains you arn't.

3) They can set up a payment plan with the person who received treatment. They did that with me after my son was born.

So now that everyone will have health insurance, hospitals will be lowering their rates, followed by insurance companies. Right?

I hope the rates lower its crazy.

About making payments ~ getting something like cancer will bring you down so fast as far as the high costs.

Fortunately I have insurance which is sooo very expensive. I would have lost everything.

I got a bill for 3 months of chemotherapy and it was $64,000.

I went through a year of that, not including the multiple surgeries as well as many unnecessary things.

I would not do that again if I had known

People lose their houses and life saving because of getting sick.

Hard working people should not have to go through that.

No, no one should. Unfortunately, people get sick. They get breast cancer, they get rheumatoid arthritis, they get pulmonary fibrosis, they get heart disease. They die.

I don't have a problem with people being able to purchase health insurance. Seems dumb to me that someone wouldn't purchase it because you just never know what will happen. That's what insurance is for ... to protect you 'just in case'. I do have a problem with the government running the show. Everyone should have a problem with that. I also have a problem with someone who has a pre-existing condition not paying more for their insurance. High risk people should pay more ... they are a higher risk. Now? They get to pay the same as non-high risk people. ??? Should a 16 year old pay the same for car insurance as a 30 year old experienced driver? No. Why? Because the 16 year old is a much, much higher risk to insure. Oh wait, smokers. Smokers are still getting nailed with higher rates. ???

Anyway, I hope you are recovered and on the road to good health.

 

[Wry Catcher]

So I don't have to keep repeating myself, I decided to make a thread.

ObamaCare has already been set in place, and the supreme court made into a law.

It is a Law!

Sad that people are looped into the idea that there Is room to negotiate.

Sorta like trying to negotiate with the president on the grounds of drinking while driving,
driving without insurance, driving without a license, or the thousand other Laws we have.

Millions already have signed up, and it is now in effect.

good. Then I will have to only repeat this one more time.

The SCOTUS ruled it as a tax. Taxes are changed all the time.

In addition....

If this was a law that is immutable (look it up), then how is it that you have not been screaming at the top of your lungs and blaming Obama for the waivers and changes he has made (illicitly at that) to the law to protect his cronies?

At least try to think critically before posting nonsense.

Okay, I've thought critically. Hence, you are either a liar or an ignorant partisan. There is only one other conclusion - you're both.

Your allegation of "illicitly" is bull shit. Here's is why:

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/library/research/courseGuides/upload/UnderstandingLaws.pdf

Now, thank me for educating you and apologize for your lie.

 

[Pop23]

So I don't have to keep repeating myself, I decided to make a thread.

ObamaCare has already been set in place, and the supreme court made into a law.

It is a Law!

Sad that people are looped into the idea that there Is room to negotiate.

Sorta like trying to negotiate with the president on the grounds of drinking while driving,
driving without insurance, driving without a license, or the thousand other Laws we have.

Millions already have signed up, and it is now in effect.

good. Then I will have to only repeat this one more time.

The SCOTUS ruled it as a tax. Taxes are changed all the time.

In addition....

If this was a law that is immutable (look it up), then how is it that you have not been screaming at the top of your lungs and blaming Obama for the waivers and changes he has made (illicitly at that) to the law to protect his cronies?

At least try to think critically before posting nonsense.

Taxes are changed by a bill being introduced to amend a law, which is then passed by one or the other chamber, and then the second chamber adopts or modifies the passed bill, and then it goes to committee or the potus. Taxes are NOT changed specifically to defund a law that the minority party lacks the votes to amend.

Christ, you just described negotiations. When only one side agrees to negotiate the only option the other side has is leverage, and leverage is HUGE when it is applied by the side that holds the CASH.

Get it?

 

[Foxfyre]

No, they used funding the Government as extortion to kill a law that they couldn't do through legislative means

They fucked over 800,000 loyal workers because they did not have the votes to do it in Congress

Nevertheless the GOP house passed three separate bills that would keep those 800,000 (your number) loyal workers on the job. The President and Democrats said nope. It's our way or nothing. End of story.

And like petulant children they are now shutting down facilities that have NEVER been closed in previous government shutdowns and doing their damndest to inflict maximum pain on as many people as possible.

Yet people like you keep defending them to the hilt.

Here's Harry Reids response to a CNN reporter's question re closure of a cancer facility. Her question, "If you can help one child with cancer, why wouldn't you do that?" His response, "Why would we want to do that?" I don't think he really intended it the way it came across--even Harry Reid isn't THAT dumb or probably not THAT cold blooded--but how hard of heart do people have to be to intentionally hurt people when there is absolutely no reason to do so?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTbzgjQlM5s]Harry Reid 'Why Would We Want To' Help One Kid With Cancer - YouTube[/ame]

No

They passed three bills to defund Obamacare knowing full well they would result in 800,000 workers being sent home

Perhaps, but it didn't have to. None of the bills defunded Obamacare or even tried to kill it. They just didn't provide funding for it right now when the government is broke and they are all pledged to reduce the size and scope and expense of government. The last two bill suggested that Obamacare just be delayed for now until the rules and regs are all written, the exchanges are ready to run, and all the other glitches can be worked out. It is NOT an unreasonable request.

It is not the GOP's responsibility that the President and Harry Reid will not negotiate in any way or work with anybody on anything and are being unnecessarily vindictive. It is the GOP's responsibility to represent the people who elected them. They have been doing that. Elections have consequences, remember? You Democrats have been telling us that over and over again.

 

[Wry Catcher]

good. Then I will have to only repeat this one more time.

The SCOTUS ruled it as a tax. Taxes are changed all the time.

In addition....

If this was a law that is immutable (look it up), then how is it that you have not been screaming at the top of your lungs and blaming Obama for the waivers and changes he has made (illicitly at that) to the law to protect his cronies?

At least try to think critically before posting nonsense.

Taxes are changed by a bill being introduced to amend a law, which is then passed by one or the other chamber, and then the second chamber adopts or modifies the passed bill, and then it goes to committee or the potus. Taxes are NOT changed specifically to defund a law that the minority party lacks the votes to amend.

Christ, you just described negotiations. When only one side agrees to negotiate the only option the other side has is leverage, and leverage is HUGE when it is applied by the side that holds the CASH.

Get it?

Nope. What is happening is extortion. The H. of Rep. had six months to meet and confer on the budget, they chose not to do so. At the last minute they named eight white guys to meet and confer - how fucking stupid was that (very!)?

 

[Wry Catcher]

No, they tried to fund the government. Harry said no and sent everyone home. Obama concurred. True story!

The radical right wing did not want to fund the government, historical records prove they got what they wanted, a government shutdown. The Senate passed a budget in March of this year and all Boehner needed to do was employ the normal course of business - have a conference committee. Boehner refused and the crisis of yesterday is what we got.

No, they used funding the Government as extortion to kill a law that they couldn't do through legislative means

They fucked over 800,000 loyal workers because they did not have the votes to do it in Congress

True!

Nevertheless the GOP house passed three separate bills that would keep those 800,000 (your number) loyal workers on the job. The President and Democrats said nope. It's our way or nothing. End of story.

Lie, all three offers required the established law, the ACA, be delayed for a year. Extortion, not negotiation.

And like petulant children they are now shutting down facilities that have NEVER been closed in previous government shutdowns and doing their damndest to inflict maximum pain on as many people as possible.

True

Yet people like you keep defending them to the hilt.

Yep, and like me. You defend radical & callous assholes with your lies.

Here's Harry Reids response to a CNN reporter's question re closure of a cancer facility. Her question, "If you can help one child with cancer, why wouldn't you do that?" His response, "Why would we want to do that?" I don't think he really intended it the way it came across--even Harry Reid isn't THAT dumb or probably not THAT cold blooded--but how hard of heart do people have to be to intentionally hurt people when there is absolutely no reason to do so?

Nice default to being a demagogue (of course you are simply parroting the demagoguery of the right - no surprise there.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTbzgjQlM5s]Harry Reid 'Why Would We Want To' Help One Kid With Cancer - YouTube[/ame]

You're are disgustingly dishonest. Boehner and the Tea Party scumbags are the ones who hope to deny seriously ill people health insurance, many of whom lost their jobs and insurance and because of pre existing condition are being fucked over by the current system.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[Pop23]

The radical right wing did not want to fund the government, historical records prove they got what they wanted, a government shutdown. The Senate passed a budget in March of this year and all Boehner needed to do was employ the normal course of business - have a conference committee. Boehner refused and the crisis of yesterday is what we got.

No, they used funding the Government as extortion to kill a law that they couldn't do through legislative means

They fucked over 800,000 loyal workers because they did not have the votes to do it in Congress

True!

Nevertheless the GOP house passed three separate bills that would keep those 800,000 (your number) loyal workers on the job. The President and Democrats said nope. It's our way or nothing. End of story.

Lie, all three offers required the established law, the ACA, be delayed for a year. Extortion, not negotiation.

And like petulant children they are now shutting down facilities that have NEVER been closed in previous government shutdowns and doing their damndest to inflict maximum pain on as many people as possible.

True

Yet people like you keep defending them to the hilt.

Yep, and like me. You defend radical & callous assholes with your lies.

Here's Harry Reids response to a CNN reporter's question re closure of a cancer facility. Her question, "If you can help one child with cancer, why wouldn't you do that?" His response, "Why would we want to do that?" I don't think he really intended it the way it came across--even Harry Reid isn't THAT dumb or probably not THAT cold blooded--but how hard of heart do people have to be to intentionally hurt people when there is absolutely no reason to do so?

Nice default to being a demagogue (of course you are simply parroting the demagoguery of the right - no surprise there.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTbzgjQlM5s]Harry Reid 'Why Would We Want To' Help One Kid With Cancer - YouTube[/ame]

You're are disgustingly dishonest. Boehner and the Tea Party scumbags are the ones who hope to deny seriously ill people health insurance, many of whom lost their jobs and insurance and because of pre existing condition are being fucked over by the current system.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

No, the left should be. Offering low cost health insurance with high copays and high deductibles is crazy. THE POOR CAN'T AFFORD EITHER! So now we are back to the poor running away from health care bills and the rest paying ANYWAY!

 

[Ragnar]

So I don't have to keep repeating myself, I decided to make a thread.

ObamaCare has already been set in place, and the supreme court made into a law.

It is a Law!

Sad that people are looped into the idea that there Is room to negotiate.

Sorta like trying to negotiate with the president on the grounds of drinking while driving,
driving without insurance, driving without a license, or the thousand other Laws we have.

Millions already have signed up, and it is now in effect.

Funny that President Obama is the only one who has violated the ACA law. (through delays and exemptions the ACA gives the executive branch no authority to give)

Defunding and delaying through the House is 100% legitimate and Constitutional. (Constitution: It's the law)

Illegal immigrant? You broke the law! Want to borrow more money than the Debt Limit allows... you broke the law! etc

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So I don't have to keep repeating myself, I decided to make a thread.

ObamaCare has already been set in place, and the supreme court made into a law.

It is a Law!

Sad that people are looped into the idea that there Is room to negotiate.

Sorta like trying to negotiate with the president on the grounds of drinking while driving,
driving without insurance, driving without a license, or the thousand other Laws we have.

Millions already have signed up, and it is now in effect.

good. Then I will have to only repeat this one more time.

The SCOTUS ruled it as a tax. Taxes are changed all the time.

In addition....

If this was a law that is immutable (look it up), then how is it that you have not been screaming at the top of your lungs and blaming Obama for the waivers and changes he has made (illicitly at that) to the law to protect his cronies?

At least try to think critically before posting nonsense.

Okay, I've thought critically. Hence, you are either a liar or an ignorant partisan. There is only one other conclusion - you're both.

Your allegation of "illicitly" is bull shit. Here's is why:

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/library/research/courseGuides/upload/UnderstandingLaws.pdf

Now, thank me for educating you and apologize for your lie.

Can you tell me which part of your link for idiots allows Obama to rewrite the law?

By the way, Darkwind is correct that exempting employers from the mandate is illicit.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Obama keeps changing it on a whim. What kind of a "Law" is this?

a law familiar to those of banana republics