General US Politics Discussion

[Cebra]

he might literally be the stupidest man ever elected to hold public office in the United States.

It's not even debatable anymore. It was fun to give him the benefit of the doubt for a while, but the man is just plain dumb. I'm not even saying it to egg on him anymore, he is completely oblivious to the world around him outside of his narcissistic bubble. The fact that a decent number of people think he speaks like a normal human being compared to that horrible elitist (aka decent orator) Obama is terrifying and speaks volumes about them. If someone spoke to me in his kind of discombobulated psychobabble in person I'd have to try not to laugh.

 

I'm curious, Chiari, what do you think about the fact that Trump didn't realize that the US Virgin Islands are part of, I don't know, the US? Can we chalk it down to "he's new at this"?

Edited October 14, 2017 by Cebra

[Chiarii]

I'm curious, Chiari, what do you think about the fact that Trump didn't realize that the US Virgin Islands are part of, I don't know, the US? Can we chalk it down to "he's new at this"?

It's a gaffe. Sure, it's an embarrassing one. Still, the willingness to write someone off completely on the basis of a stupid gaffe is really just an exemplary example of confirmation bias.

 

Maybe he is legitimately ignorant enough to not realize that he's their president. I doubt it; he seems like the kind of guy who is acutely aware of what's his. Either way, no one really cares about the virgin islands unless it's in their vacation plans.

 

All that aside, I don't give a sh*t if the man drools when talks, or doesn't recognize his terrorities for what they are, or wants to play a cock contest with some manchild in NK. As long as he does things that benefit me on a personal level (like cutting taxes for the middle and upper class/gutting entitlements) I'll support him.

[Tchuck]

sh*t, I'd wager most Americans wouldn't be able to tell if the US Virgin Islands were a part of the US either. Moreover, I'd bet most wouldn't be able to locate it and other American territories on the map either.

[Cebra]

 

I'm curious, Chiari, what do you think about the fact that Trump didn't realize that the US Virgin Islands are part of, I don't know, the US? Can we chalk it down to "he's new at this"?

It's a gaffe. Sure, it's an embarrassing one. Still, the willingness to write someone off completely on the basis of a stupid gaffe is really just an exemplary example of confirmation bias.I wrote him off a long time ago, at this point I'm just riding the waves of this continuing lunacy from the other side of the border. You're free to support him for as long as you like, but you've gotta admit that this so-called gaffe isn't exactly a one-off. The man is a walking gaffe-machine, and I honestly believe that he's so clueless that this wasn't just a momentary lapse in judgement either. I think he's seriously falling into Alzheimer's just as his father did - between these verbal mistakes, missing his limo right in front of him, missing Rudy Giuliani sitting right in front of him, missing Melania standing right beside him, and continually forgetting to sign legislature before he leaves the room, he's showing all the signs of a diminishing mental capacity. Watch some interviews of him from the 90s - he was always a expert at hyperbole, but he was actually fairly eloquent. The only remnants of that today are a constant use of "tremendous" between his ramblings. Before long it'll be Weekend at Donnie's with his cronies propping up his signing arm. Edited October 14, 2017 by Cebra

[Creed Bratton]

 

 

Quality post. I get it, you hate Trump. I don't know why you feel the need to say it over and over again. By the way, I've noticed that everything you post is anti-Trump in one way or another, which tells me that you don't know sh*t about politics aside from that you hate one person or one party.

Clearly you don't get it, if that's your takeaway from my posts. I don't hate Trump. It takes too much energy to hate someone that I don't even know. I'm just infinitely entertained by his stupidity.

 

 

Anyways, anything that the president does that reduces the government's involvement in health care is a good move for me. As someone who doesn't need to leech off of gov't sponsored insurance I'm happy to see programs like Medicare and Medicaid weaken. Beyond this relatable position, I'm also positively affected by crushing these programs due to the chart-heavy systems they operate on being an annoying pain in the ass and a waste of precious time.

 

And just like that, conservatives continue to show to the rest of the world that their values are inherently sociopathic.

[El Dildo]

I get it, you hate Trump. I don't know why you feel the need to say it over and over again. By the way, I've noticed that everything you post is anti-Trump in one way or another, which tells me that you don't know sh*t about politics aside from that you hate one person or one party.

look I get it; you hate human welfare.

I don't know why you feel the need to say it over and over again. by the way, I've noticed that everything you post seems to lack basic human empathy in one way or another, which tells me that you don't know sh/t about modern society... aside from the fact that you harbor irrational fear and hatred of an entire side of the political spectrum.

 

Anyways, anything that the president does that reduces the government's involvement in health care is a good move for me. As someone who doesn't need to leech off of the gov't....

BINGO.

there it is folks. the Conservative view of humanity.

 

if I don't need it? f/ck everyone else. find your own bootstraps to pull.

everyone who uses something that I don't need must be moochers and leechers and scum not worthy of dignity or care.

 

you're a pathetic excuse for a human and I'm ashamed you're a part of our species. the world would improve markedly if people who shared your views would suddenly die tomorrow...

 

It's a gaffe.

did you wake up from a coma yesterday?

it's not a "gaffe."

 

it's a pattern of behavior; of shocking stupidity that he repeats on a weekly basis because he's a f/cking idiot. you elected a f/cking idiot to the white house. he's a sheltered, dumb man who doesn't know anything about the real world. and you're happy with him being in charge as long as it benefits you personally; regardless of what happens to anyone else in the world.

 

you're sick.

your mind is sick.

 

All that aside, I don't give a sh*t if the man drools when talks, or doesn't recognize his terrorities for what they are, or wants to play a cock contest with some manchild in NK. As long as he does things that benefit me on a personal level (like cutting taxes for the middle and upper class/gutting entitlements) I'll support him.

BINGO.

there it is again, folks. conservative humanity.

 

f/ck the consequences as long as I get some financial reward.

world war 3 with North Korea?

who cares! Trump wants to cut taxes!

 

do you hear yourself? you need a serious reality check.

you're here with us posting on GTAForums, brother. you're not the elite class that is going to benefit from the kind of tax breaks Donald Trump is pushing. we've seen the tax plans they're proposing. the same 'trick-down' bullsh/t the GOP has always been pushing. and the only people it benefits are the rich. it doesn't help the middle class. it doesn't even help the upper class. these benefits only enrich the wealthy. you can't take advantage of the kinds of loopholes and exemptions that are being offered.

 

outside of the fact that you're only ignorant enough to support him, Trump doesn't give a sh/t about you. you're not part of the Golf Club elite / executive class. you're just another callous shill lining up to vote against their own checkbook.

 

what else is new.

Edited October 14, 2017 by El Diablo

[rome7]

Hustler Magazine founder Larry Flynt is reportedly offering a $10 million reward for information that could lead to the impeachment of President Trump.

Think theres any evidence out there?

I honestly think Trump is going through the early stages of Alzheimers

[Creed Bratton]

I honestly think Trump is going through the early stages of Alzheimers

I don't. But I think that they want people to start thinking that. Roger Stone had already planted that idea months ago. It would be a less embarrassing way to end his presidency than impeachment and criminal prosecution.

[Svip]

Don't try to explain with malice what can be adequately explained with stupidity.

[Spaghetti Cat]

unlike anything proposed by Trump or the GOP, the Affordable Care Act actually works and enjoys popular support by recipients, caregivers, and healthcare interest groups. so good luck with your Fake News narrative.

I don't think you understand the healthcare law you're supporting. Allow me...

 

Way back in 2010 Democrats and President Obama passed the ACA aka Obamacare. And while I strongly disagree, the Supreme Court upheld Obamacare as Constitutional. Obamacare was then changed AFTER THAT to include payments to insurance companies totaling in the billions of dollars. The AG's in several states successfully sued the federal government and won. President Obama's EO's were deemed unConstitutional (impeachment anyone?) but the feds continued to pay the insurance companies until this past week. President Trump reversed former President Obama's EO with his own EO, thus making Obamacare in compliance with existing law. The law you supposedly support.

 

If you are so against this action please tell us: Why should we give billions of dollars to the insurance companies instead of hard-working Americans and those in need? I look forward to the answer.

 

 

 

Chuck: Many moons ago I lived in the USVI. Not to be confused with the British VI. What would you like to know about St Thomas, St Croix, St Johns, or PR?

Edited October 15, 2017 by Spaghetti Cat

[Saggy]

 

unlike anything proposed by Trump or the GOP, the Affordable Care Act actually works and enjoys popular support by recipients, caregivers, and healthcare interest groups. so good luck with your Fake News narrative.

If you are so against this action please tell us: Why should we give billions of dollars to the insurance companies instead

 

The first bolded part answers the second bolded part.

 

More Americans are receiving health care now than in decades past, despite your, "hard working and those in need" rhetoric. The ACA may admittedly not be as rosy red as past insurance plans that those "hard working" were on, and so we must hear their constant bitching about more expensive premiums. But meanwhile, those "in need" are actually getting healthcare for the first time, so don't pretend to give two squirts about the needy while pretending the ACA has been bad for them in the same breath.

 

Of course this all comes down to whether we should have less expensive premiums for those "hard working" and just leave the "needy" to kick rocks, or if we should have a system which places more of the burden on the shoulders of those that can handle it in order to facilitate the most basic care for the needy.

 

Queue up some anti-socialism bullsh*t...

Edited October 15, 2017 by Saggy

[sivispacem]

Let's not forget, even before the ACA came into force American taxpayers were paying more per-capita for medicare, medicaid and other state-funded medical costs than most countries were paying per capita for real free-at-the-point-of-access universal healthcare systems.

At the end of the day, the sh*tty compromise you've ended up with is your own doing.

[Dr. Robotnik]

Of course this all comes down to whether we should have less expensive premiums for those "hard working" and just leave the "needy" to kick rocks, or if we should have a system which places more of the burden on the shoulders of those that can handle it in order to facilitate the most basic care for the needy.

 

It's not even that. The hard-working will become the needy eventually, and Obamacare is meant to ensure that it won't cost so much when they do.

[ten-a-penny]

The great President of the US decided to make a $300Mill cut from Wildfire-fighting programs..... while California is burning. Great f*cking idea.

 

http://reverepress.com/news/california-burns-trump-moves-slash-300-million-wildfire-fighting-programs/

[Spaghetti Cat]

 

 

unlike anything proposed by Trump or the GOP, the Affordable Care Act actually works and enjoys popular support by recipients, caregivers, and healthcare interest groups. so good luck with your Fake News narrative.

If you are so against this action please tell us: Why should we give billions of dollars to the insurance companies instead

 

The first bolded part answers the second bolded part.

 

More Americans are receiving health care now than in decades past, despite your, "hard working and those in need" rhetoric. The ACA may admittedly not be as rosy red as past insurance plans that those "hard working" were on, and so we must hear their constant bitching about more expensive premiums. But meanwhile, those "in need" are actually getting healthcare for the first time, so don't pretend to give two squirts about the needy while pretending the ACA has been bad for them in the same breath.

 

 

 

BZZZZT Wrong.

 

You guys don't understand the law do you? Trump's EO has nothing to do with the individuals, it has to do with the insurance companies. If you like the law, you should follow the law right???

 

Here is the ruling:

 

 

 

The Affordable Care Act unambiguously appropriates money for Section 1401 premium tax credits but not for Section 1402 reimbursements to insurers. Such an appropriation cannot be inferred.

 

Paying out Section 1402 reimbursements without an appropriation thus violates the Constitution.

 

 

-US District Judge Rosemary Collyer

 

https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2014cv1967-73

 

 

BOLDED PART ANSWERS ALL

 

If Obamacare is so great, and you guys agree with what was passed in 2010, then there should be no problem here right? If anything, I should be mad at Trump. So why don't you guys stick to your principals? Maybe because there are no principals here?

 

To flip it the other way, if you disagree with what PDT did, explain to everyone why the Federal government should pay private insurance companies to the tune of 7 Billion a year. If insurance companies are so eeeeeevil why give them free money? If you are all so concerned about the poor, why give away money to rich fat cats? Can you say hypocritical?

 

But let's break it down shall we? In essence PDT saved Obamacare from being ruled unconstitutional. You guys hate President Trump so much that you can't even acknowledge that. Sad!

[Not A Nice Person]

The great President of the US decided to make a $300Mill cut from Wildfire-fighting programs..... while California is burning. Great f*cking idea.

 

http://reverepress.com/news/california-burns-trump-moves-slash-300-million-wildfire-fighting-programs/

He obviously doesn't care about lives lost in blue states.

[Creed Bratton]

He doesn't care about lives. He doesn't care about anything other than himself. More evidence of that incoming.

 

I'm just gonna leave this here and watch Trump supporters try to defend him now:

 

 

 

Try not to get an aneurysm.

Edited October 17, 2017 by The Yokel

[Saggy]

 

 

 

unlike anything proposed by Trump or the GOP, the Affordable Care Act actually works and enjoys popular support by recipients, caregivers, and healthcare interest groups. so good luck with your Fake News narrative.

 

If you are so against this action please tell us: Why should we give billions of dollars to the insurance companies instead

 

The first bolded part answers the second bolded part.

 

More Americans are receiving health care now than in decades past, despite your, "hard working and those in need" rhetoric. The ACA may admittedly not be as rosy red as past insurance plans that those "hard working" were on, and so we must hear their constant bitching about more expensive premiums. But meanwhile, those "in need" are actually getting healthcare for the first time, so don't pretend to give two squirts about the needy while pretending the ACA has been bad for them in the same breath.

 

BZZZZT Wrong.

 

You guys don't understand the law do you? Trump's EO has nothing to do with the individuals, it has to do with the insurance companies. If you like the law, you should follow the law right???

 

Here is the ruling:

 

 

 

The Affordable Care Act unambiguously appropriates money for Section 1401 premium tax credits but not for Section 1402 reimbursements to insurers. Such an appropriation cannot be inferred.[/size]

 

Paying out Section 1402 reimbursements without an appropriation thus violates the Constitution.[/size]

 

 

-US District Judge Rosemary Collyer

 

https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2014cv1967-73

 

 

BOLDED PART ANSWERS ALL

 

If Obamacare is so great, and you guys agree with what was passed in 2010, then there should be no problem here right? If anything, I should be mad at Trump. So why don't you guys stick to your principals? Maybe because there are no principals here?

 

To flip it the other way, if you disagree with what PDT did, explain to everyone why the Federal government should pay private insurance companies to the tune of 7 Billion a year. If insurance companies are so eeeeeevil why give them free money? If you are all so concerned about the poor, why give away money to rich fat cats? Can you say hypocritical?

 

But let's break it down shall we? In essence PDT saved Obamacare from being ruled unconstitutional. You guys hate President Trump so much that you can't even acknowledge that. Sad!

Gee I wonder why he (Obama) had to pay insurance companies a bribe to cover Americans rather than dismantling private insurance and instituting a universal coverage system... It's almost like an entire party and its dimwitted lackies fought against it while screaming "communism" the whole time or something...

 

Meanwhile Trump is not going to continue those payments, so those Americans are not going to continue to receive healthcare. That's how that works. The ACA's principle was to cover Americans and thanks to the silly opposition the only way it could do that was to pay out to the insurance companies because the Republican "principal" was to fight "socialism" at any cost, including Americans' health.

 

Also I enjoy how your such a Trump parrot you're now prefixing and postfixing your arguments with his buzzwords. I can just imagine you putting the same inflection on them too. It's almost like you're just interpreting reality through some distorted lens to allow you to puppet them out in a seemingly appropriate instance. Kinda like how your president kept shouting "wrong!" during the debate. As then as it is now, I am sure there's no point in fact checking. But I bet I could get you to say "Fake news!" if I pull your string a little more... "Sad!"

[Creed Bratton]

Also I enjoy how your such a Trump parrot you're now prefixing and postfixing your arguments with his buzzwords. I can just imagine you putting the same inflection on them too. It's almost like you're just interpreting reality through some distorted lens to allow you to puppet them out in a seemingly appropriate instance. Kinda like how your president kept shouting "wrong!" during the debate. As then as it is now, I am sure there's no point in fact checking. But I bet I could get you to say "Fake news!" if I pull your string a little more... "Sad!"

He's been doing that from the start.

[El Dildo]

sit on it

 

 

[Creed Bratton]

Just when you thought that he couldn't get any lower: https://www.local10.com/news/politics/trump-speaks-to-widow-of-sgt-la-david-johnson

 

I wonder if he said the same to the families of three white soldiers. I'm not sure if that would make it better or worse.

Edited October 18, 2017 by The Yokel

[sivispacem]

It's been a pretty embarrassing week so far to be honest. Firstly we had news of the four SF soldiers killed in Sudan, which the French had to wade in and deal with so incompetent was the US handling of the incident.

 

Then we have Trump's response to the incident, which is as hilariously foot-in-mouth as it could possibly be.

 

And now a Hawaiian judge has suspended the new incarnation of his Muslim travel ban.

[K^2]

It's been a pretty embarrassing week so far to be honest.

This can be just a pinned welcoming message for United States by now. I don't remember a week that wasn't embarrassing since before inauguration, and even leading up to that, they weren't many. I'm just glad not all of it seems to make international headlines.

[Spaghetti Cat]

 

Snip

 

Here is the ruling:

 

The Affordable Care Act unambiguously appropriates money for Section 1401 premium tax credits but not for Section 1402 reimbursements to insurers. Such an appropriation cannot be inferred.[/size]

 

Paying out Section 1402 reimbursements without an appropriation thus violates the Constitution.[/size]

But let's break it down shall we? In essence PDT saved Obamacare from being ruled unconstitutional. You guys hate President Trump so much that you can't even acknowledge that. Sad!

 

Gee I wonder why he (Obama) had to pay insurance companies a bribe to cover Americans rather than dismantling private insurance and instituting a universal coverage system... It's almost like an entire party and its dimwitted lackies fought against it while screaming "communism" the whole time or something...

 

 

If were talking about dimwits, can we please read the court ruling that was quoted?

 

In 2010 the Obama Admin had control of Congress at the time. If paying off the eeeeeevil insurance companies was a good idea, why not put it in then? Why wait years later and do it unconstutionaly? Had nothing to do with Republicans. They wern't In power at the time.

 

 

 

Meanwhile Trump is not going to continue those payments, so those Americans are not going to continue to receive healthcare. That's how that works. The ACA's principle was to cover Americans and thanks to the silly opposition the only way it could do that was to pay out to the insurance companies because the Republican "principal" was to fight "socialism" at any cost, including Americans' health.

Which is Fake News. Again go read the quoted ruling. Only payments to insurance companies are being denied. Individual payments are continuing. Nobody is loosing any payments. Fake News.

 

If anything its crony capatilsim rather than socialism. So again, why do you guys seem so intent on giving taxpayer money to insurance companies? Wouldnt that be better spent elsewhere?

 

 

Also I enjoy how your such a Trump parrot you're now prefixing and postfixing your arguments with his buzzwords. I can just imagine you putting the same inflection on them too. It's almost like you're just interpreting reality through some distorted lens to allow you to puppet them out in a seemingly appropriate instance. Kinda like how your president kept shouting "wrong!" during the debate. As then as it is now, I am sure there's no point in fact checking. But I bet I could get you to say "Fake news!" if I pull your string a little more... "Sad!"

What stings? You and others are so totally wrong about the law that you supposedly uphold. If were all supposed to hate the eeeevil insurance companies and support government run healthcare then Trump did the right thing, correct? Im actually opposed to PDT on this issue. If anything I should be the one condemning Trump. Instead the hate is so strong in this thread that its put blinders on otherwise smart people. Im going to keep calling it how it is, dont really care what names you want to give.

 

E: fixed quotes

Edited October 19, 2017 by Spaghetti Cat

[El Dildo]

keep spelling "evil" with 3 e's.

 

it totally makes you sound more intelligent.

[sivispacem]

If were talking about dimwits

So what's puzzling me about your comments is the fact you're quoting a court ruling from May 2016 as if it were relevant and notable in this context. It isn't.

 

Trump in no way "saved Obamacare from being ruled unconstitutional" by enacting his executive order, because the executive order itself doesn't do anything other than broadly task the wider administration (specifically the DoL) with exploring other avenues designed to reduce state costs, and providing a get-out clause to allow people to buy short-term policies that don't meet the minimum requirements set out under the ACA.

 

Whether or not Trump is constitutionally able to blanket scrap federal subsidies to insurers, some (IE Section 1402) of which were ruled unconstitutional, but others not, is still an open question. But I doubt highly that the primary motivation behind the decision is one of concern for constitutional norms, given that Trump has apparently backed a bipartisan bill that basically resumes the same federal subsidies for insures that he scrapped less than a week ago.

[Spaghetti Cat]

Yes I do agree it's hard to follow where President Trump is going with the alexander-Murray proposal, yesterday it was a-ok, today it's:

 

I am supportive of Lamar as a person & also of the process, but I can never support bailing out ins co's who have made a fortune w/ O'Care.

This may be a negotiation tactic, not sure. It would appear that PDT is against the subsidies to the insurance companies, but I can understand where the confusion comes from, myself included.

 

Ok, so this Section 1402, it is unconstitutional. It's relevant now as it was in 2016, only thing that's changed is the President. So, President Trump got rid of the unconstitutional aspect of the law. (Setting aside I totally disagree with the Supreme Court on the ACA) Given that a) it was unconstitutional and b) it was paying those eeevil (yep) insurance companies, isn't his EO a good thing? If you liked Obamacare, and wanted to keep Obamacare, then this is good. Right?

 

This is quite the opposite of what was reported in Slate (btw the author was a history major fyi). Which is, sorry to say, Fake News. No puzzle, just straight facts.

 

Where I think you're getting confused has to do with the individual tax credits (that would be Section 1401). Those are still in effect, and I agree that only Congress can change or eliminate them. People who received those tax credits before will continue to still receive them. Again, the total opposite of what was reported. The claim that people will be put out is untrue. If anything the tax credits will increase, good news right? People in need get $$ insurance companies don't. It's as simple as that.

[sivispacem]

Given that a) it was unconstitutional and b) it was paying those eeevil (yep) insurance companies, isn't his EO a good thing?

No, for reasons I've already outlined. Namely the fact that the EO has absolutely nothing to do with the suspension of federal subsidies for insurance providers, which was a separate executive decision. But also because the 1402 unfunded mandate is not the sole source of direct government economic subsidy to insurers, and only 1402 was declared unconstitutional, not other provisions. Indeed, the 1401 tax credit system is in effect a direct federal subsidisation of insurers. The issue with 1402 is not that the act of subsidising the insurers is unconstitutional, it's the manner through which these funds were obtained. And even putting this aside, a low court declaring a single clause of the ACA unconstitutional is hardly a significant blow, given that the highest courts in the land have already ruled on the fundamental legality of the ACA and deemed it constitutional. So such a ruling isn't even remotely close to the death knell you allege.

 

Which is, sorry to say, Fake News.

The irony of you peppering your arguments with these worthless and- in the context of my comments on the subject at least- entirely irrelevant Trumpisms whilst simultaneously getting wrong the details of Trump's executive order, his subsequent actions, the conclusions of the May 2016 judgement and the impact of that on the ACA is not lost on me.

[Creed Bratton]

He just accused the FBI of colluding with the DNC and with Russia to create "The Dossier". If he's accusing the FBI, knowing Trump, he wants people to think that the FBI can't be trusted. And why would he want that if he's innocent and if the dossier is fake?

Edited October 19, 2017 by The Yokel

[Spaghetti Cat]

 

Given that a) it was unconstitutional and b) it was paying those eeevil (yep) insurance companies, isn't his EO a good thing?

No, for reasons I've already outlined. Namely the fact that the EO has absolutely nothing to do with the suspension of federal subsidies for insurance providers, which was a separate executive decision. But also because the 1402 unfunded mandate is not the sole source of direct government economic subsidy to insurers, and only 1402 was declared unconstitutional, not other provisions. Indeed, the 1401 tax credit system is in effect a direct federal subsidisation of insurers. The issue with 1402 is not that the act of subsidising the insurers is unconstitutional, it's the manner through which these funds were obtained. And even putting this aside, a low court declaring a single clause of the ACA unconstitutional is hardly a significant blow, given that the highest courts in the land have already ruled on the fundamental legality of the ACA and deemed it constitutional. So such a ruling isn't even remotely close to the death knell you allege.

 

Which is, sorry to say, Fake News.

The irony of you peppering your arguments with these worthless and- in the context of my comments on the subject at least- entirely irrelevant Trumpisms whilst simultaneously getting wrong the details of Trump's executive order, his subsequent actions, the conclusions of the May 2016 judgement and the impact of that on the ACA is not lost on me.

 

 

There are probably a bunch of people who's eyes glaze over whenever someone talks about Insurance laws and section this or that, so risking that I'll give a response, but I need to explain something first...

 

Ok, American Civics 101:

 

There are three separate but equal branches, Legislative, Executive, and Judicial.

 

Legislative (house & senate) - Writes laws and provides funding.

 

Executive (President) - Carries out the laws that the Legislative Branch passes.

 

Judicial (Supreme Court) - Determines if the laws passed by Congress or executed by the President are Constitutional.

 

 

 

Obamacare/ACA was passed by Congress and signed by President Obama. And while I strongly strongly disagree, the Supreme Court upheld Obamacare in 2012. AFTER the law was ruled Constitutional President Obama then ADDED funding to pay the insurance companies. All by himself and without Congressional approval. This is unConstitutional and quite frankly an impeachable offense. Therefore the law passed by Congress and approved by the Supreme Court WAS in violation of the Constitution. Attorneys Generals from many states sued the Federal Government and won, the case was headed for the Supreme Court. Since the payment to the insurance companies was enacted by Executive Order, President Trump decided to use an EO to void the previous EO. Therefore making an unConstitutional law back into a valid one.

 

Having said all that I want Congress to do their job and repeal Obamacare. But we are where we are. So, PDT saved Obamacare from being stuck in the courts for years AND removed payoffs for the insurance companies. As a good Progressive, isn't that a good thing? Do you not find it hypocritical and hate-filled to not acknowledge this fact?

 

Furthermore isn't the very definition of Fake News articles or stories meant to convey the opposite of the truth? Saying that millions and millions of people are loosing coverage is totally false. The tax-credits to individuals will continue without interruption. Fake News Yokel has a continual habit of planting these stories, which are easily proven wrong. It's not lost on me either that you seem to have a habit of looking the other way for one side, but not the other. Not quite the centrist are we?

 

 

 

OT: Minor bribery and the Russians collusion, nothing to see here folks, move along: http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/355749-fbi-uncovered-russian-bribery-plot-before-obama-administration