apparently he wasn't too fond of white people. But don't expect this to be brought up or addressed by the mainstream media
https://dailycaller.com/2013/08/21/black-teen-who-murdered-australian-jogger-posted-racist-tweets/
apparently he wasn't too fond of white people. But don't expect this to be brought up or addressed by the mainstream media
https://dailycaller.com/2013/08/21/black-teen-who-murdered-australian-jogger-posted-racist-tweets/
apparently he wasn't too fond of white people. But don't expect this to be brought up or addressed by the mainstream media
https://dailycaller.com/2013/08/21/black-teen-who-murdered-australian-jogger-posted-racist-tweets/
Latest: "Jackson, Sharpton and attorney Benjamin Crump are set to protest on the steps of the police station in Oklahoma where the arrest was made. The race baiters are set to argue that the chief of police is racist, and that Chris Lane was racially profiling the three young children (insert pictures from 2007) while they were merely out trying to buy bubble gum. Fearing this 'creepy behind guy,' the poor innocent three CHILDREN (emphasis this part...insert more pictures from 2005) had no choice but to defend themselves."
I can see it now.
Latest: "Jackson, Sharpton and attorney Benjamin Crump are set to protest on the steps of the police station in Oklahoma where the arrest was made. The race baiters are set to argue that the chief of police is racist, and that Chris Lane was racially profiling the three young children (insert pictures from 2007) while they were merely out trying to buy bubble gum. Fearing this 'creepy behind guy,' the poor innocent three CHILDREN (emphasis this part...insert more pictures from 2005) had no choice but to defend themselves."
I can see it now.
Another white man shot by young black male, two other blacks charged.
https://downtown.wmctv.com/news/news/185832-three-suspects-charged-deadly-shooting-south-main
Another white man shot by young black male, two other blacks charged.
https://downtown.wmctv.com/news/news/185832-three-suspects-charged-deadly-shooting-south-main
Another white man shot by young black male, two other blacks charged.
https://downtown.wmctv.com/news/news/185832-three-suspects-charged-deadly-shooting-south-main
Another white man shot by young black male, two other blacks charged.
https://downtown.wmctv.com/news/news/185832-three-suspects-charged-deadly-shooting-south-main
Obviously this isn't racism.
the definition of racism is being against Obamacare
Obviously this isn't racism.
the definition of racism is being against Obamacare
My blue cross blue shield raised about 30%,
I dropped it,
then I lost my job due to a 27% pay cut to comply with upcoming Obamacare,
Now that I am on Tricare, I am going to see anywhere from 40% to 60% raise in premiums.
Soooooo, I might be the wrong person to ask for an objective response,
Suffice it to say that it has already cost me plenty, and the rest of America is about to get a taste.
Olive garden and other similar resturants have cut hours back to comply, UPS cut spouse coverage.
This is the tip of the iceberg.
This law was meant to break healthcare so deeply that we would be forced on a single payer system. It has been the idea all along.
My blue cross blue shield raised about 30%,
I dropped it,
then I lost my job due to a 27% pay cut to comply with upcoming Obamacare,
Now that I am on Tricare, I am going to see anywhere from 40% to 60% raise in premiums.
Soooooo, I might be the wrong person to ask for an objective response,
Suffice it to say that it has already cost me plenty, and the rest of America is about to get a taste.
Olive garden and other similar resturants have cut hours back to comply, UPS cut spouse coverage.
This is the tip of the iceberg.
This law was meant to break healthcare so deeply that we would be forced on a single payer system. It has been the idea all along.
To be fair, the Republicans are not threatening to shut down the govt. They are willing to pass a continuing resolution that pays for everything just as before, except Obamacare. It would then be up to the Senate to either pass the continuing resolution, sans Obamacare, or risk a government shutdown.
I personally think that the Republicans will back down and pass a contunuing resolution that covers everything. I'd like to see it go to committee so they can compromise. A delay in the individual mandate of 1 year sems fair. If it's good enough for businesses it should be good enough for all of us right? Besides that, the exchanges are not ready and won't be on time. The Obama administration has missed almost 50% of the deadlines. If it isn't ready, why rush it? Just delay a year and iron out some of these issues.
To be fair, the Republicans are not threatening to shut down the govt. They are willing to pass a continuing resolution that pays for everything just as before, except Obamacare. It would then be up to the Senate to either pass the continuing resolution, sans Obamacare, or risk a government shutdown.
I personally think that the Republicans will back down and pass a contunuing resolution that covers everything. I'd like to see it go to committee so they can compromise. A delay in the individual mandate of 1 year sems fair. If it's good enough for businesses it should be good enough for all of us right? Besides that, the exchanges are not ready and won't be on time. The Obama administration has missed almost 50% of the deadlines. If it isn't ready, why rush it? Just delay a year and iron out some of these issues.
I agree, but it IS all about politics. The Dems are very good at the PR game, the Repubs are not. If it does go that route, the Repubs can say that they voted to fund everything - SS payments, welfare payments, benefits to the vets, etc and it was the Dems that decided that Obamacare was more important than the elderly, disabled and paying the country's obligations. They'd be correct.
If the govt does shut down, what would the public think was the better reason - shutting down the government because the Dems won't defund Obamacare or shutting down the government because the Repubs won't fund it? Right now I'd say the public would side with the Repubs on it. Of course they could never discuss it clearly and would lose the PR war waged by Obama, Reid and every liberal media outlet.
If I was in the House I would not vote for anything that had funding for Obamacare in it. Nobody wants the govt to shut down. Force a compromise and get the 1 year delay for all tax payers.
I agree, but it IS all about politics. The Dems are very good at the PR game, the Repubs are not. If it does go that route, the Repubs can say that they voted to fund everything - SS payments, welfare payments, benefits to the vets, etc and it was the Dems that decided that Obamacare was more important than the elderly, disabled and paying the country's obligations. They'd be correct.
If the govt does shut down, what would the public think was the better reason - shutting down the government because the Dems won't defund Obamacare or shutting down the government because the Repubs won't fund it? Right now I'd say the public would side with the Repubs on it. Of course they could never discuss it clearly and would lose the PR war waged by Obama, Reid and every liberal media outlet.
If I was in the House I would not vote for anything that had funding for Obamacare in it. Nobody wants the govt to shut down. Force a compromise and get the 1 year delay for all tax payers.
I agree, but it IS all about politics. The Dems are very good at the PR game, the Repubs are not. If it does go that route, the Repubs can say that they voted to fund everything - SS payments, welfare payments, benefits to the vets, etc and it was the Dems that decided that Obamacare was more important than the elderly, disabled and paying the country's obligations. They'd be correct.
If the govt does shut down, what would the public think was the better reason - shutting down the government because the Dems won't defund Obamacare or shutting down the government because the Repubs won't fund it? Right now I'd say the public would side with the Repubs on it. Of course they could never discuss it clearly and would lose the PR war waged by Obama, Reid and every liberal media outlet.
If I was in the House I would not vote for anything that had funding for Obamacare in it. Nobody wants the govt to shut down. Force a compromise and get the 1 year delay for all tax payers.
I respectfully disagree. It would be different if the Republicans have at least a counter proposal of some sort. After all, they make it sound like the evil of all evils so it's not so unreasonable to expect an alternative from them, especially consider that they have A LOT OF TIME to do so.
I agree, but it IS all about politics. The Dems are very good at the PR game, the Repubs are not. If it does go that route, the Repubs can say that they voted to fund everything - SS payments, welfare payments, benefits to the vets, etc and it was the Dems that decided that Obamacare was more important than the elderly, disabled and paying the country's obligations. They'd be correct.
If the govt does shut down, what would the public think was the better reason - shutting down the government because the Dems won't defund Obamacare or shutting down the government because the Repubs won't fund it? Right now I'd say the public would side with the Repubs on it. Of course they could never discuss it clearly and would lose the PR war waged by Obama, Reid and every liberal media outlet.
If I was in the House I would not vote for anything that had funding for Obamacare in it. Nobody wants the govt to shut down. Force a compromise and get the 1 year delay for all tax payers.
I respectfully disagree. It would be different if the Republicans have at least a counter proposal of some sort. After all, they make it sound like the evil of all evils so it's not so unreasonable to expect an alternative from them, especially consider that they have A LOT OF TIME to do so.
True, there are a lot of bad laws as you said, but the ACA is the mother of all bad laws, right after the Patriot Act. The pure size of the law and the fundamental change shoved down every Americans throat is the issue. Also the BS way that it was passed is a sore spot. Something this large that affects 300 million people (well minus Congress and their staffers, is that legal?) should have been planned better and at least read by everyone voting on it. We are seeing the results of bad legislation getting hurried through without anyone reading it or even having an open discussion. When something like this passes without one vote from the minority party, you can rest assured that said party will do everything within their Constitutional rights and power to stop it at every turn. Since the Dems were so dishonest in the way they passed this, I think the Republicans have every right to use their power in the House to try and kill it.
True, there are a lot of bad laws as you said, but the ACA is the mother of all bad laws, right after the Patriot Act. The pure size of the law and the fundamental change shoved down every Americans throat is the issue. Also the BS way that it was passed is a sore spot. Something this large that affects 300 million people (well minus Congress and their staffers, is that legal?) should have been planned better and at least read by everyone voting on it. We are seeing the results of bad legislation getting hurried through without anyone reading it or even having an open discussion. When something like this passes without one vote from the minority party, you can rest assured that said party will do everything within their Constitutional rights and power to stop it at every turn. Since the Dems were so dishonest in the way they passed this, I think the Republicans have every right to use their power in the House to try and kill it.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.