Obama or Media: Who Is More Responsible for Perpetuating Such a Lie to Seniors

If the Obama Administration is breaking the law with their 8.3 billion dollar Demonstration Project why is it not being covered?

Is it not the responsibility of the media to inform senior citizens that they are not only being lied too but tax payer money is being used to hide the truth?

Would you care to summarize the issue for us?

Gee, welcome, New User.


I fear your source material is too biased to serve as the foundation for an honest debate.

Well, that is the opinion of a blogger from the Heritage, it is not the only one anyhow and it looks that is omitting a lot of the background:

I did a little reading over there and GOSH that President Obama is BAD.:rolleyes:

Thank you for assisting those lacking motivation to even read enough to notice a government agency being cited.

For those still concerned that a blog posted this. It is elsewhere. You just have to dig because as I mentioned. It will not be covered by CNN MSNBC and others. To my knowledge those biased Obama hating right wing radicals at Fox News have not either.

Doesnt mean it is not a story. Just a story that is being covered up

Your punctuation makes word salad out of what might otherwise be, I’m sure, a cogent and compelling response. Well, punctuation and usage. Okay, punctuation, usage and grammar. Well, to be fair, your syntax aint all that great either and…

Of course he is bad. Bad for everybody not just seniors. I did want to see how blind supporters respond in light of the fact that they are members of the party that apparently cares sooooo much about seniors but is actively deceiving them.

Don’t worry. I am not expecting an honest reply or any substantive response.
It is all in the posts already.

Maybe, just maybe, probably, perhaps, because the opinion of one member of a government agency does not mean much when there is no official action coming from the agency and even the legal minds (many in congress are lawyers) in congress admitted that there is nothing that they can point out that it is illegal?

That would be my response as well… if I didn’t have a good answer to the question being posted. Maybe there is a punctuation tutorial section somewhere else. Perhaps your insights would better suit that post

What exactly is the lie? It seems that the Republicans know they are spending the money, how did they find out?

Not going to do your work for you sir. If you don’t feel like informing yourself on issues that reflect negatively on your party or ideology… you don’t have to respond at all

Question for you: did Obama do this because he hates America, is a Muslim, was born in Kenya, or because he is an American hating Muslim born in Kenya?

Actually I do point out that my grammar is a crime against nature, but I make an attempt at making things clear.

In this case it is clear that many are responding with disdain because so far this is an item that deals with an opinion (that reports that **maybe **there is something illegal here) that has not generated yet any official action, and that has even the most critical members of the administration in congress thinking that there is nothing there.

Well, my reply was honest - I’d like you to summarize the issue, specifically on what you believe Obama is doing and what is illegal about it.

In any case, while I’m sure there are some blind supporters of Obama, i.e. they would support literally anything he proposed, I rather doubt they’re in the majority on this board. There are any number of people who claim provisional support for Obama, i.e. willing to tolerate some policies they see as wrong because he overall has better policies than any likely Republican replacement.

Of course, if you’ve already made up your mind that no actual debate can be held here, then I wouldn’t presume to tell you otherwise.

Boy, the water in this well sure looks clean and refreshing. I think I’ll take a nice big gulp…erk collapse die.

The lie would be the daily chorus of pols saying changes to medicare under the affordable healthcare act will not increase cost for seniors while actively using temporary funding just long enough to get past the elections. At which point it won’t matter. That IS a lie and a very nasty lie at that.

Actually there are provisions that are more encompassing and less expensive under the ACA for seniors, but IIUC they are not implemented yet, and many could miss it thanks to the actions of the Republicans.

The problem is that IMHO Republicans do know that if they make a bigger stink out of this and attempt to remove it before the more encompassing ACA provisions take care of the holes that we have now, that then seniors will notice that it is on the states that are opting out that will get more seniors grumbling, and specially against the Republicans.

At the very worst it is illegal, just as at best it is dubious. I did not proclaim it illegal but asked if it is illegal. I am more interested whether or not anybody has thoughts as to why the media does not find it relevant to cover. I, like 95 percent of the voting population, have made up my mind. That does not mean we should stop discussing important issues.