Thomas Frank Recently Wrote An Article That Criticized Obama Severely

Trajan has a good question. The answer is: the GOP, infuriated with its losses and beholden to Pharma and Health Insurance, wouldn't play.

Now we have candidates from the GOP saying we will keep the "good parts" of Obamacare.

Sigh.
 
Unlike you, Trajan, who merely is a running dog. Go get your own party, Sir Drip.

:lol:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqrhZW9xIrY]Running Dog - YouTube[/ame]

I'd say it hurts sometimes to have a conscience, but you have no frame of reference...........press the button jake, time for another blast.
 
Trajan has a good question. The answer is: the GOP, infuriated with its losses and beholden to Pharma and Health Insurance, wouldn't play.

Now we have candidates from the GOP saying we will keep the "good parts" of Obamacare.

Sigh.

god you're such a moron.

Updated June 11, 2012, 7:35 p.m. ET

Emails Reveal How the White House Bought Big Pharma
'Then Rahm came in. Among other things, said very positive things about what we were doing.'

Editor's note: The following emails are among those released by the House Energy and Commerce Committee as part of its investigation into the health-care deal-making between the White House and industry groups. Some of the names were redacted by the committee for privacy reasons. A related editorial is nearby.

Emails Reveal How the White House Bought Big Pharma - WSJ.com

read it and weep not that anyone paying attention when Big Pharma stepped up with $100 million for pro obamacare advertising didn't know it already.....:rolleyes:
 
Trajan has a good question. The answer is: the GOP, infuriated with its losses and beholden to Pharma and Health Insurance, wouldn't play.

Now we have candidates from the GOP saying we will keep the "good parts" of Obamacare.

Sigh.

It worse than that Jake. And it is not 'candidates from the GOP', it is THE candidate from the GOP who trashes his own healthcare reform in Massachusetts and caves to Pharma, Health Insurance and the far right. The Romney you saw in Massachusetts was a product of legislation by a liberal state government, NOT Mittens.

Romney Health Care Plan Nearly Doubles Family Insurance Costs


Under Romney’s proposed health care plan, American families buying non-group health insurance would pay nearly double what they pay under Obamacare, according to a new study by Families USA entitled "ObamaCare versus RomneyCare versus RomneyCandidateCare." That includes both comparative insurance premium payments as well as out-of-pocket expenses.

The study finds that while RomneyCare in Massachusetts bears many similarities to Obamacare, neither are very similar to what Romney’s health care plan would look like if he were elected. Among measures identified in the study, RomneyCandidateCare would repeal Obamacare, turn Medicaid into a block grant and add an income tax deduction for purchasing health coverage. As a result, the study reports, not only would American families pay more for coverage, many fewer Americans would have health insurance at all. By 2016, 41.9 million more people would be uninsured under Romney than with Obamacare.

Study:

ObamaCare versus RomneyCare versus RomneyCandidateCare


Families USA is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, 501(c)(4) organization
that does not endorse, support, or oppose political candidates.
Its mission is to achieve high-quality, affordable health coverage
and care for all Americans.​
 
Obama did not repackaged Hillarycare. In reality he repackaged Romneycare. The Affordable Healthcare Act is much closer to the Republican proposals that were offered back in the early 1990's during the Hillarycare debate.

The GOP made a collective decision to obstruct health care reform and hand Obama his 'Waterloo'. They were given Frank Luntz talking points on how to obstruct reform while sounding like they were for it.

Again, you continue to either lie or you are just that blind and stupid.

Obama didn't do anything, the law we call Obamacare came about because he sat on the sideline for an entire year and only got involved when it became perfectly clear to everyone with a brain, which obviously excludes you, that nothing was going to pass. Even when he did get involved the only thing he did was position himself as the savior of the bill in order to maintain his historic position. Believe it or not, being the first black president is not his achievement, all of you need to get over it.

Still upset because I pointed out how dogmatic you are? If you actually had facts to back up your point you would post them, the problem is that absolutely no facts exist, all that exists is one story that contains an interview from before the 2009 midterms that the pundiots from the left have backdated.

Pundiots, I like that, anyone think it will catch on?

I have posted them numerous times. But you continue to ignore the facts.

And what Republicans did during the healthcare debate should not be deemed acceptable by either side. It was dishonest, contrived, destructive, an insult to We the People who were never a consideration by the right.

"If we’re able to stop Obama on this (healthcare) it will be his Waterloo. It will break him"
Senator Jim DeMint - July, 2009

Waterloo - March 21st, 2010
By David J. Frum, former economic speechwriter for President George W. Bush.


"At the beginning of this process we made a strategic decision: unlike, say, Democrats in 2001 when President Bush proposed his first tax cut, we would make no deal with the administration. No negotiations, no compromise, nothing. We were going for all the marbles. This would be Obama’s Waterloo – just as healthcare was Clinton’s in 1994."

...

Could a deal have been reached? Who knows? But we do know that the gap between this plan and traditional Republican ideas is not very big. The Obama plan has a broad family resemblance to Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts plan. It builds on ideas developed at the Heritage Foundation in the early 1990s that formed the basis for Republican counter-proposals to Clintoncare in 1993-1994.

Thanks for proving me right by going to the article from 2010 instead of finding something from 2008.
 
I hope Obama, if Romney loses because of the inanity and insanity of the extremists in his party, destroys the GOP as it is. It needs to be remade for the 21st century, with the far right excluded to form their own minority party.
Here's what I predict.

When Obama wins, there will be a MAJOR backlash from the rabid right and they will rant and rave about not being right enough.

However, sober heads will prevail and the silent majority of the GOP, those saner ones will OPENLY speak out against this rabid RWism that has overtaken today's Republican Party.

A battle will ensue and I believe the saner heads will win.

If not, then the GOP, as a party...is done for and another new party will rise out of the crusty ashes.


It doesn't make sense for the Republican party to move more left.At least it doesn't make sense to me.If that's the case then we might as well vote Democrat...I for one would rather pour crushed glass in my coffee instead of sugar.The GOP needs to move far right in order to counter the way the Democrat party has moved so far left.
See what I mean...?

The lurch to the further far right is beginning already.

Here we have a RWer that's clearly OBLIVOUS to the fact that their party is already at the furthest fringes of the far right.

I understand his point, however, I don't agree that he was a failure

I believe that Obama stuck to his principles in trying to reach out to the Republicans, although they had decided from day 0 to attack and obstruct him at every turn.

One of these days I am going to figure out why the defenders of Obama think everyone on the planet is stupid. The simple fact is Obama is a typical politician, he doesn't have principles. If he actually had principles we would not have a repackaged Hillarycare, nor would we have ever increasing deficits.

By the way, the Republicans did not set out to obstruct Obama from the beginning.

Here's the article: Thomas Frank: Obama’s squandered hope - Salon.com

Frank isn't agreeing with nor giving the Republicans any easy either, he places the blame squarely on GWB's shoulder, where it should be. His beef is that Obama did NOT use the political he had after trouncing the Republicans in 2008 to give them the death-knell that they deserved, instead he tried to compromise...dragging the country more to the right in the process.

Did you actually read the essay before you decided to talk about it, or did you rely on a Cliff's Notes to get the talking points?

Franks did not blame Bush for what Obama did, he points out that Obama did everything exactly the same way Bush would have if he got elected. That is all on Obama, not Bush. Yet you sat right here and defended Obama for the very things that you are now trying to blame Bush for.

What does that make you?

No one has been prosecuted, not one banker jailed, not one policy maker taken to task, non of the former Administration held responsible, in fact he's not only brought back some Clinton pseudo-Democrat RWers, but also kept many of Bush's cronies in their position as well.

This is the author's beef w/Obama, that he's not been liberal at all. The worst part about it is, that the Republicans have sworn that Obama is "the most Leftist, socialist, Marxist President this country has had since...like ever." WoW!!!

*SMH*

We can only hope that when Obama wins this 2nd term he learns his lesson and decides to take these hard RWers to the woodshed like he SHOULD have done earlier this term.

Interesting article indeed.

Obama is going to spend his second term, if he gets one, setting up his next job as Secretary General of the UN.
You are a liar of the highest order Quantum. The article DID blame Bush. The article lambasted Obama for NOT using his political capital in the beginning of his term for making Bush and his cronies pay. It said as much. It took me a long time to write up this post because I had to wait to find time to read it and read it thoroughly. Stop lying liar.
 
QWB, your point is meaningless. The GOP would not cooperate a plan that good Republicans, including me, had been pushing since the mid-1990s, all in the name of politics.
 
From day zero hub.

Who said to whom, "we won you lost." And that was supposed to have been when a deal was imminent.
Hey but don't let the facts get in the way of your bullshit story

I love this rw stuff you spew. I come from 2 rw states Utah and Idaho both are great states and are fiscally responsible. The most conservative state in America ranks fourth in job creation. Provo is number 1 in desire to retire city. and One of the lowest in obesity, unlike that fatass state Mississippi

Now if rw are wacko's like you so proudly proclaim, how come it doesn't hold up in the most conservative state in America.

and just on a side note. Why doesn't your boy obama take some of that egytian money and use it to pay down the debt, and create jobs, and pay welfare queens for their cell phones.
Obamaturd has done everything to keep the republicans from any input from day one. Libtards lie and remember different because they refuse to believe obamaturd is a bigger failure then carter.
 
AmericanFirst, your lying is a symptom of what Americans hate: your absolute disregard for America in your pursuit for power.

You are a symbol of why the GOP is going to lose a presidency we should have won very easily.
 
AmericanFirst, your lying is a symptom of what Americans hate: your absolute disregard for America in your pursuit for power.

You are a symbol of why the GOP is going to lose a presidency we should have won very easily.
No, it is the dimwits that are lying. Obamacare was pushed on us behind closed doors and all the executive decisions since to bypass congress. I do not disregard America, it is the dimwits and obamaturd that hate America, they prove it all the time. To defend what obamaturd is doing is the stupidest thing I have ever seen, but then it is the stupid left defending the fool.
 
Are you suggesting there’s not much of a difference between the Obama administration and Bush?

Well, certainly there are differences, of course. I don’t think Bush would have pulled out of Iraq so quickly. How soon we forget. That would still be dragging on in some way, I think. The stimulus would have been handled differently. Bush did several rounds of stimulus as president, and they always involved tax cuts. And I don’t mean to brush off the way the Obama team runs the apparatus of the state; go back and look at something like the Labor Department under George Bush, which was a joke. They were cracking down on labor unions. That’s what they thought their mission was. Of course, that’s no longer going on. The EPA — the Republicans put it in the hands of a series of people who were hostile to the mission, and that’s not going on any longer.

Pretty much sums up the article.
 
So they are saying Obama should of been a bigger thug ass than he already was

How lovely people this is what they want for President of our country

Shoving ObamaCare down our throats AGAINST OUR WILL just wasn't enough for these lovely Progressives..Now they want to start rounding up American citizens and prosecute them
2 years was NOT "shoving anything down your throat"

That's number 1.

Number 2, people weren't "against it" as you RWers like to say, half the people wanted MORE, however you dishonest mofos pretended that ALL the disagreeers were in the same boat wanting NO change.

That's how the Right operates you see, with lies and obfuscation. Just like you're doing now.

*SMH*

The stephanies and the other extremist losers are going to be shown the door whether the GOP wins or not. We cannot afford their presence in the Republican Party anymore.
I sure hope so.

I understand his point, however, I don't agree that he was a failure

I believe that Obama stuck to his principles in trying to reach out to the Republicans, although they had decided from day 0 to attack and obstruct him at every turn.

...

Blame the Republicans, blah, blah, blah. That is getting old and tired and is clearly wrong. Frank is right: "President Obama’s first term has been a dramatic failure compared to the rhetoric that landed him in office." If Obama had any honor, he would step down and let someone else run for President. The fact that he didn't means he's just another power-hungry politician who only cares about himself.
Again...another Far RW liar and obfuscator, pretending that the President has been a failure. What you're doing is cherry picking the article, picking the part that you like (to hear) which is that Obama did something wrong, and ignoring the other parts you don't like (to hear) which lambasts the right and holds them accountable.

If Republicans didn't lie...they'd have nothing to say.

*SMH*
 
I hope Obama, if Romney loses because of the inanity and insanity of the extremists in his party, destroys the GOP as it is. It needs to be remade for the 21st century, with the far right excluded to form their own minority party.
Here's what I predict.

When Obama wins, there will be a MAJOR backlash from the rabid right and they will rant and rave about not being right enough.

However, sober heads will prevail and the silent majority of the GOP, those saner ones will OPENLY speak out against this rabid RWism that has overtaken today's Republican Party.

A battle will ensue and I believe the saner heads will win.

If not, then the GOP, as a party...is done for and another new party will rise out of the crusty ashes.

Gee, Marc...I thought the GOP "as a party" was done for in 2008? Wasn't that the progressive narrative following Barack Obama's defeat of John McCain? Yet two years later the Democrats were handed the biggest shellacking in modern political history when the Republicans took dozens of House and Senate seats along with numerous Governor's jobs as well.

I'm quite curious why anyone would think another four years by a man who's shown himself to be totally unprepared for the Presidency is going to "hurt" the GOP? You think suddenly Barry is going to "get" economics? You think he's going to suddenly HAVE an economic plan to put people back to work after all these years and all those trillions he's spent trying? You think that in a remarkable turnabout that the Obama "charm" will actually work with foreign policy when he's basically been dithering for the past four years and most of the good will he entered office with has been squandered? You think he's going to suddenly be any better at choosing the people who work with him? Or are we going to continue to have more incompetents like Geithner, Summers, Napolitano, Holder and Chu running our government for us?
The Bush Administration was the definition of incompetence.

He got a booming economy with a SURPLUS and left us with a COLLAPSING economy and a the biggest deficit in history.

Obama was handed a sack of turds by Bush, and he managed to stabilize it. Not only stabalize it, but has it ticking upwards.

Stop lying Repubs.

Oldstyle and QWB: who do you honestly think would win the WH and which party will hold the Senate if the election were held this Tuesday?

Honestly?

I think that Barack Obama would win if it were held this Tuesday.

I also think that the reason for that is Mitt Romney has been facing the same uphill battle to get positive coverage from the main stream media that John McCain faced in 2008.

The truth is...Barack Obama has been an underwhelming President. His lack of leadership skills has been self evident and his policies have not been working. Foreign policy which was a strong point for him is suddenly very much in question with what took place in Benghazi. The economic numbers have been so abysmal for so long that we've almost become numb to them. If this were an incumbent Republican with these numbers and problems like Fast & Furious, Solyndra, Iran and Libya the media would be all over their case with a barrage of negative coverage. With Barack Obama you've seen nothing even close to that.
Hmmmm...so you're all for MORE RW networks then...right? Like another 2, perhaps even 3 more just like TheFOXNEWS or similar. Yes?
 
Are you suggesting there’s not much of a difference between the Obama administration and Bush?

Well, certainly there are differences, of course. I don’t think Bush would have pulled out of Iraq so quickly.

The article made that assertion, and ignored the fat that Obama followed the Bush negotiated timetable for withdrawal, just like you always do.

How soon we forget. That would still be dragging on in some way, I think.

Are you saying that, if Bush were president, we would still have troops and personnel in poised in Iraq? Do you think there are no troops in Iraq or Kuwait? Why would we have troops in Kuwait?

The stimulus would have been handled differently. Bush did several rounds of stimulus as president, and they always involved tax cuts.

Funny, so did the Obama version of the stimulus.

And I don’t mean to brush off the way the Obama team runs the apparatus of the state; go back and look at something like the Labor Department under George Bush, which was a joke. They were cracking down on labor unions. That’s what they thought their mission was. Of course, that’s no longer going on.

They cracked down on labor unions? How, exactly?

The EPA — the Republicans put it in the hands of a series of people who were hostile to the mission, and that’s not going on any longer.

Pretty much sums up the article.

The essay. Articles would contain actual facts, not just opinions.
 
Here's what I predict.

When Obama wins, there will be a MAJOR backlash from the rabid right and they will rant and rave about not being right enough.

However, sober heads will prevail and the silent majority of the GOP, those saner ones will OPENLY speak out against this rabid RWism that has overtaken today's Republican Party.

A battle will ensue and I believe the saner heads will win.

If not, then the GOP, as a party...is done for and another new party will rise out of the crusty ashes.

Gee, Marc...I thought the GOP "as a party" was done for in 2008? Wasn't that the progressive narrative following Barack Obama's defeat of John McCain? Yet two years later the Democrats were handed the biggest shellacking in modern political history when the Republicans took dozens of House and Senate seats along with numerous Governor's jobs as well.

I'm quite curious why anyone would think another four years by a man who's shown himself to be totally unprepared for the Presidency is going to "hurt" the GOP? You think suddenly Barry is going to "get" economics? You think he's going to suddenly HAVE an economic plan to put people back to work after all these years and all those trillions he's spent trying? You think that in a remarkable turnabout that the Obama "charm" will actually work with foreign policy when he's basically been dithering for the past four years and most of the good will he entered office with has been squandered? You think he's going to suddenly be any better at choosing the people who work with him? Or are we going to continue to have more incompetents like Geithner, Summers, Napolitano, Holder and Chu running our government for us?
The Bush Administration was the definition of incompetence.

He got a booming economy with a SURPLUS and left us with a COLLAPSING economy and a the biggest deficit in history.

Obama was handed a sack of turds by Bush, and he managed to stabilize it. Not only stabalize it, but has it ticking upwards.

Stop lying Repubs.

Oldstyle and QWB: who do you honestly think would win the WH and which party will hold the Senate if the election were held this Tuesday?

Honestly?

I think that Barack Obama would win if it were held this Tuesday.

I also think that the reason for that is Mitt Romney has been facing the same uphill battle to get positive coverage from the main stream media that John McCain faced in 2008.

The truth is...Barack Obama has been an underwhelming President. His lack of leadership skills has been self evident and his policies have not been working. Foreign policy which was a strong point for him is suddenly very much in question with what took place in Benghazi. The economic numbers have been so abysmal for so long that we've almost become numb to them. If this were an incumbent Republican with these numbers and problems like Fast & Furious, Solyndra, Iran and Libya the media would be all over their case with a barrage of negative coverage. With Barack Obama you've seen nothing even close to that.
Hmmmm...so you're all for MORE RW networks then...right? Like another 2, perhaps even 3 more just like TheFOXNEWS or similar. Yes?

What Bush "inherited" was the END of the Dot Com Boom and 9/11. You honestly think that Barack Obama would have handled that double whammy as well as Bush did? Since he's displayed zero competence when it comes to the economy I find that concept rather amusing. The truth is that Barry hasn't had an economic policy since Larry Summers and Christina Romer both jumped ship and scuttled back to their teaching positions at Harvard and Berkeley. His solution for our problems? Raising taxes in the midst of an economic downturn. Yeah, that'll fix things! (eye-roll) We've got a President who's worried about one thing and one thing alone...his own reelection. If you're one of the poor souls who's been out of work for a year plus...burning up your savings...don't count on any solutions from Barack Obama. He's giving us a steady diet of class warfare bull shit in order to try and get another term. He has no solutions...he only has excuses.
 

Forum List

Back
Top