Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
Here were go with the same attempted BS analogy between Romneycare and Obamacare. Romneycare the same size / scope as Obamacare? No. Romneycare have age-banding like Obamacare? No. "Illegal" or so - called "junk policies" which most of the folks who bought them actually liked them - that were unilaterally cancelled by carriers who were complying with Obamacare? No. These were the elements that cause the most turbulence in the marketplace - the "fucking with people's lives". So, let's move on, shall we?
|
The GOP had every opportunity during debates on Obamacare to help make it better, just as they did 65 other times when they meaninglessly voted to repeal and replace it. FWIW, they still have no replacement and the one that Trump promised he would unveil last Tuesday
doesn't even exist per Senator Hatch.
Quote:
You're correct, to the extent that it took an EO to let the agencies know that is was time to enforce EXISTING LAW. Your loopy assertion that the EO was designed "solely just to maliciously fuck with people"...well...I'll simply consider the source of that comment. 
|
His EO was not about enforcing existing law. Where in the existing law did it say to turn back already vetted refugees, people with green cards or dual citizenship, and Iraqi interpreters and their families who had been vetted for years and had valid visas? Did the existing law say to
handcuff and detain a 5 year old boy who was an American citizen?
I'd say all of those unequivocally qualify as maliciously fucking with people and have absolutely no basis in existing law. I support the views of
100 national security professionals who assert that this EO actually made us less safe and that it should be cancelled. Defend it if you want, but first take a deep look into your soul and see if it's there before doing so.