More Lies: "I never said you could keep it"!

Oh yeah !!

 

Good post...... "sociopath" - watching him during the 08 campaign, that's the word I kept thinking of as I watched this guy oozing w/charisma, coming across like a rock star, sucking people in like a vacuum, believing every word he was saying..... those are the definite traits of a sociopath. If he's not - but I believe he is - then he's definitely narcissistic, which is also a mental disorder........

 

So your logic leads you to believe the cause (the ACA requirements) didn't directly lead to the effect (cancellation for not meeting ACA requirements)?

 

No wonder you guys on the left have no shame. But I understand - if Obama being Messiah and TEH ONE gets away with lying, why can't you?

 

In other words you have no real point to make

 

Saul Alinsky would be proud.

 

Then you have no trouble showing me, and proving me wrong.

 

Bravo !!! Hey...I found the new Obama Logo:

 

And that's the definition of a sociopath. Also, a sociopath isn't capable of truly loving anyone else, not even their own kids...... no one.

 

I think you have had enough links, news media coverage and discussions within this thread to conclude you've been proven wrong. Delusional denial doesn't make you right and semantics are your last grasp at saving a lie from truth. I just find it humorous that you can still argue your point, which you really haven't other than some anecdotal nonsense akin to "no it's not" debate.

So I've provided plenty of ammo for you. I've pointed you to the lies, I've pointed to the cause/effect after your causality defense, and I've pointed you to the requirements of the ACA that state what a policy must have in order to remain in effect. So please do all of us a favor since we've put in the hard work for our side and just provide a source that proves he didn't lie and support it with your own rationale that the clearly thinking folks can understand rather than the gibberish you've posted in rebuttal so far. And causality still applies since you drew it into the debate.

 

"Integrity"? That's a foreign word to them.........

 

[video=youtube;3ebOnVOdDHw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ebOnVOdDHw#t=67[/video]

 

PERIOD/10char.

 

Things have changed under Obama. There is some investment I don't really understand. That somehow, "The One", either through his persona or through their perception of him cannot tolerate even ONE possibility of maybe there having been a miscalculation somewhere; they will not even concede five years after the fact what Obama himself has conceded that "Cash for Cars" was a disaster "we did not plan it well..." and yet his defenders throw every kind of straw man at that rare, but refreshing admission.

I have at times likened to the attitude of the bride the morning after, so sure of her "perfect man", despoiled and in denial now about the obvious: he snores, has bad breath etc.

There is a "Teflon" quality about him anyway. Reagan could make mistakes and be forgiven, Clinton too. But its as if this guy cannot have even one blemish, perceived by anyone.

Sad, because most adults learn that you can't ever improve without realizing your mistakes. Can't do that if you never make any and there is no such thing as a perfect human.

 

In other words you can't actually supply anything.

 

Unfortunately I believe most of those so called Democrats are far more left than that...it's the end result that matters, not how you get there, if that includes bribes, kickbacks, backroom deals, earmarks, lobbyists...whatever.

Now if you're talking about those on this forum that refuse to say he is lying...I can't help ya there.

 

[video=youtube;3ebOnVOdDHw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ebOnVOdDHw[/video]

 

I already have. Over and over. It is you who have provided nothing. Just click through all my prior posts on this thread if you'd like my supply of information and data and links that prove you wrong, over and over and over and over. You just fail to admit it and come back with a claim that I, not you, can't supply anything.

Go ahead, we have time. Just find a source and then defend it with your own words. I did it many times in this thread so surely you can do it just once. I set the example for you, as have others, now all you have to do is rinse and repeat with your version of the events as they have occurred.

 

93 MILLION Americans?

93 Million....as in more than FOUR TIMES the number of people who could not afford a plan?

So let me see if I have this straight:


The US needed to solve the problem of 20+ million Americans who could not afford health care.

They made a law that made everyone buy health care so that those 20 million people could now afford health care.

As a result 93 million Americans now LOSE the plan that Barrack Obama said they could keep.

And Barrack Obama and his administration KNEW this for over a year while Obama wasn't saying "If you like your plan, you will keep it."

What problem?

 

Really, he's in a rage? Did you try and splain to him the virtue's of Obamacare and the redistribution of wealth and the collective and all of that?

 

WTF? Are you seriously incapable of saying "hey guys I was wrong" and moving on?

Seriously, I bet only a few (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s would diss you for doing so, and they would be shot down by the rest of us. You're wrong here, just deal with it.

 

The latest numbers I saw yesterday suggest it could go as high as 129 million Americans getting booted off their coverage.

 

You're kind of beating your head against the wall here....but thanks for the information posted. Good source material.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes. That happens to be most of the liberal debate strategy, that and to accuse you of what their doing.

 

Just wait until the employer mandate kicks in.

 

Indeed.

This is what the neo-socialist New Left considers "progress" and "success".

I'm beginning to think they're ALL a bunch of sociopaths...