Obama Goes Toe-To-Toe With Stephanopoulos On "Tax Increases" [VIDEO]

Political Lore Blog ^

[DecoyJames]

The humor in this video is unquestionable. Whether or not you agree with a public mandate does not even matter. Stephanopoulos tries his hardest to actually question Obama, but of course Obama will not have it.

[DecoyJames]

Nice job Georgey boy!

[edcoil]

Have not see Catie in years - she looks good.

[Mrs.Z]

Zero thinks that paying $$$ to the govt. and getting a service in return is not a tax.

Even George S. seems to know that ANY FORCED $$$ to the govt. is a TAX.

[rvoitier]

I would like to see terms like: taxes, fines, penalties, charges, etc. be redefined as costs to the taxpayer. That way all this quibbling about "language" will go away.

[drew]

Talk about a girl fight!

[rod1]

or call it “mandated unfunding” (of taxpayers).

[An Old Man]

You must be a democrat! This one word covers everything crap is what democrats do.

Words have meanings! Each word you chose in your example has a different meaning because we need to be able to communicate those differences.

However not all is lost, we could perhaps use the word "loot" instead of "costs", thieves often do just that.

[Caipirabob]

Obama Goes Toe-To-Toe With Stephanopoulos On "Tax Increases"

More like Heel-to-Toe. This is Barry we're talking about. All there is to debate is who gets to be the girl first.

[Malesherbes]

Interesting isn’t it. Of all the professional “journalists” who interviewed BO, not a curious question, nothing of any import, just softballs. It took a former Dim aparatchik to actually offer something to chew on.

[Malesherbes]

Interesting isn’t it. Of all the professional “journalists” who interviewed BO, not a curious question, nothing of any import, just softballs. It took a former Dim aparatchik to actually offer something to chew on.

[Bigg Red]

Stephanopoulos tries his hardest to actually question Obama....

&&
Oh, please, are we talking about the same litte faggot who has a morning conference call with WH staff every week day?

[jcsjcm]

It really annoys the heck out of me that everyone keeps using car insurance as an example. Stating you are required to have insurance on your car, so what is the problem of requiring you to have insurance on yourself. It isn’t the same thing!

You are required to have insurance to protect others, you are not required to have insurance on your car to protect yourself. You don’t even have to have insurance to protect your car unless of course the bank still owns your car. Then you have to have insurance to protect the car so you can pay the bank back.

Insurance on cars = property damage to others, personal injury to others, paying back your own car loan.

Not required = personal injury, or if you own your car outright, damage insurance to your own car.

I know this to be true in my state since I pull all insurance off my car that isn’t necessary once I’ve paid it off.

Just ranting not particularly at anyone on this thread, just to the fact that no reporter will call him on this insane analogy that he is using.

[John Valentine]

Also, there is NO FEDERAL statute requiring any kind of auto insurance. This is a state issue.

There is equally NO Constitutional basis for Federally mandated health insurance.

[rvoitier]

Au contraire.

Don't take it so seriously. My point is that whatever the dems call it the bottom line is, IT'S TAKING MONEY FROM US and it's they who try to give that act too many names in order to confuse the clueless. In order to drive that point home and deny the robbers ambiguity, I was saying just call it one name.

[what's up]

bookmark for later viewing