Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FJB who wrote (755459)	12/1/2013 6:47:15 PM
From: jlallen	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Respond to of 1585969

This is not only a lie but an intentionally fraudulent misrepresentation with significant consequences for many..... Odumbo should be impeached.

To: FJB who wrote (755459)	12/1/2013 7:30:25 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie	1 Recommendation Recommended By i-node Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1585969

Do you consider the Bammy quote, "If you like your plan, you can keep it. Period." to be a LIE? If you find it to be lie, can you put a magnitude on it? This LIE is a 10 on a scale of 10 if you ask normal people. Actually, I don't necessarily. Lying has to be intentional deception. An example. Was GWB lying about WMD's in Iraq? I don't think so, even though no evidence was ever found of an active WMD program. Outside of the fact that there was plenty of time to get rid of all of the evidence (can you say "syria"), his expert advisors provided evidence that there was a program, Saddam himself implied that there was and violated the agreements that ended desert storm when he wouldn't allow UN inspectors to verify the status of his WMD program. I don't believe that GWB was lying, but he may have been wrong. And the distinction is important as it speaks to his character. As far as the Obama quote, I suspect it wasn't a lie. But it may be something far worse. First off, I don't think that obama knew the content of the ACA bill anymore than any one person did. Individuals may have know pieces of the bill very intimately, but nobody had a grasp of all of the implications. So at one level, it could simply be Obama stating what he knew was his intent with Obamacare, without actually being qualified to speak authoritatively on his signature piece of legislation. It's not so much intentional deception as him just being an idiot. Another level is that he could have consulted his experts and they told him the answer that he was supposed to convey. Again, not intentional deception, but the actions of an incompetent puppet. Another level is that he gave the answer without knowing the actual content of the ACA and since he is absolutely ignorant of how the business world works didn't realize that any legislation on an industry will create situations that make some product offerings unprofitable. Without understanding the basics of the profit motive in a capitalistic economy, he wouldn't understand that the insurance companies would simply eliminate programs that were made unprofitable by Obamacare. In which case, we are back to incompetent and unqualified to offer an opinion without actually intentional deceiving. Another level is that he gave the answer without knowing the actual content of the ACA and since he is absolutely ignorant of how the business world works didn't realize that any legislation on an industry will create situations that make some product offerings unprofitable. Without understanding or careing about the basics of the profit motive in a capitalistic economy, he wouldn't understand or care that the insurance companies would simply eliminate programs that were made unprofitable by Obamacare, because if they did, he would simply mandate that they offer they continue to offer the programs at a loss. And then of course, he could have just been lying. There is no way that either he or his advisors weren't informed by the insurance industry liaisons that some programs would have to be discontinued under obamacare. There is a good chance that he wasn't told directly, but he has plausible deniability on this one. The fact is though, as a self proclaimed expert on the US Constitution, he should have known that it wasn't true. He should have known that the only way he could make that promise is if he had the power over private industry to mandate that they offer unprofitable products. The president of this country should know that he doesn't have that power....yet. So, I am not willing to call it a 10 out of 10 lie. But that certainly doesn't ease my heart any.