Charles Krauthammer: Why it all starts with repeal

Suppose someone -- say, the president of United States -- proposed the following: We are drowning in debt. More than $14 trillion right now. I've got a great idea for deficit reduction. It will yield a savings of $230 billion over the next 10 years: We increase spending by $540 billion while we increase taxes by $770 billion.

He'd be laughed out of town. And yet, this is precisely what the Democrats are claiming as a virtue of Obamacare. During the debate over Republican attempts to repeal it, one of the Democrats' major talking points has been that Obamacare reduces the deficit -- and therefore repeal raises it -- by $230 billion. Why, the Congressional Budget Office says exactly that.





Charles Krauthammer: Why it all starts with repeal | The Indianapolis Star | IndyStar.com

 

Yeah Believe Krauthammer. He believed in Bernie Madhoff and lost a bundle.

 

so in your unicorn life a person is not allowed to make a mistake or be wrong about anything? you izz a moron.

 

Krauthammer is one of the more civil, and well thought conservative columnists. He is easy to read, clear and backs up his information well.

But of course its just easier to add a strawman to counter his points instead of critiquing the basis of his article.

 

Did he really? I didn't know about that. I did hear that Yankees/Red Sox outfielder Johnny Damon lost a huge amount.

I watched a bit of the late-night repeat of FOXTAINMENT after the speech, and once again was underwhelmed by Krauthammer's supposedly brilliant analysis.

 

Well it depends, if this is specialty in life and he could not see the Madhoff problems. Yes.

 

Krauthammer wrote a speech for George W. Bush..then got on FOX to say what a brilliant speech George W. Bush just gave..

He did so without disclosing he wrote the speech.

 

I love that Willow posts this yet she herself gets government sponsored healthcare. Funny how that works.

 

Here we go again, using a highly partisan as a sole resource.
I recall only once when he has agreed with anything that came from the left of him.
Now Krauthammer is typically civil, but his opinions are solidly embedded with the neocon thought process. Therefore he naturally does view issues from that
prospective and critiques with that set thought process. His views should be considered but only has a part of the critiquing methodology and in melded with views from all other ideological sectors to come to some sort of conclusive analysis.
The same applies to say,,,,Paul Krugman and the likes.

 

Send me all the money I've sent in to the government and I'll get off it.. deal?