[quote=Cannon Shell]
But you keep on believing verbatim everything that politicians tell you. They would never lead you astray...[/QUOTE

I'm not the one who only quotes conservative WSJ op-ed pieces :rolleyes:

I dont need to make a case. It is painfully obvious that you view anything Obama through rose colored glasses. You want to make him out to be what you view yourself to be, center-right. But he isnt and really if you are seriously onboard with his agenda then you arent either.

It is ok to come out of the political closet. You and Arlen Specter will have something in common...

[quote=Riot]Do the facts trip you up?

If you dont agree with something said go right ahead and break it down why it is wrong.

You just keep being the only one to "see what's really happening" ;)

[quote=Cannon Shell]You first. You can use facts, too (but please, someone else having the same opinion as you do doesn't make something "factual" :D ) And free to use a response other than, "I don't like what what said, so it's bs because ... well, it is! And one is an idiot if they can't see that it's bs! "

I'm done :D

In the case of me versus you, that is true.

But seriously go back to the 1st post of this thread and tell me why I am wrong? I did the editorializing by the way so you cant knock the poor saps from the WSJ.

Centrist? He's a Maoist.

[quote=Riot]The problem is that you really dont have an opinion other than to blindly follow Obama. You are the Dee Tee version of Robert Gibbs.

[quote=Cannon Shell]WOW...that musta hurt!

Look out! They are coming to get you! To arms!

Can you argue that the Student Loan program wasn't in need of a complete takeover from it's current state?

http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/cr...lted/19417573/

uhh the president did want a public option. he asked for it especially at first and then backed off when the SENATE wouldnt approve a public option. You just proved he's governing from the left, lefty.

[quote=Riot]Thank God.

Thanks for commenting on my question.

It such a good bill it should have been pass on its own - oh wait the Heath Bill needed the "savings" in the SL Program to make it pass the smell of deficit reduction.
:rolleyes:

Yes. That was some time ago, though, right?

Because then the Senate and House each passed their own versions of healthcare reform.

Then the House voted upon and approved the Senate version, with reconcilation measures. Then the bill with reconciliation measures went back to the Senate.

Then the Senate Paralimentarian did find a couple things that sent it back to the House.

At that point, there were definitively enough House votes for a public option, and there definitively enough Senate votes for a public option (for when they got the bill back again) In the two weeks leading up to the reconcilation voting process, the progressive Dems pushed hard for a public option, and Obama told them to not put it back in there, even though the votes were clearly and easily there when simple majority was counted in the Senate (and the House version had already passed with a public option intact)

So what was passed for healthcare reform isn't even as "left" as what the Republicans presented, when they countered Clinton's healthcare reform package, and isn't even as "left" as what Richard Nixon proposed when he was President.

And Obama, when the votes were clearly there, for a second time backed off on the public option.

Doesn't seem so, when looking at the facts.

As one who had accumulated many student loans over their life, it was always ridiculous, to me, to have to borrow from the government, but have to go through a private bank to do so, and have that private bank just fill out the paperwork and collect service fees, then immediately sell off my loans back to a consolidation holder or the government.

I guess some are angry the middlemen banks, who essentially have been making a rather generous profit for nothing much other than doing a bit of paperwork, are now cut out of the gravy train?

The banks were taking no risk - they were loaning government money, the loans were insured by the government, and the payments went back to the government. They were simply a profit-taking middle man.

Obama cutting government waste and streamlining a massive government program - that's something to get angry about or disagree with?

[quote=timmgirvan]I guess only if one thinks Chuck's political takes are right on ;)

when did Obama or anyone else for that matter cut any waste or streamline anything to do with government? answer: never

I predict that the student loan deal will be a debacle, and people will wish that they could deal with a bank. In this case the middleman provided a service. The government can't even conduct a car sale last summer, or run a window caulking program without spending double or triple the estimate and taking much longer.

you'd think after 100% of government programs either fail or go bust people would start to put 2 and 2 together.

How about our department of energy. started under Carter in order to reduce dependence on foreign oil. at the time we imported 40% of our oil.
now 30 years later we import 70% of our oil and this department has a budget of 26 billion and employs 16,000. a smashing success! I can't wait until they've worked their magic on the healthcare industry.

You are so out of your mind its ALMOST comical. If there was ANY way the senate could have passed a public option, it would have been done. Obama REALLY wanted the public option, and only went away from it when he realized there could not possibly be any reform if they kept the public option.

This costly bill pasts last week and in Obama's speech the next day he says "this is the first step towards Universal Health Care"

And you say he governs from the center :rolleyes: I wish he governed from the center. Get real once and awhile.