Unbelievable Obama Gaff

ccbatson · September-20-09, 07:21 PM

Well, not really a "gaff" but that he would have the public believe that he was not aware that ACORN received public money? Who does he think he is fooling and how stupid does he think the public is?

UFO · September-20-09, 07:28 PM

When did he say this? If he did then he is a flat out liar considering he used to run with them when he was younger.

**ejames01** · September-20-09, 08:16 PM

Does anyone that doesn't watch Hannity or Glenn Beck even give a f*ck about ACORN?

ccbatson · September-20-09, 08:31 PM

When? Today, CNN and all of the other talk shows he did [[not including FOX).

UFO · September-20-09, 08:32 PM

no more cable remember? Might e a good thing for me. Im tired of this back and forth nonsense anyway.

**jams** · September-20-09, 08:40 PM

Oh, my Gawd, Cc makes another mountain out of a molehill.

[[despite not presenting any credible evidence)

**ZRX Doug** · September-20-09, 09:55 PM

Originally Posted by jams

Oh, my Gawd, Cc makes another mountain out of a molehill.

[[despite not presenting any credible evidence)

Jesus, dude..would it kill you to do a Google search once in a while?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090921/...us_obama_acorn

And the relevant quote:
"Frankly, it's not really something I've followed closely," Obama said. "I didn't even know that ACORN was getting a whole lot of federal money."

But the big O's REAL jaw dropper came during his interview with George Snuffleupagus, when he claimed that being A) forced to buy health insurance or B) paying a tax penalty for refusal was "not a form of taxation." [[I paraphrase, forgive me..)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090921/..._care_overhaul

I suspect you left-wing folk are gonna kick George out of the club for this..he broke the rules and talked mean to Obama.
Must be a racist.

ccbatson · September-20-09, 09:58 PM

I disagree that the big surprise was the taxation on health care comment. Why? His comment on ACORN is a such a bold face lie that it defies reasonable expectations, even from him.

**Detroitej72** · September-21-09, 12:38 AM

Yawn, must be a slow day for news...

**East Detroit** · September-21-09, 12:59 AM

Today's semantics lesson for the reading comprehension challenged:

Sentence 1:
"I didn't even know that ACORN was getting a whole lot of federal money."

Sentence 2:
"I didn't even know that ACORN was getting federal money."

Can you spot the difference in meaning?

**alsodave** · September-21-09, 06:34 AM

Originally Posted by East Detroit

Today's semantics lesson for the reading comprehension challenged:

Sentence 1:
"I didn't even know that ACORN was getting a whole lot of federal money."

Sentence 2:
"I didn't even know that ACORN was getting federal money."

Can you spot the difference in meaning?

Anti-semanticism is alive and well on the Non-Detroit side.

**ZRX Doug** · September-21-09, 09:43 AM

Originally Posted by East Detroit

Today's semantics lesson for the reading comprehension challenged:

Sentence 1:
"I didn't even know that ACORN was getting a whole lot of federal money."

Sentence 2:
"I didn't even know that ACORN was getting federal money."

Can you spot the difference in meaning?

Of course I can..the qualifier "a whole lot of" is standard CYA practice for any politician..have you ever heard Obama say anything WITHOUT a qualifier?
Bottom line is that he's either oblivious to his own legislation and less aware of where he spends money than us lowly constituents are, or he's lying thru his teeth..
Ignorant, or lying. Hmmm.
Either way, not good..

**Diehard** · September-21-09, 10:42 AM

Anyone know how much federal money ACORN was receiving, or what percentage of their funding came from there? That might help determine what's "a whole lot of."

**MCP-001** · September-21-09, 10:52 AM

Calling it a "gaff" is a major understatement.

ACORN was a major sponsor of Pres. B.O. during the election. He knew that.

For a man of his position to claim otherwise is insulting to our intelligence.

**Sstashmoo** · September-21-09, 10:55 AM

Quote: "ACORN was a major sponsor of Pres. B.O."

And why there needs to be a cap on campaign contributions, soft-money eliminated and lobbyists expelled from the country.

**bailey** · September-21-09, 11:09 AM

But the big O's REAL jaw dropper came during his interview with George Snuffleupagus, when he claimed that being A) forced to buy health insurance or B) paying a tax penalty for refusal was "not a form of taxation." [[I paraphrase, forgive me..)

So, are you also against penalties for not having auto insurance? It seems to me this plan would be something the "right" would not only NOT be against but a proposal they would actively demand as part of any reform. You are requiring deadbeats to pay into the system...just like with no-fault insurance, what is the problem?

**MCP-001** · September-21-09, 11:22 AM

Originally Posted by bailey

So, are you also against penalties for not having auto insurance? It seems to me this plan would be something the "right" would not only NOT be against but a proposal they would actively demand as part of any reform. You are requiring deadbeats to pay into the system...just like with no-fault insurance, what is the problem?

Big problem with that analogy.

People are required to buy auto insurance if they choose to drive.

Are you trying to imply that they are required to purchase health insurance if they want to live?

OABTW, the deadbeat problem can easily be dealt with by charging everyone for their doctor/emergency room visits, rather than give them a free-ride with federal laws like EMTALA [[signed into law by Reagan, no less).

**bailey** · September-21-09, 12:26 PM

Originally Posted by MCP-001

Big problem with that analogy.

People are required to buy auto insurance if they choose to drive.

Are you trying to imply that they are required to purchase health insurance if they want to live?

OABTW, the deadbeat problem can easily be dealt with by charging everyone for their doctor/emergency room visits, rather than give them a free-ride with federal laws like EMTALA [[signed into law by Reagan, no less).

Well, it comes down to the debate over whether health care is a right or privilege. The right says it's a privilege, but then goes all high pitched screaming when the proposal of requiring everyone to buy in gets floated....they should have no problem with the "no fault car insurance" analogy and I am always surprised that they are not jumping on board with it.

If you want go to the doctor or use any health care facilities-outside of catastrophic emergency care [[i would assume some allowance there for fault and subsequent collections actions against the at fault party) you must have a policy. Just like no-fault, there would, I am guessing, be a bare bones "PLPD" type plan and then an increasing level of plans up to an "all the bells and whistles Broad form" level care. We all know that the only reason Americans will modify their behavior is if it comes with a financial penalty or incentive. So OK, emergency room visits every time your kid has a ear ache is going to cost you the price of the visit and the price of the prescription....or you can pay for an annual health care policy. your choice, but you don't get the free ride anymore.

**Danny** · September-21-09, 01:11 PM

Since the 1990s The U.S. Government has giving ACORN over 50 million dollars of taxpayer monies. It's just like giving the Conservative Vice Lords of Chicago's Lawndale Neighborhood Chapter over 9 million dollars of taxpayer expense back in the late 1960s.

**elganned** · September-21-09, 01:17 PM

Originally Posted by MCP-001

Big problem with that analogy.

People are required to buy auto insurance if they choose to drive.

Are you trying to imply that they are required to purchase health insurance if they want to live?

OABTW, the deadbeat problem can easily be dealt with by charging everyone for their doctor/emergency room visits, rather than give them a free-ride with federal laws like EMTALA [[signed into law by Reagan, no less).

You don't see the irony in the juxtaposition of those two statements, MCP?

If we charged everybody for every doctor/ER visit, they would not be able to afford health care. Or have you not checked the cost of emergency health care, lately? NObody can afford to pay out of pocket anymore; even a relatively minor outpatient procedure can run into thousands and thousands of dollars.

Break a leg? Need an X-ray to confirm it and a cast to fix it? Wanna guess how much? Wait for it...average cost, $10,000. If you need orthopedic surgery, like plates/pins/screws, it'll be way more--somewhere between $25,000-$50,000, depending on how much damage you did.

Could you pay that out of pocket? I don't personally know anyone who could. The alternative? Just be crippled for life, or maybe just die of sepsis. Your choice.

So, Yes; under your proposal, everybody would need to buy health insurance in order to live.

**MCP-001** · September-21-09, 04:02 PM

Originally Posted by elganned

You don't see the irony in the juxtaposition of those two statements, MCP?

If we charged everybody for every doctor/ER visit, they would not be able to afford health care. Or have you not checked the cost of emergency health care, lately? NObody can afford to pay out of pocket anymore; even a relatively minor outpatient procedure can run into thousands and thousands of dollars.

Break a leg? Need an X-ray to confirm it and a cast to fix it? Wanna guess how much? Wait for it...average cost, $10,000. If you need orthopedic surgery, like plates/pins/screws, it'll be way more--somewhere between $25,000-$50,000, depending on how much damage you did.

Could you pay that out of pocket? I don't personally know anyone who could. The alternative? Just be crippled for life, or maybe just die of sepsis. Your choice.

So, Yes; under your proposal, everybody would need to buy health insurance in order to live.

There's nothing ironic in what I had written.

I merely states that individuals are responsible for their own health care, and that only individuals should be paying for their own care.

Throwing everyone's money into a pot to cover the cost for the next guy is not the system we operate under in this country.

That's what Pres. B.O. is moving towards. He even said so himself.

Oh, he'll try to change the message, but more and more Americans are becoming wise to his tricks.

**elganned** · September-21-09, 04:24 PM

There is every irony in what you wrote. In one breath you imply that forcing people to buy health insurance is a Bad Thing, in the next breath you say that everyone should pay for their own health care, which if implemented will guarantee that everyone will be forced to buy health insurance. The only difference is whether the government forces you to buy it or economic reality forces you to buy it. Either way, it's forced.

And if throwing everyone's money in a pot to cover the next guy is not the system we operate under, then how would you describe insurance? It is nothing more than pooling a lot of people's money in order to cover any one individual in the event he/she needs to tap the pool for unexpected expense. Any profits are derived from those people who don't need to tap the pool. They participate because it's in their interest to have the pool available to tap if they need it.

Dude, wake up.

**jams** · September-21-09, 06:04 PM

Throwing everyone's money into a pot to cover the cost for the next guy is not the system we operate under in this country.

That is exactly how private insurance works, they just want to keep the money in their pot.

ccbatson · September-21-09, 07:09 PM

Not only did/does he "know" exactly how much federal money they are getting, he designed it.

**Gistok** · September-22-09, 12:46 AM

.... gawd I miss have Dubya as president.... those were the days when a "gaffe was a gaffe"... not this faux indignation "meal out of a morsel" crap that some of you folks are digging up...

Let the ACORN bashing continue....