If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(US Supreme Court) NewsFlash Supreme Court rules that Obamacare is constitutional. The bland mask that is Mitt Romney's face twitches with something called "emotion"   (supremecourt.gov) divider line 3382
    More: NewsFlash, obamacare, supreme courts, Mitt Romney, supreme court ruling  
•       •       •

14920 clicks; posted to Politics » on 28 Jun 2012 at 10:27 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

3382 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | » | Last
 
2012-06-28 01:10:25 PM  

SouthernFriedYankee: CPennypacker: SouthernFriedYankee: The end zone dancing is very much misplaced. The powerful will avoid shouldering any additional burden, while the powerless will not be able to do so. It's probably good news for welfare riders, but for the working poor it's going to be a disaster, economically. So much for hiring picking up. So much for economic recovery.

But hey, your team won, right? And that's all that matters.

Congrats.

Sounds like your team lost.

We all lost today. The oligarchs, specifically the insurance industry, are the only ones who won, which is not surprising, since they wrote the damn thing. Every time Congress ups the tax, they'll raise their rates accordingly. They've all got to be jizzing themselves right now.

Pyrrhic victory, folks. Believe it.


Why are their stocks plummeting today if they won?
 
2012-06-28 01:10:25 PM  

xdedd: Bwahahaha!

[i.huffpost.com image 640x246]


Did they really show that on Fox News? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

qorkfiend: FirstNationalBastard: Rwa2play: xanadian: *saunters into thread*

[narwhaler.com image 469x453]

Problem, GOP?

I can only begin to imagine the conservative butthurt today...

Believe me, it's bigger than you can imagine

/moar trollface

I haven't seen Butthurt so big since John Holmes plugged Bruce Villanch.

I haven't seen butthurt so big since Zed brought out the Gimp.


The problem with this victory for Obama is that it *could* come back and bite him in the ass. If the GOP has even a quarter of a brain, they could easily spin this as, "Obama doesn't care about poor and middle-class people, because HE JUST INCREASED TAXES ON YOU in the form of the mandate."
 
2012-06-28 01:10:38 PM  
www.vote29.com
 
2012-06-28 01:10:40 PM  

SouthernFriedYankee: CPennypacker: SouthernFriedYankee: The end zone dancing is very much misplaced. The powerful will avoid shouldering any additional burden, while the powerless will not be able to do so. It's probably good news for welfare riders, but for the working poor it's going to be a disaster, economically. So much for hiring picking up. So much for economic recovery.

But hey, your team won, right? And that's all that matters.

Congrats.

Sounds like your team lost.

We all lost today. The oligarchs, specifically the insurance industry, are the only ones who won, which is not surprising, since they wrote the damn thing. Every time Congress ups the tax, they'll raise their rates accordingly. They've all got to be jizzing themselves right now.

Pyrrhic victory, folks. Believe it.


sour grapes?
 
2012-06-28 01:10:47 PM  

Anti_illuminati: If you have medical insurance and you get fat and incur medical costs due to diabetes (for example) medical insurance pays for it.


At a cost to other people within the care network.

Remove the penalty of increased healthcare costs on fat, unhealthy people and you'll get more fat, unhealthy people since insurance companies will be unable to raise their rates or drop them. This is possibly equivalent to crashing my uninsured car into a nursery school full of children, calling Geico and then expecting them to put me on a $60/mo policy and incur all the costs associated with the condition I just created before I had insurance.

If we are going to socialize the consequence of behavior, it is within our rights to regulate individual behaviors.
 
2012-06-28 01:10:57 PM  

Alonjar: olddinosaur: The MSN poll is running 29% for, 62% against; I would be surprised this thing lasts past next January, too many are against it.

Either that, or the type of people who can sit around on MSN during the day already have health coverage, while poor people are.. you know, working their shiat jobs without net access at the moment.


Working? Hahahahhahaha. If they worked, none of this would be a problem. They are high on bath salts and making babies.
 
2012-06-28 01:11:01 PM  
SouthernFriedYankee: We all lost today. The oligarchs, specifically the insurance industry, are the only ones who won, which is not surprising, since they wrote the damn thing. Every time Congress ups the tax, they'll raise their rates accordingly. They've all got to be jizzing themselves right now.

you're just mad because we won't be able to pay for it all with one silver dime
 
2012-06-28 01:11:13 PM  
Republicans -

"We hate everything you want, even when it was our idea."
 
2012-06-28 01:11:17 PM  

vegasj: Theres a shocker.

Healthcare stocks are up... market is crashing.

WTG Obammy... nice one to fark up this country


Oh noes! The Dow is down a whole 1%! And it's all the fault of Obamacare!

Investor skepticism over the EEC solving its debt issues has nothing to do with it.

vegasj: cameroncrazy1984: According to NPR, Obama will address the nation around noon.

Cool. I'm tuning in.

This would be a great time for the Admin to fake an attack or something on the pres so that Marshall Law can be enforced.


www.wwnorton.com
Disapproves of your shenanigans.
 
2012-06-28 01:11:40 PM  

xanadian: The problem with this victory for Obama is that it *could* come back and bite him in the ass. If the GOP has even a quarter of a brain, they could easily spin this as, "Obama doesn't care about poor and middle-class people, because HE JUST INCREASED TAXES ON YOU in the form of the mandate."


I'm still not buying that, because most Americans have insurance, and I've said it twice already, increasing taxes on others is fine.
 
2012-06-28 01:11:44 PM  
Wow, that is a scary place... I would find it hard to believe that people actually thinhk this way if I didn't know a couple of people that are likey saying things like this today:

There is no more reason to consider myself a patriot to this shell of a country. It has died. Instead of calling it the United States of America, it should be the NWO Federation or North American Experiment or something like that.

I should go fly my flag upside-down like I did the day the Maggot signed DeathCare, but I don't want to alert any leftists to report me to the tyrant. Last time, one stopped by and was going to turn me in, and I'm over it.


And

That is what this monsterous decision has done to our once great nation. The Republic crafted by those brilliant and inspired men is now ashes.

And mocked the sacrifice of those who shed their blood in defense of the Great Republic.


And

This government...all three branches, and in one degree or another, both parties...are in collusion to place the yoke of unbridled tyranny upon the American people.

It will take blood to cast off this yoke.
 
2012-06-28 01:11:45 PM  

Rev.K: [www.lackenbauer.ca image 288x414]

Dear America,

I might be dead, but I'm proud of you.

- Tommy Douglas


The greatest Canadian ever. 50 years from now Obama may very well be considered the greatest President ever.
 
2012-06-28 01:11:46 PM  

Anti_illuminati: The_Sponge: Anti_illuminati: But he didn't raise my taxes.


True, but his broad promise was made to EVERYONE making under $250K.

Oh, so he used the royal "you" meaning everyone. Got it. So who did he raise taxes on? If not me, and presumably not you, then who?


Rational people arguing in good faith understand that when the context is "raising" or "lowering" taxes, it's income taxes being talked about. This new argument is basically "Cigarette taxes going up means Obama has broken his promise!" all over again, only it's somehow even more retarded.
 
2012-06-28 01:11:49 PM  

Phinn: Here's an idea: Everyone pays for his own stuff.


I can't afford an aircraft carrier.
 
2012-06-28 01:11:53 PM  

TV's Vinnie: i.huffpost.com


Full of win.
 
2012-06-28 01:12:03 PM  

SouthernFriedYankee: CPennypacker: SouthernFriedYankee: The end zone dancing is very much misplaced. The powerful will avoid shouldering any additional burden, while the powerless will not be able to do so. It's probably good news for welfare riders, but for the working poor it's going to be a disaster, economically. So much for hiring picking up. So much for economic recovery.

But hey, your team won, right? And that's all that matters.

Congrats.

Sounds like your team lost.

We all lost today. The oligarchs, specifically the insurance industry, are the only ones who won, which is not surprising, since they wrote the damn thing. Every time Congress ups the tax, they'll raise their rates accordingly. They've all got to be jizzing themselves right now.

Pyrrhic victory, folks. Believe it.


The bill limits the amount of overhead so if they raise the rates, or requires a rebate cheque to be sent to the policy holders, it'll be to cover the cost not to line their pockets.
 
2012-06-28 01:12:45 PM  

StoneColdAtheist: SouthernFriedYankee: The end zone dancing is very much misplaced. The powerful will avoid shouldering any additional burden, while the powerless will not be able to do so. It's probably good news for welfare riders, but for the working poor it's going to be a disaster, economically. So much for hiring picking up. So much for economic recovery.

But hey, your team won, right? And that's all that matters.

Congrats.

Are you always this dense?

The 'working poor' don't make enough income to have to buy insurance under ACA.

As a small business owner, I base hiring decisions on sales, not overhead. Claims that ACA will stifle hiring are BS.

I and every other tax-paying American is already paying for health care for the poor and working poor -- the ACA won't change that one iota.

What WILL happen is that some 30+ million more Americans will start paying into the health care money pool, possibly reducing actual costs on average, but certainly helping offset current budget deficits.

"My side" didn't win...America won.


My biggest worry will be those caught in a twilight zone of sorts. Not poor enough to get free medical aid (i.e. Medicaid, etc), but not rich enough to afford any of the health insurance plans. I don't know how wide that income gap will be, but those will be the people who will be sorely tempted to suck it up and pay the tax penalty. If it's a big enough gap, it could prove problematic for Obama.

Anyone know how big that gap might be?
 
2012-06-28 01:12:53 PM  

SouthernFriedYankee: CPennypacker: SouthernFriedYankee: The end zone dancing is very much misplaced. The powerful will avoid shouldering any additional burden, while the powerless will not be able to do so. It's probably good news for welfare riders, but for the working poor it's going to be a disaster, economically. So much for hiring picking up. So much for economic recovery.

But hey, your team won, right? And that's all that matters.

Congrats.

Sounds like your team lost.

We all lost today. The oligarchs, specifically the insurance industry, are the only ones who won, which is not surprising, since they wrote the damn thing. Every time Congress ups the tax, they'll raise their rates accordingly. They've all got to be jizzing themselves right now.

Pyrrhic victory, folks. Believe it.


My 25 year old sister who can't get a job because of the NYS teacher hiring freeze and can stay on our parents' insurance won.

My neice with athsma who would have been turned down for insurance won.

Who lost? Are they fat rich people? Fark 'em.
 
2012-06-28 01:12:58 PM  

o5iiawah:

If we are going to socialize the consequence of behavior, it is within our rights to regulate individual behaviors.


so does that mean you're calling for draconian regulation of wall street and bankers? after all, we bailed all those businesses out with public funds so by your logic, we have the right to regulate wall street very closely.
 
2012-06-28 01:13:39 PM  

SouthernFriedYankee: The end zone dancing is very much misplaced. The powerful will avoid shouldering any additional burden, while the powerless will not be able to do so. It's probably good news for welfare riders, but for the working poor it's going to be a disaster, economically. So much for hiring picking up. So much for economic recovery.

But hey, your team won, right? And that's all that matters.

Congrats.


notcoming.com
 
2012-06-28 01:13:53 PM  

meat0918: xanadian: The problem with this victory for Obama is that it *could* come back and bite him in the ass. If the GOP has even a quarter of a brain, they could easily spin this as, "Obama doesn't care about poor and middle-class people, because HE JUST INCREASED TAXES ON YOU in the form of the mandate."

I'm still not buying that, because most Americans have insurance, and I've said it twice already, increasing taxes on others is fine.


I realize that it could very well be bullshiat, but since when has the GOP backed off a talking point when it was obvious bullshiat?
 
2012-06-28 01:14:10 PM  

Weaver95: o5iiawah:

If we are going to socialize the consequence of behavior, it is within our rights to regulate individual behaviors.

so does that mean you're calling for draconian regulation of wall street and bankers? after all, we bailed all those businesses out with public funds so by your logic, we have the right to regulate wall street very closely.


but SOSHULIZM!
 
2012-06-28 01:14:18 PM  

mr lawson: mrshowrules: I was referring to the US adopting single-payer. There would be some modest short term reductions 20%-30% but it would allow you to keep help care costs in line with general cost of living increases. Make it sustainable which should be the real focus.

Obama's fix although needed will do nothing to control increases in insurance premiums that are insane compared to general inflation.

Agree on all points


No, it'll control the increases in insurance premiums. Not as good as we want, and definitely not in line with inflation, but it'll be better. What this does not control is health care costs. That's going to hurt us more in the long run if we don't get it under control.
 
2012-06-28 01:14:30 PM  
that justice system burns!
 
2012-06-28 01:14:35 PM  

barneyfifesbullet: Yet another way this decision screws Obama.....


This is why you should avoid ignoring trolls.

This shiat is hilarious.
 
2012-06-28 01:14:46 PM  
I actually fear for John Robert's life now.
 
2012-06-28 01:15:38 PM  
My DERP-y friend swears up and down we've just created a nation full of Medicaid dependents.
 
2012-06-28 01:15:39 PM  

ItsMyNameYouCantHaveIt: I actually fear for John Robert's life now.


I really hate to have to agree with you on this one but..yes. I think Justice Roberts is going to need a protection detail, at least for a little while.
 
2012-06-28 01:15:45 PM  

TV's Vinnie: [i.huffpost.com image 300x219]


It's....beautiful!
 
2012-06-28 01:15:53 PM  

Kittypie070: Coelacanth 2012-06-28 11:04:33 AM


I have a happy -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzF_y039slk

[dances happily with Ancient Fishy]

[www.dinofish.com image 373x231]

[cutearoo.com image 400x266]


i.imgur.com
 
2012-06-28 01:16:09 PM  

SouthernFriedYankee: It's probably good news for welfare riders, but for the working poor it's going to be a disaster, economically. So much for hiring picking up. So much for economic recovery.


Yeah, the working poor will be so mad that they get healthcare now (I doubt you understand how the law actually works and they will be getting heavily subsidized healthcare) , right and employers getting a big tax cut for giving workers healthcare will stop hiring now.
 
2012-06-28 01:16:30 PM  

Weaver95: o5iiawah:

If we are going to socialize the consequence of behavior, it is within our rights to regulate individual behaviors.

so does that mean you're calling for draconian regulation of wall street and bankers? after all, we bailed all those businesses out with public funds so by your logic, we have the right to regulate wall street very closely.


You create laws and then enforce them. All the regulation in the world didn't stop Madoff, Bear Stearns, Enron, Stanford, etc

And yes, I am in favor of the complete removal of public welfare for private institutions wall street included. I'm looking at you too, GM and Chrysler.
 
2012-06-28 01:16:34 PM  
While I understand the importance of this ruling, the law can still be repealed, which Romney is vowing to take action on day 1 if elected.

In my mind, the citizens united decision was much more important since a constitutional amendment is now required to undo that shiat.

/fark the Koch family
 
2012-06-28 01:16:41 PM  
By the way, if anyone was thinking that the Medicaid ruling would fark over people who live in states that refuse to expand their program, I just checked, and HR 4872, the reconciliation act that finalized the law, specifically offers credits to people under 133% of FPL, so they'll still be eligible in the exchanges.
 
2012-06-28 01:17:04 PM  
StoneColdAtheist
"What WILL happen is that some 30+ million more Americans will start paying into the health care money pool, possibly reducing actual costs on average, but certainly helping offset current budget deficits."


If you really think that providing something for free to people who do not pay for it will reduce the deficit then you better look at Greece.
 
2012-06-28 01:17:15 PM  

Lando Lincoln: Phinn: Here's an idea: Everyone pays for his own stuff.

I can't afford an aircraft carrier.


I can't even afford an internet.
 
2012-06-28 01:17:26 PM  

GhostFish: hinten: Who gives a shiat if it is a 'tax'? Do you really think that anyone but the most teabagging, hover riding, purple heart bandaid wearing Tea Partier is going to care?
How is that even a counter-argument?

Because it's a word of power, and they despise that they didn't have as big of a chance to use it during the debate over the law.

The net effect is the same, either way, but because the administration successfully avoided all the prejudice associated with the word "tax" during the debate - they feel cheated.


The people who will get mad about the word "tax" are folks who were, by and large, going to hate PPaACA anyway (or, likely, already did).
 
2012-06-28 01:17:30 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: Rwa2play: xanadian: *saunters into thread*

[narwhaler.com image 469x453]

Problem, GOP?

I can only begin to imagine the conservative butthurt today...

Believe me, it's bigger than you can imagine

/moar trollface

I haven't seen Butthurt so big since John Holmes plugged Bruce Villanch.


O.o

That's pretty big...

//ouch
 
2012-06-28 01:17:39 PM  

badLogic: make me some tea: Brandyelf: Freepervillle is trying to spike the online poll at WCBV in Boston (about halfway down the page on the left).

Show them we can do better, Fark.

My VCOM (Very Conservative Office Mate) is flipping over today's decision. I asked him if he hated the freedom of insuring his kids (he has a lot) until they're 26. He said of course not. I asked him if my daughter, who has a pre-existing condition (asthma) should be denied insurance when she becomes independent because of that. He said of course not. I then asked what he objected to, and he told me we were all going to lose our insurance and be forced to buy government insurance and we wouldn't be allowed to see our own doctors anymore, but would instead have to go to whomever the government tells us to. Plus we would have to pay thousands more every year to pay for insurance for illegal immigrants.

This is how people "think".

I'm having a similar debate with someone on Facebook. We've whittled it down to him agreeing that everything is great about ObamaCare except the individual mandate, which is against his freedom or something. That one I'm having trouble with, because that's more in the realm of belief and it's tough to debate in that area.

Ask him what should be down with people show up to the ER with no ability to pay and no insurance.


Actually he's already stated that he agrees with ERs having to provide care for anyone who shows up. But now that he has to have insurance by law, he doesn't feel like he's free anymore.

Eh, he stopped replying. Either he gave up or got busy, oh well.
 
2012-06-28 01:17:41 PM  

o5iiawah: Weaver95: o5iiawah:

If we are going to socialize the consequence of behavior, it is within our rights to regulate individual behaviors.

so does that mean you're calling for draconian regulation of wall street and bankers? after all, we bailed all those businesses out with public funds so by your logic, we have the right to regulate wall street very closely.

You create laws and then enforce them. All the regulation in the world didn't stop Madoff, Bear Stearns, Enron, Stanford, etc

And yes, I am in favor of the complete removal of public welfare for private institutions wall street included. I'm looking at you too, GM and Chrysler.


But the logical consequence of your position is that the Federal government has the right to impose strict and draconian regulation on wall street. is that what you advocate?
 
2012-06-28 01:17:42 PM  

colon_pow: d3sertion: colon_pow: i can't argue with robert's reasoning, but he should have kicked it back to congress and make them pass it as a tax.

or try to...

There's nothing in the Constitution requiring Congress to cite which part of the Constitution they're using to pass a law. Although sometimes bills will throw a jurisdictional hook in there, failing to do so has never been grounds for overturning a law -- the vast majority of legislation makes no reference to the Constitution for authority. If it was passed it was passed. Nothing about the language of the bill would change to "pass it as a tax."

when it was up for the vote, it was not defined as a tax. this whole thing is history's largest bait-and-switch.


It's not a bait and switch.... Nothing has changed about the operation of the bill. The only way the individual mandate was going to be enforced was by withholding your income tax return. They called it a fine. Roberts didn't buy that, but said it's closely enough related to Congress's power to tax and spend to be valid. It is, quite literally, nothing more than semantics.

Nothing has been "switched" here.... The law operates the exact same way as it was written to when the members of Congress voted for it and the President signed it into law.

The only way this could be a bait and switch is if no one read the damn bill. Nothing related to this part of the bill has changed at all.
 
2012-06-28 01:17:42 PM  

tallguywithglasseson: Precedent going back 35 years. Not exactly a new development.


Thanks for the response, I was not aware of this.

tallguywithglasseson: There were a lot of right-wing bloggers blogging about severability. As usual, they were best ignored.


Because if your job is to comment on news, reading applicable case law is clearly unnecessary...
 
2012-06-28 01:17:51 PM  
Meanwhile, in freeperland...
www.hostingbytes.us
 
2012-06-28 01:18:11 PM  

Zerochance: My DERP-y friend swears up and down we've just created a nation full of Medicaid dependents.


Yeah because we did have that before.

What did he think Medicaid was before this?
 
2012-06-28 01:18:11 PM  
If you all thought people were protesting before, just wait till you see what they do now that this has happened.

The problem with Obamacare is that it doesn't address the main fundamental issue with healthcare: That it is expensive. Simply mandating by law that people have health insurance of some sort under penalty of fine tax isn't going to change the fact that health care costs are ballooning.

The thing is this isn't a problem where we don't have a solution. Some very smart people spent several years researching this shiat and managed to find several sectors of the health care industry that were able to find ways of operating that drove costs of health care down to much more acceptable levels and were further able to derive a sound strategy for the healthcare industry to reliably lower the cost of care and still improve the quality of care delivered (mostly through decentralization and by making it much easier and affordable to get care for minor and easily treated illnesses via stuff like Minute Clinic and technology making it much easier to diagnose illness without needing highly trained professionals which lowers costs and turnaround).

"Mandated" health insurance doesn't work because it's not addressing the fundamental reason why healthcare is so expensive in the first place, and is only going to cause the problem to become worse over time, not better. Furthermore this is clearly a preemptive bailout for the health insurance industry, as they've mostly priced themselves out of the market, mainly because of rising health care costs, so if people think this is going to magically make their insurance more affordable (or significantly more so) or comprehensive, then I got a bridge in China I can sell you. And then of course there is the issue of "expanding" Medicare. How? With what money? Pretty soon Medicare will likely be as sustainable as Social Security is right now, which is to say, not very. I'm not attacking Medicaid or SS or the people on it, but these are all products of the Industrial Age and the Industrial Age is in its death throes right now as the chestburster that is the Silicon Era struggles to erupt free from its chest, just as the Industrial Age did to the Agricultural Age so many years ago.

To sum up, "Obamacare" fails because it doesn't address the fundamental issue that healthcare is too expensive and can't just be fixed by mandatory health insurance because a). the health insurance agencies are in a rock and hard place and can't really lower the cost of health insurance due to the nature of healthcare expenses at this time, but on top of that they are basically being given customers since more people are opting out of insurance because it's too expensive to have due to the expensive nature of healthcare in general, and b). Medicare is funded by the government and given the out-of-control nature of deficit spending will simply be unable to maintain as things worsen on that end.

The only real solution to our healthcare woes is through disruptive innovation via both technological disruptions/breakthroughs and business model reform.
 
2012-06-28 01:18:24 PM  

Lando Lincoln: I can't afford an aircraft carrier.


I work for Northrop Grumman, we just spun off Huntington-Ingalls, I'll see what I can do about getting you an employee discount, since my support desk still helps em out.
 
2012-06-28 01:18:53 PM  

ItsMyNameYouCantHaveIt: I actually fear for John Robert's life now.


No shiat. I hope they are careful. He's a smart man so this decision did take a tremendous amount of courage.
 
2012-06-28 01:19:11 PM  

bwilson27: Meanwhile, in freeperland...
[www.hostingbytes.us image 640x192]


Where are his three statisticals?!?
 
2012-06-28 01:19:13 PM  

muck4doo: Weaver95: mr lawson: LOL...... Premiums are going to go Through the roof!

/be careful what you wish for, ya might just get it

you mean that premiums weren't going to go up all on their own anyway?

As a fellow libertarian, I'm sure you must be cuming your shorts over news of more taxes. Isn't this an awesome day?


I know, right? These taxes could be much better used to supply more CEO bonus's and corporate welfare, along with feeding the starving war machine. Maybe it would be better spent on the war on drugs! God forbid that taxes get used to actually help the people.
 
2012-06-28 01:19:19 PM  

xanadian: xdedd: Bwahahaha!

[i.huffpost.com image 640x246]

Did they really show that on Fox News? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

qorkfiend: FirstNationalBastard: Rwa2play: xanadian: *saunters into thread*

[narwhaler.com image 469x453]

Problem, GOP?

I can only begin to imagine the conservative butthurt today...

Believe me, it's bigger than you can imagine

/moar trollface

I haven't seen Butthurt so big since John Holmes plugged Bruce Villanch.

I haven't seen butthurt so big since Zed brought out the Gimp.

The problem with this victory for Obama is that it *could* come back and bite him in the ass. If the GOP has even a quarter of a brain, they could easily spin this as, "Obama doesn't care about poor and middle-class people, because HE JUST INCREASED TAXES ON YOU in the form of the mandate."


I think Obama would welcome a chance to publicly debate tax policy with Mitt Romney; Romney's plan also increases taxes on the poor and middle class, but instead of helping people, Romney gives tax cuts to top brackets and increases defense spending. Romney wants taxes as far away from the debating table as possible for as long as possible.
 
Displayed 50 of 3382 comments

First | « | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | » | Last

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report