Why no protests, no riots, no burning down of my city?

[Slade3200]

Libs make up there own facts? Kind of like that crowd size on Inauguration Day? Haha

Or the million man march????

Yes, thank you! another example of false exaggeration to prop up and add importance to an issue. Exactly what Trump likes to do with most things he is involved in. He was notorious for lying about ratings for the Apprentice, even when they were in the gutter he would say they were the best. Now he is elevating that shit to a whole new level in our politics at the highest level BullShitArtist101.

Let's face it, all politicians lie about something. It's more of what you lie about that counts.

Telling people that you had higher ratings on a show you conducted or saying there were more people at an inauguration is way different than lying to the American people about a plot to take over one-sixth of our economy and ruin our healthcare system for God knows how long.

Telling people you expect Mexico to pay for a border wall is much different than telling Americans you made a great deal with the world sponsor of terrorism.

Come on Ray... Wanna try again? Those were some of the weakest points I've ever seen you make. I'll give you a second chance at a clean slate to make a real argument.

My argument doesn't get any more realistic than I posted. Trump was either misinformed or lied about stupid shit. DumBama lied about major shit. Big difference.

Trumps lies are needless and blatant designed to mislead the public to prop himself up... he does it on nearly a daily basis. Turn on your TV, just broke that he wrote his sons misleading statement about the "adoption" meeting. It's nonstop!

Your Obama examples are not lies. You can disagree with them but he isn't stating false information. I'm sure president Obama was proud of the Iran deal and saw it as something that helped prevent or slow them from developing nuclear weapons. I'm sure he saw the millions of people who got insurance because of Obamacare and saw that as a success. He is also on record stating that there are many problems with the ACA that he wanted to fix.

You are comparing apples to oranges with a gross and dishonest political spin. Lmk if you want to talk like grown ups.

 

[WEATHER53]

Trump will make America responsible again and libbies hate responsibility so naturally they label it as hate speech

 

[Slade3200]

Trump will make America responsible again and libbies hate responsibility so naturally they label it as hate speech

How is constantly lying and misleading the American people even remotely close to "responsible"??

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Or the million man march????

Yes, thank you! another example of false exaggeration to prop up and add importance to an issue. Exactly what Trump likes to do with most things he is involved in. He was notorious for lying about ratings for the Apprentice, even when they were in the gutter he would say they were the best. Now he is elevating that shit to a whole new level in our politics at the highest level BullShitArtist101.

Let's face it, all politicians lie about something. It's more of what you lie about that counts.

Telling people that you had higher ratings on a show you conducted or saying there were more people at an inauguration is way different than lying to the American people about a plot to take over one-sixth of our economy and ruin our healthcare system for God knows how long.

Telling people you expect Mexico to pay for a border wall is much different than telling Americans you made a great deal with the world sponsor of terrorism.

Come on Ray... Wanna try again? Those were some of the weakest points I've ever seen you make. I'll give you a second chance at a clean slate to make a real argument.

My argument doesn't get any more realistic than I posted. Trump was either misinformed or lied about stupid shit. DumBama lied about major shit. Big difference.

Trumps lies are needless and blatant designed to mislead the public to prop himself up... he does it on nearly a daily basis. Turn on your TV, just broke that he wrote his sons misleading statement about the "adoption" meeting. It's nonstop!

Your Obama examples are not lies. You can disagree with them but he isn't stating false information. I'm sure president Obama was proud of the Iran deal and saw it as something that helped prevent or slow them from developing nuclear weapons. I'm sure he saw the millions of people who got insurance because of Obamacare and saw that as a success. He is also on record stating that there are many problems with the ACA that he wanted to fix.

You are comparing apples to oranges with a gross and dishonest political spin. Lmk if you want to talk like grown ups.

Right, grown ups meaning don't tell the truth about DumBama?

Keeping your doctor if you like your doctor was not a lie?
Keeping your hospital if you like your hospital was not a lie?
Keeping your insurance company if you like your insurance company was not a lie?
Premiums decreasing by $2,500 per year was not a lie?
Promising nobody making less than 250K a year will see any tax increase of any kind was not a lie?
Saying that Benghazi was the product of a video tape most people never seen was not a lie?
Saying Fast and Furious was an extension of Bush's policy was not a lie?

Yeah, millions of people got insurance they didn't have before, but what about us real working people that lost our insurance because of Commie Care? Affordable insurance for everyone? When I applied for Commie Care, they only had one insurance company to accommodate my doctor and hospital. It was a policy that would cost me over 25% of my net pay, had a 7K out of pocket and 7K deductible. $50.00 copay for doctors visits, no prescription, no dental, no eye care. A useless insurance policy that could only be used for major surgeries or if I decided to walk out in front of a moving bus.

Right, DumBama never lied.

 

[Slade3200]

Yes, thank you! another example of false exaggeration to prop up and add importance to an issue. Exactly what Trump likes to do with most things he is involved in. He was notorious for lying about ratings for the Apprentice, even when they were in the gutter he would say they were the best. Now he is elevating that shit to a whole new level in our politics at the highest level BullShitArtist101.

Let's face it, all politicians lie about something. It's more of what you lie about that counts.

Telling people that you had higher ratings on a show you conducted or saying there were more people at an inauguration is way different than lying to the American people about a plot to take over one-sixth of our economy and ruin our healthcare system for God knows how long.

Telling people you expect Mexico to pay for a border wall is much different than telling Americans you made a great deal with the world sponsor of terrorism.

Come on Ray... Wanna try again? Those were some of the weakest points I've ever seen you make. I'll give you a second chance at a clean slate to make a real argument.

My argument doesn't get any more realistic than I posted. Trump was either misinformed or lied about stupid shit. DumBama lied about major shit. Big difference.

Trumps lies are needless and blatant designed to mislead the public to prop himself up... he does it on nearly a daily basis. Turn on your TV, just broke that he wrote his sons misleading statement about the "adoption" meeting. It's nonstop!

Your Obama examples are not lies. You can disagree with them but he isn't stating false information. I'm sure president Obama was proud of the Iran deal and saw it as something that helped prevent or slow them from developing nuclear weapons. I'm sure he saw the millions of people who got insurance because of Obamacare and saw that as a success. He is also on record stating that there are many problems with the ACA that he wanted to fix.

You are comparing apples to oranges with a gross and dishonest political spin. Lmk if you want to talk like grown ups.

Right, grown ups meaning don't tell the truth about DumBama?

Keeping your doctor if you like your doctor was not a lie?
Keeping your hospital if you like your hospital was not a lie?
Keeping your insurance company if you like your insurance company was not a lie?
Premiums decreasing by $2,500 per year was not a lie?
Promising nobody making less than 250K a year will see any tax increase of any kind was not a lie?
Saying that Benghazi was the product of a video tape most people never seen was not a lie?
Saying Fast and Furious was an extension of Bush's policy was not a lie?

Yeah, millions of people got insurance they didn't have before, but what about us real working people that lost our insurance because of Commie Care? Affordable insurance for everyone? When I applied for Commie Care, they only had one insurance company to accommodate my doctor and hospital. It was a policy that would cost me over 25% of my net pay, had a 7K out of pocket and 7K deductible. $50.00 copay for doctors visits, no prescription, no dental, no eye care. A useless insurance policy that could only be used for major surgeries or if I decided to walk out in front of a moving bus.

Right, DumBama never lied.

Those were broken promises which were unfortunate and make me question his ability to follow through and efficiently execute his policy ideas. Sure that stuff is absolutely worthy of scrutiny. But intentional lies? No. There is a big difference.

Under your standards you would be calling Trump a liar for saying that repeal and replace would happen Very very quickly and at the same time, or that he wouldn't touch Medicaid, or premiums would go down, or everybody will have coverage...

See I'm honest enough to say that those statements were just hot air campaign rhetoric, just like Obamas were. I don't like them but they aren't lies and I'm not calling them lies.

 

[Faun]

I don't know what that has to do with the price of rice in China. Of course they couldn't receive food stamps because of their unemployment insurance--nobody could. Unemployment pays enough for you to buy your own food.

DumBama just wanted to create as many new government dependents as he could.

What it had to do with the chart you posted is that many folks wanted food stamps during the recession and shortly thereafter, but had to wait as long as nearly 2 years to qualify. So while you're idiotically blaming Obama because SNAP participation increased dramatically in 2009 and 2010, the fact of the matter is that the increase was due to the Great Recession and not Obama's policies.

You mean like "Bush's fault"?

Please. You people own it, quit blaming and accept some responsibility, fer Christ's sake.

We don't own the Republican's housing boom and subsequent crash, I don't care how brain-dead conservative you are.

Neither did Obama fix it, goat boy. In case you were sleeping under a rock, the housing mortgage crash was entirely the fault of the queer Democrat Barney Frank.

More people actually lost houses under Obama, especially black folks. Why do you liberals hate black folks?

What reality are you living in man? You don't actually believe that stuff do you?

He's a conservative -- that means he lives in a universe of alternative facts.

 

[Faun]

What it had to do with the chart you posted is that many folks wanted food stamps during the recession and shortly thereafter, but had to wait as long as nearly 2 years to qualify. So while you're idiotically blaming Obama because SNAP participation increased dramatically in 2009 and 2010, the fact of the matter is that the increase was due to the Great Recession and not Obama's policies.

You mean like "Bush's fault"?

Please. You people own it, quit blaming and accept some responsibility, fer Christ's sake.

We don't own the Republican's housing boom and subsequent crash, I don't care how brain-dead conservative you are.

Neither did Obama fix it, goat boy. In case you were sleeping under a rock, the housing mortgage crash was entirely the fault of the queer Democrat Barney Frank.

More people actually lost houses under Obama, especially black folks. Why do you liberals hate black folks?

One fag from the minority party in one chamber of Congress does not have the power or ability to crash the housing markets, I don't care how rightarded conservative you are.

Your conservatism aside, Bush even campaigned on the success of his housing boom. It's his and Republicans. They own it.

"Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all-time high!" ~ George Bush, 2004 RNC acceptance speech​

This is true, Bush didn't try hard enough to stop what Clinton started. But you can't blame Bush entirely for that. Sure, like any other politician, he took credit for something even though he had nothing to do with it.

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending

Minorities' Home Ownership Booms Under Clinton but Still Lags Whites'

What Fannie and Freddie Knew

You're a nut. Bush campaigned on it... Republicans took credit for it.... the economy crashed as a result of it.... brain-dead righties now try to blame the left.

Sorry, chump, there is no blaming the left for this one....

 

[Faun]

That's why I didn't even bother to respond. Nothing you can say or do is going to change the opinion of a leftist. I've been battling those pinheads for the last 8 years on other boards, so screw 'em.

I like a good battle, especially when I know it's one I can win with facts.

DumBama doubled the food stamp role within his first few years of presidency as the chart shows. He did that by lowering the requirements in his Pork bill which the Democrat congress passed. Nobody on the left can deny that. He also increased the amount of food stamps that a person could collect.

Many people who lost their job in the Great Recession didn't qualify for food stamps because their unemployment benefits exceeded the monthly income requirements to qualify for food stamps. Because the administration extended unemployment insurance to as much as 99 weeks, many folks didn't begin receiving food stamps until 2010 and 2011.

I don't know what that has to do with the price of rice in China. Of course they couldn't receive food stamps because of their unemployment insurance--nobody could. Unemployment pays enough for you to buy your own food.

DumBama just wanted to create as many new government dependents as he could.

What it had to do with the chart you posted is that many folks wanted food stamps during the recession and shortly thereafter, but had to wait as long as nearly 2 years to qualify. So while you're idiotically blaming Obama because SNAP participation increased dramatically in 2009 and 2010, the fact of the matter is that the increase was due to the Great Recession and not Obama's policies.

Utter bull. Food stamp increase was included in the Stimulus bill that was passed immediately by the Democrat Congress. That's what increased the participation rate in food stamps.

You're deranged. ARRA increased SNAP benefits, it didn't lower the requirements to qualify. To dumb this down for you so hopefully, even you can understand.... that means for folks receiving SNAP benefits, they got more; ARRA did not cause more people to receive SNAP.

What did cause the number of SNAP recipients to grow were among the 8 million people who lost their job during the Great Recession. Many of whom didn't start receiving SNAP benefits until they exhausted their unemployment benefits in 2009, 2010, and into 2011.

 

[JoeB131]

Looks like 963 people were killed by police last year and 48 were unarmed. Thats about 80 deaths per month and 4 unarmed per month.

Both of those numbers are way too high.

To high to be acceptable or realistic?

Too high to be acceptable.

By comparison, in the United Kingdom, 54 civilians were killed by police in the last 25 YEARS!

We have a lot of problems with trigger happy cops in this country.

Also, "armed" is a pretty wide definition. LaQuan McDonald was considered "armed" because he had a pocket knife. Tamir Rice was considered armed because he had a toy gun. Philandro Castille was considered armed because he had a gun that he had a CCA permit for and which he informed the officer he had.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I like a good battle, especially when I know it's one I can win with facts.

DumBama doubled the food stamp role within his first few years of presidency as the chart shows. He did that by lowering the requirements in his Pork bill which the Democrat congress passed. Nobody on the left can deny that. He also increased the amount of food stamps that a person could collect.

Many people who lost their job in the Great Recession didn't qualify for food stamps because their unemployment benefits exceeded the monthly income requirements to qualify for food stamps. Because the administration extended unemployment insurance to as much as 99 weeks, many folks didn't begin receiving food stamps until 2010 and 2011.

I don't know what that has to do with the price of rice in China. Of course they couldn't receive food stamps because of their unemployment insurance--nobody could. Unemployment pays enough for you to buy your own food.

DumBama just wanted to create as many new government dependents as he could.

What it had to do with the chart you posted is that many folks wanted food stamps during the recession and shortly thereafter, but had to wait as long as nearly 2 years to qualify. So while you're idiotically blaming Obama because SNAP participation increased dramatically in 2009 and 2010, the fact of the matter is that the increase was due to the Great Recession and not Obama's policies.

Utter bull. Food stamp increase was included in the Stimulus bill that was passed immediately by the Democrat Congress. That's what increased the participation rate in food stamps.

You're deranged. ARRA increased SNAP benefits, it didn't lower the requirements to qualify. To dumb this down for you so hopefully, even you can understand.... that means for folks receiving SNAP benefits, they got more; ARRA did not cause more people to receive SNAP.

What did cause the number of SNAP recipients to grow were among the 8 million people who lost their job during the Great Recession. Many of whom didn't start receiving SNAP benefits until they exhausted their unemployment benefits in 2009, 2010, and into 2011.

Despite government claims, the job market is still lagging. The poverty rate is on the rise, The Journal says. And federal laws passed under former President Clinton and further under Mr. Obama are actually driving the enrollment rate higher. Those laws allow for those with higher incomes to take food stamps.

Food stamp president: Enrollment up 70 percent under Obama

And back in 2012:

It's true that the food stamp rolls have swelled more under Obama's tenure than under his recent predecessors. Also, his 2009 Recovery Act allowed even more people to sign up.

The number of people in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program has soared to an average 44.7 million in fiscal 2011, up 33% from fiscal 2009. Obama's stimulus act made it easier for childless, jobless adults to qualify for the program and increased the monthly benefit by about 15% through 2013.

Is Obama the 'food stamp president?'

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You mean like "Bush's fault"?

Please. You people own it, quit blaming and accept some responsibility, fer Christ's sake.

We don't own the Republican's housing boom and subsequent crash, I don't care how brain-dead conservative you are.

Neither did Obama fix it, goat boy. In case you were sleeping under a rock, the housing mortgage crash was entirely the fault of the queer Democrat Barney Frank.

More people actually lost houses under Obama, especially black folks. Why do you liberals hate black folks?

One fag from the minority party in one chamber of Congress does not have the power or ability to crash the housing markets, I don't care how rightarded conservative you are.

Your conservatism aside, Bush even campaigned on the success of his housing boom. It's his and Republicans. They own it.

"Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all-time high!" ~ George Bush, 2004 RNC acceptance speech​

This is true, Bush didn't try hard enough to stop what Clinton started. But you can't blame Bush entirely for that. Sure, like any other politician, he took credit for something even though he had nothing to do with it.

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending

Minorities' Home Ownership Booms Under Clinton but Still Lags Whites'

What Fannie and Freddie Knew

You're a nut. Bush campaigned on it... Republicans took credit for it.... the economy crashed as a result of it.... brain-dead righties now try to blame the left.

Sorry, chump, there is no blaming the left for this one....

Obviously you didn't read any of my links nor did you watch the video. Typical.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Those were broken promises which were unfortunate and make me question his ability to follow through and efficiently execute his policy ideas. Sure that stuff is absolutely worthy of scrutiny. But intentional lies? No. There is a big difference.

What do you mean they were not lies? They were written in Commie Care. If your insurance company adjusted your rates, you lost that insurance company. If your insurance did not meet government standards, you lost your insurance company.

Washington Post catalogues the biggest lies Obama ever told

 

[Slade3200]

Those were broken promises which were unfortunate and make me question his ability to follow through and efficiently execute his policy ideas. Sure that stuff is absolutely worthy of scrutiny. But intentional lies? No. There is a big difference.

What do you mean they were not lies? They were written in Commie Care. If your insurance company adjusted your rates, you lost that insurance company. If your insurance did not meet government standards, you lost your insurance company.

Washington Post catalogues the biggest lies Obama ever told

I see them as broken promises and missed goals, not lies. But if you want to call them lies then fine. Same is true for Trumps statements that I pointed out, correct?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Those were broken promises which were unfortunate and make me question his ability to follow through and efficiently execute his policy ideas. Sure that stuff is absolutely worthy of scrutiny. But intentional lies? No. There is a big difference.

What do you mean they were not lies? They were written in Commie Care. If your insurance company adjusted your rates, you lost that insurance company. If your insurance did not meet government standards, you lost your insurance company.

Washington Post catalogues the biggest lies Obama ever told

I see them as broken promises and missed goals, not lies. But if you want to call them lies then fine. Same is true for Trumps statements that I pointed out, correct?

Correct. But the difference is Trump's lies didn't hurt people--especially in the millions.

 

[Slade3200]

Those were broken promises which were unfortunate and make me question his ability to follow through and efficiently execute his policy ideas. Sure that stuff is absolutely worthy of scrutiny. But intentional lies? No. There is a big difference.

What do you mean they were not lies? They were written in Commie Care. If your insurance company adjusted your rates, you lost that insurance company. If your insurance did not meet government standards, you lost your insurance company.

Washington Post catalogues the biggest lies Obama ever told

I see them as broken promises and missed goals, not lies. But if you want to call them lies then fine. Same is true for Trumps statements that I pointed out, correct?

Correct. But the difference is Trump's lies didn't hurt people--especially in the millions.

Would you say that ANYBODY was helped by Obamacare? young, poor, pre-existing conditions?? Remove the fiscal issues for a second, which I completely agree need to be addressed, but do think anybody has been helped as a result of the ACA? If so, how were they helped?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Those were broken promises which were unfortunate and make me question his ability to follow through and efficiently execute his policy ideas. Sure that stuff is absolutely worthy of scrutiny. But intentional lies? No. There is a big difference.

What do you mean they were not lies? They were written in Commie Care. If your insurance company adjusted your rates, you lost that insurance company. If your insurance did not meet government standards, you lost your insurance company.

Washington Post catalogues the biggest lies Obama ever told

I see them as broken promises and missed goals, not lies. But if you want to call them lies then fine. Same is true for Trumps statements that I pointed out, correct?

Correct. But the difference is Trump's lies didn't hurt people--especially in the millions.

Would you say that ANYBODY was helped by Obamacare? young, poor, pre-existing conditions?? Remove the fiscal issues for a second, which I completely agree need to be addressed, but do think anybody has been helped as a result of the ACA? If so, how were they helped?

Sure people were helped, but that doesn't discount the people that were harmed.

 

[Papageorgio]

Cop gets away with killing unarmed citizen? It ain't exactly news, happens all the time .

Cop found guilty would be news !

The only reason the story didn't make headlines is that it wasn't a white police officer killing a black man. Had it been, the story would have played out from the day it happened until today. There would be outrage over the verdict.

You are a dishonest regressive, pure and simple, I tire of the lies.

 

[Slade3200]

Those were broken promises which were unfortunate and make me question his ability to follow through and efficiently execute his policy ideas. Sure that stuff is absolutely worthy of scrutiny. But intentional lies? No. There is a big difference.

What do you mean they were not lies? They were written in Commie Care. If your insurance company adjusted your rates, you lost that insurance company. If your insurance did not meet government standards, you lost your insurance company.

Washington Post catalogues the biggest lies Obama ever told

I see them as broken promises and missed goals, not lies. But if you want to call them lies then fine. Same is true for Trumps statements that I pointed out, correct?

Correct. But the difference is Trump's lies didn't hurt people--especially in the millions.

Would you say that ANYBODY was helped by Obamacare? young, poor, pre-existing conditions?? Remove the fiscal issues for a second, which I completely agree need to be addressed, but do think anybody has been helped as a result of the ACA? If so, how were they helped?

Sure people were helped, but that doesn't discount the people that were harmed.

Well that is relevant to this conversation. How many were help and HOW were they helped... How many were hurt and HOW were they hurt... Thats pretty important.

If the "help" was life saving care and the "hurt" was higher costs and a financial burden than those are relevant factors. If the help is 10 million and the hurt is 5 million then that makes a difference. So it is worth a conversation.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What do you mean they were not lies? They were written in Commie Care. If your insurance company adjusted your rates, you lost that insurance company. If your insurance did not meet government standards, you lost your insurance company.

Washington Post catalogues the biggest lies Obama ever told

I see them as broken promises and missed goals, not lies. But if you want to call them lies then fine. Same is true for Trumps statements that I pointed out, correct?

Correct. But the difference is Trump's lies didn't hurt people--especially in the millions.

Would you say that ANYBODY was helped by Obamacare? young, poor, pre-existing conditions?? Remove the fiscal issues for a second, which I completely agree need to be addressed, but do think anybody has been helped as a result of the ACA? If so, how were they helped?

Sure people were helped, but that doesn't discount the people that were harmed.

Well that is relevant to this conversation. How many were help and HOW were they helped... How many were hurt and HOW were they hurt... Thats pretty important.

If the "help" was life saving care and the "hurt" was higher costs and a financial burden than those are relevant factors. If the help is 10 million and the hurt is 5 million then that makes a difference. So it is worth a conversation.

Okay, then here is what Commie Care was all about: Besides the main goal which was to create as many new government dependents as possible, it was a vote buying scam that gave lower income people (likely Democrat voters) the ability to buy insurance at the cost to middle-income (likely Republican voters) Americans.

If you work part-time or full-time making french fries for a living, Commie Care was affordable because of the huge subsidies. If you are middle-America, Commie Care was unaffordable to you but who cares since you probably vote Republican anyway? Too bad, because you get no or very little subsidies.

On top of that, Democrats realized some employers would drop the benefit to their employees. Health insurance benefits were untaxed, so now that those people have to buy it themselves, they do so with after tax money. Add the billion or so dollars the government collected in fines every year, it was a big windfall for them.

 

[Slade3200]

I see them as broken promises and missed goals, not lies. But if you want to call them lies then fine. Same is true for Trumps statements that I pointed out, correct?

Correct. But the difference is Trump's lies didn't hurt people--especially in the millions.

Would you say that ANYBODY was helped by Obamacare? young, poor, pre-existing conditions?? Remove the fiscal issues for a second, which I completely agree need to be addressed, but do think anybody has been helped as a result of the ACA? If so, how were they helped?

Sure people were helped, but that doesn't discount the people that were harmed.

Well that is relevant to this conversation. How many were help and HOW were they helped... How many were hurt and HOW were they hurt... Thats pretty important.

If the "help" was life saving care and the "hurt" was higher costs and a financial burden than those are relevant factors. If the help is 10 million and the hurt is 5 million then that makes a difference. So it is worth a conversation.

Okay, then here is what Commie Care was all about: Besides the main goal which was to create as many new government dependents as possible, it was a vote buying scam that gave lower income people (likely Democrat voters) the ability to buy insurance at the cost to middle-income (likely Republican voters) Americans.

If you work part-time or full-time making french fries for a living, Commie Care was affordable because of the huge subsidies. If you are middle-America, Commie Care was unaffordable to you but who cares since you probably vote Republican anyway? Too bad, because you get no or very little subsidies.

On top of that, Democrats realized some employers would drop the benefit to their employees. Health insurance benefits were untaxed, so now that those people have to buy it themselves, they do so with after tax money. Add the billion or so dollars the government collected in fines every year, it was a big windfall for them.

All very fair points and I won't deny that those are the core problems of the law. But you also ignored my questions. Did the law get millions of uninsured people on the rolls? Did that end up saving the lives of many many people? If so then you have to be able acknowledge that as a positive. I get that the regulations had negative effects for businesses and for middle class people who were on the individual exchanges. They caused insurance agencies to drop certain plans which effected many people and the doctors they had access to. I realize that the subsidies are propping up the financing of the system at a time that we can't afford to keep feeding the debt. We can have an economic discussion about it to find better ways to make it affordable. But we can't have that conversation when you take the "Commie Care" approach and can't have a realistic conversation about the WHOLE picture.