Karl Rove: ObamaCare's Coalition Begi...

Karl Rove: ObamaCare's Coalition Begins to Fracture

There are 58 comments on the Wall Street Journal story from Jul 18, 2013, titled Karl Rove: ObamaCare's Coalition Begins to Fracture. In it, Wall Street Journal reports that:

The letter was unusually harsh. Addressed to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi , it was really intended for President Barack Obama .

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Wall Street Journal.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#49 Jul 21, 2013
conservative crapola wrote:
<quoted text>
We all read the rules. That's why your phoney au confused profile was removed for spamming.
http://www.topix.com/member/profile/aucontrai...
hahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Miami to LA: Hundreds turn out for Trayvon rallies...hahahahah what a crowd. I guess you can't even pay them to get off their butts now.

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#50 Jul 21, 2013
Your Ex wrote:
<quoted text>
Lolz! How'd that "auContraire" BS work out for you with Topix TOS??
Great, you ran from her just like you do from me with your personal attacks which shows you have nothing to counter facts with.
conservative crapola

Bethlehem, PA

#51 Jul 21, 2013
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>Miami to LA: Hundreds turn out for Trayvon rallies...hahahahah what a crowd. I guess you can't even pay them to get off their butts now.
More people are 'off their butts' than got off their fat con asses to go support the mor(m)on.

hahahahahahahahahaha
Stoneman

Boise, ID

#52 Jul 21, 2013
conservative crapola wrote:
<quoted text>
More people are 'off their butts' than got off their fat con asses to go support the mor(m)on.
hahahahahahahahahaha
I guess there was a closeout sale on screw-top wine the day they were supposed to riot.

A few got free flat-screen TV's in California breaking into a Wal-Mart. Good enough. Liberals should be happy.
Your Ex

United States

#53 Jul 22, 2013
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>Great, you ran from her just like you do from me with your personal attacks which shows you have nothing to counter facts with.
ROTFLMFAO!

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#54 Jul 22, 2013
Your Ex wrote:
<quoted text>
ROTFLMFAO!
Good, we both agree your a joke.
Your Ex

United States

#55 Jul 22, 2013
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>Good, we both agree your a joke.
You and who else?
AuContraire?
You know,
you can talk to yourself,
you can agree with yourself,
But when you start to argue with yourself
It's pretty much over...;)
Your Ex

United States

#56 Jul 22, 2013
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>Great, you ran from her just like you do from me with your personal attacks which shows you have nothing to counter facts with.
Speaking of facts, cupcake...
On the topic of this thread, the GOP vowed to
"Repeal & Replace" Obamacare.
What, exactly, is their "Replacement"?
Be very specific, with links & dates.
(Hint, they don't have a clue what the replacement bill would say, just "we'll have one ready when the time comes")
http://www.gop.gov/news
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#57 Jul 22, 2013
Bluebonnets-Thistle wrote:
<quoted text>
In 2007 Senator Obama voted for TARP and the budget bills his party passed immediately preceding the beginning of the recession in November of 2007 and the bursting of the housing bubble.
both Community Organizer/Lawyer and Senator Obama were supporters of the “affordable housing” push begun by Democrats in the 1990s and continuing into the 21st Century by congressional Democrats and their ACORN, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac allies. Obama is no where on record in favor of reigning in Fannie or Freddie or legal threats against home lending institutions lest they raise their lending standards
You bozo's caused the fkn recession, genius...then blamed Bush who tried to get fannie/freddie under control.
Several california cities have filed for bankruptcies...they can't pay the massive retirement and other entitlement benifits they promised years ago based on the dot.com industry they thought would ride forever....it busted in 2001 and was the bases of slick willie clintons bogus surplus. Never materialized and you clowns said "uh, bush spent it."
Blame, false claims and complete total mismanagement...the democrats.
There's so much nonsense in your post it's unbelievable, starting with your laughable claim that TARP "preceded the beginning of the recession in November, 2007."

Given that TARP was signed on October 3, 2008, and that the recession began in December 2007 and took a sharp downward turn in September 2008, I think we can see that you have no grasp on the facts whatsoever. The rest of your post bears this out, obviously.

Please learn something about the recession YOU JUST LIVED THROUGH before posting again. Thanks.
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#58 Jul 22, 2013
Stoneman wrote:
<quoted text>
"Bluebonnet" stole most of my thunder, correcting the majority of your drivel. But allow me to clean up the rest of your blather.
I was mistaken, I hadn't checked the council website for a couple of months since I last noticed "Kwame" on it. What's remarkable about him? He, along with the majority of the members THAT ARE STILL ON THE COUNCIL don't have an ounce of business or financial training or experience. From reading their bios it appears that the only qualifications necessary to sit on the Detroit council are:
1. Be black.
2. Promise to STICK IT TO THE MAN and distribute goodies.
3. It helps to have union ties.
Think it's racist for me to mention the first one? I didn't come up with it-- several "agenda statements" of the council members state that Detroit should be for blacks first, everybody else second. One said that since 85% of the population is black, 85% of the contracts awarded by the council must be to black businesses, regardless of the price.
And you are absolutely wrong about California not being close to bankruptcy. As recently as three years ago, while I was sitting in a hotel lobby watching the news, they were discussing suspending payments on invoices and payroll for lack of funds. What happened? Mysteriously, the funds from Lord Obama's "quantitative easing" ended up bailing out the pensions, payroll etc. and the problem was solved. Until the next bailout.
Maybe you should let Bluebonnet have most of the "thunder," since his post was utterly absurd and lacking in anything resembling facts?

lol

Talking about temporarily suspending payments = bankruptcy, now? OK, if you believe so it must be true.

As to Detroit, you must not have noticed that I said Kilpatrick was corrupt and the city, poorly run. I guess you were just too busy trying to "stick it to the man," hum?:)

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#59 Jul 22, 2013
Your Ex wrote:
<quoted text>Lolz! How'd that "auContraire" BS work out for you with Topix TOS??
Is that why you kept sending her porn of you lil feller.
conservative crapola

Easton, PA

#60 Jul 22, 2013
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/member/profile/aucontrai...

hahahahahahahahahahahaha

“Yeah, but...”

Since: Sep 11

MILKY WAY

#61 Jul 22, 2013
Your Ex wrote:
<quoted text>
Speaking of facts, cupcake...
On the topic of this thread, the GOP vowed to
"Repeal & Replace" Obamacare.
What, exactly, is their "Replacement"?
Be very specific, with links & dates.
(Hint, they don't have a clue what the replacement bill would say, just "we'll have one ready when the time comes")
http://www.gop.gov/news
You'll find out what the replacement is after it's enacted. Pelvis insists on it.
Billy Ringo

New York, NY

#62 Jul 22, 2013
The ObamaCare Coalition?

LOL - has anyone informed Rover the ACA is the Law of the Land? Passed by the US Congress, signed into law by The President of the United States and upheld by the US Supreme Court.

Perhaps Rover is too busy still trying to locate all those electoral votes he said Etchy was going to win.
Stoneman

Boise, ID

#63 Jul 23, 2013
chisholm wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe you should let Bluebonnet have most of the "thunder," since his post was utterly absurd and lacking in anything resembling facts?
lol
Talking about temporarily suspending payments = bankruptcy, now? OK, if you believe so it must be true.
As to Detroit, you must not have noticed that I said Kilpatrick was corrupt and the city, poorly run. I guess you were just too busy trying to "stick it to the man," hum?:)
I don't know how much more remedial I need to make this for you.

Most people (and corporations) that have to suspend their payroll and have no mathematical possibility of balancing their books GO BANKRUPT. THAT's where CA was a few years ago. But most people (and corporations) don't have a buddy that can print money (a. k. a. Lord Obama and his "stimulus") to get their butts out of the vise and buy some votes.

See, the Socialist/Democrats can't permanently resolve their financial crisis by allowing bankruptcy in CA because the CA gubbermint workers' union would have to accept new contracts, new retirement benefits, etc. And the unions are the people that put S/D's in office.

So eventually the buzz of the freshly printed federal taxpayer money will fade away and we'll be reading about CA's precarious financial situation again.

I delighted you recognize that Detroit, which has been run by S/D's since the 50's, is "poorly run". Are you capable of making the connection between their financial status and the S/D political philosophy? CA and Detroit citizens apparently will reelect S/D's until the well runs dry, then look baffled when the places go to hell.

As Thatcher said, Socialism works until they run out of other peoples' money to spend.
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#64 Jul 23, 2013
Stoneman wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know how much more remedial I need to make this for you.
Most people (and corporations) that have to suspend their payroll and have no mathematical possibility of balancing their books GO BANKRUPT. THAT's where CA was a few years ago. But most people (and corporations) don't have a buddy that can print money (a. k. a. Lord Obama and his "stimulus") to get their butts out of the vise and buy some votes.
See, the Socialist/Democrats can't permanently resolve their financial crisis by allowing bankruptcy in CA because the CA gubbermint workers' union would have to accept new contracts, new retirement benefits, etc. And the unions are the people that put S/D's in office.
So eventually the buzz of the freshly printed federal taxpayer money will fade away and we'll be reading about CA's precarious financial situation again.
I delighted you recognize that Detroit, which has been run by S/D's since the 50's, is "poorly run". Are you capable of making the connection between their financial status and the S/D political philosophy? CA and Detroit citizens apparently will reelect S/D's until the well runs dry, then look baffled when the places go to hell.
As Thatcher said, Socialism works until they run out of other peoples' money to spend.
States aren't corporations, and California has a bigger economy than many countries. Obviously the rules you claim to be true for companies don't really apply to California, which in any case has the full faith and credit of the U.S. government behind it. So that argument's not only not "remedial," it's nonsensical.

Democrats aren't "socialists," and no U.s. government would allow ANY state to go bankrupt or utterly fail, financially. This isn't the EU, and California isn't Greece. Again, you seem to dimly recognize this but want to blame it on Dems, illogically.

You want to connect Detroit with this mythical "Socialist Dems" conspiracy thing you have, but as I've noted, it was simply poorly run. Republicans are in fact running the show up there now, a GOP governor and appointed emergency manager. And only now it's going bankrupt. Connection? If I loved conspiracies as much as you do, I'd probably pretend it was.

Thatcher caused vast amounts of economic chaos and human wreckage in Britain. I don't think I'd use her as a positive example of ANYTHING.
Stoneman

Boise, ID

#65 Jul 23, 2013
chisholm wrote:
<quoted text>
States aren't corporations, and California has a bigger economy than many countries. Obviously the rules you claim to be true for companies don't really apply to California, which in any case has the full faith and credit of the U.S. government behind it. So that argument's not only not "remedial," it's nonsensical.
Democrats aren't "socialists," and no U.s. government would allow ANY state to go bankrupt or utterly fail, financially. This isn't the EU, and California isn't Greece. Again, you seem to dimly recognize this but want to blame it on Dems, illogically.
You want to connect Detroit with this mythical "Socialist Dems" conspiracy thing you have, but as I've noted, it was simply poorly run. Republicans are in fact running the show up there now, a GOP governor and appointed emergency manager. And only now it's going bankrupt. Connection? If I loved conspiracies as much as you do, I'd probably pretend it was.
Thatcher caused vast amounts of economic chaos and human wreckage in Britain. I don't think I'd use her as a positive example of ANYTHING.
Clueless.

Modern day Democrats ARE SOCIALIST LITE. You want gubbermint to provide you with health care, retirement, Section 8 housing, Food Stamps, on and on and on. You want gubbermint to regulate the hell out of businesses, in some cases (like GM) own them.

LOOK UP THE DEFINITION OF SOCIALISM.

Why can't you acknowledge that you libs are Socialist? What's the stigma about being a Socialist? Afraid you might get caught admitting affiliation with a form of gubbermint that has failed dozens of times in countries large and small around the globe over the past century? I guess if you can fake out the stupid people by calling it "progressive" you might get a few Socialists elected.

If CA and any other state is protected by the federal gubbermint from going bankrupt, then what is the consequence of any state completely throwing their budget away? Why not have EVERY state promise their unions huge salaries and retiement at 45 years of age? Obama will bail them out, right? Like the pinhead on Topix says, they ain't corporations so it doesn't matter!

Try really hard here. Detroit has been run by S/D's for over 50 years. The entire city council is still 100% FAR LEFT S/D'S. The only change has been ONE GUY thatthe governor sent in to clean up some of the mess LESS THAN SIX MONTHS AGO. And you claim there is no connection between the S/D philosophy of spending money with reckless abandon and taxing the hell out of anybody with money and the mess that Detroit is in?

Like I said, CLUELESS.
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#66 Jul 24, 2013
Stoneman wrote:
<quoted text>
Clueless.
Modern day Democrats ARE SOCIALIST LITE. You want gubbermint to provide you with health care, retirement, Section 8 housing, Food Stamps, on and on and on. You want ...the hell out of anybody with money and the mess that Detroit is in?
Like I said, CLUELESS.
Useless to argue with someone who won't address your points but instead just screams "socialist! socialist!" at anyone who disagrees with his far right stance.

Boring, really.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Non-Profit Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Dems Vote to Replace Elections Official Who Cla... Nov 26 PoliciaFederal 2
News Trolls take aim at solar power pioneer Elon Musk Nov 25 Solarman 1
News Trump Foundation Took Donations from Controvers... Nov 23 USA Today 1
News Donations to the Clinton Foundation plummeted a... Nov 21 YouDidntBuildThat 4
News Judge to IRS: - Strong showing' on Tea Party bi... Nov 18 Dr Wu 3
News Dixon enters guilty plea in felony embezzlement... Nov 14 Ya think 01 17
News Fight over government involvement in solar powe... Nov 13 Solarman 3
More from around the web