Obamacare running more smoothly in California

Originally posted by vivify
You make great points. I don't recognize your name from any debates I've seen, but I assumed that you were one of those people who just attack Obama on this site without any real cause, other than because he represents the other party. For that, I apologize. It's nice to see someone oppose Obama for logical and well thought-out reasons for a change.

Thanks.
But then, I attacked the Bush/Cheney administration even more strongly, with their '1984' attempts to attack foreign nations on artificially constructed pretexts, to put us in a permanent war economy. Just as LBJ did with the faked Gulf of Tonkin "attack". The last president who was deserving of office was JFK, IMO. Although Carter was honest, he was just too nice to survive the tactics of his opponents. Kennedy knew what he was doing. Which is why he was eliminated. Otherwise, no Vietnam, no assassination of King and RFK, and no Nixon selling out the US economy in 1973.
But, I digress. (As always!)
I actually flew the US flag here for a month after Obama was inaugurated, until he upped the troops in Afghanistan, and stayed in Iraq. Then I realized: "More of same". Of course, I understand the real reasons for Iraq and Afghanistan: Iraq's oil is our only real collateral for our massive foreign debt; and Afghanistan's opium is a very valuable commodity. But, in my view, that is not the way a great nation, which the US once was, should behave. Obama, in 6 years, has done nothing to reverse this.

Originally posted by DanTriola
The last president who was deserving of office was JFK, IMO.

JFK was a horrible president.

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout15
JFK was a horrible president.

Personal judgments depend on the quantity and quality of information one has.
For instance: in 1959 as a 9 year-old I recall my father griping about the chance that a Catholic might become president, although I had no idea what he was talking about. It was just so rare that I heard my father utter an opinion about anything other than sports, that it stuck in my mind. Thus, when Kennedy was elected, I had a strong bias against him. In fact, when he was assassinated, I was not upset at all. (And, like most Americans who were alive then, I remember that moment quite clearly) However, as the decades wore on, and more information accumulated, my opinion changed.
And, given the same information, and stipulating that it is all accurate, (which, statistically, it is unlikely to all be), two different observers may still come to two different judgments on an event, or an individual such as JFK. It all depends on how the observer weights the information he is given, which stems from that observer's personal biases, which biases are created by that observer's past life experience. Everyone's memory creates its own hierarchy of values, much of it not even accessible to the conscious mind, which accepts or discards various input. Which is why this 'Debate Forum' exists!
I value, in retrospect, those aspects of JFK's actions that I find to be desirable: his intent to withdraw from Vietnam, and his stated intent to eliminate the Federal Reserve, and get rid of Hoover. Also, his stimulus of the Space program did lead us to the moon, before funding dried up due to the diversion of money to Vietnam. I do not care what his sexual appetites led him to do, nor what his father was like, nor how he handled Cuba. After all, he did prevent a nuclear showdown with the USSR over Cuba, whereas a less subtle hand would have started WW3 over it.
I would be interested to hear what reasons that led to your opinion on him. Always looking for more information.

Originally posted by DanTriola

I would be interested to hear what reasons that led to your opinion on him. Always looking for more information.

Eeeeesh......I'm not up to The Big Dialogue about what a cruddy president Kennedy was.
Just google "JFK failures as president" and let me know if you disagree with anything.

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout15
Eeeeesh......I'm not up to The Big Dialogue about what a cruddy president Kennedy was.
Just google "JFK failures as president" and let me know if you disagree with anything.

Then, why participate on a 'Debate' forum'?
I am certain one can find anything one wants to find on the internet today. My favorite is :"The Bush family body count". Yet, you will have to use the Way-Back function to find it, as it seems to have disappeared some time during the last Bush regime. Here's the link, to save you time: http://wayback.archive.org/web/20020920100740/http://www.bk2k.com/bushbodycount/index.shtml
However, are you saying that you only want to reinforce a prior bias by looking at such sites, as I do with the Bush family? I'd rather hear some original thoughts from you, as I gave re JFK, than read another opinion. Unless, that is YOUR blog you are directing me to? After all, I did live and pay attention during the Kennedy years, and my memory is still quite good. Only, my biases have changed since I was in school. Hopefully, they will continue to change as more information is absorbed.
But, I will google that. And, substitute in Eisenhower, Truman, FDR, Hoover, and Coolidge as well. Might as well stop before Harding, for we all know what a mess that presidency was, just from all the fallout. Or, I could go forward. Wonder what there is about Reagan? Nice guy. Poor president. IMO! Or Nixon? Not a nice guy. But a decent president. Except for his selling all our gold reserves overseas.

Originally posted by JS357
Anybody can google ACA rollout California (or Kentucky) and find data for a state that has its own website.

Example:

http://thenextgeneration.org/blog/post/aca-blog-the-obamacare-roll-out-in-california

From there, a link to

http://coveredcanews.blogspot.com/2013/10/consumer-interest-remains-strong-for_15.html

for numbers.

Of course you can just say these numbers are made up.

And the beat goes on...

When I saw the OP, I wondered "More smoothly than what?"

Originally posted by DanTriola
Then, why participate on a 'Debate' forum'?

That's a fair question.
Because I'm just not feeling the need to debate what has been known for a long time, he was a disaster as a president . Kennedy was popular because he and his wife were young and photogenic and the People Magazine mentality made us all happy as clams to have such a Beautiful Couple in the White House,and after he was assassinated he took on a Holy Mantle of greatness. (Just like Lincoln, who was another awful president and hated by most Americans, both north and south, until he was killed).
If you want to see some reasons for why he deserves such a poor performance report as president just google "JFK sucked as president" and read the reasons.
They are many.

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout15
That's a fair question.
Because I'm just not feeling the need to debate what has been known for a long time, he was a disaster as a president . Kennedy was popular because he and his wife were young and photogenic and the People Magazine mentality made us all happy as clams to have such a Beautiful Couple in the White House,and after he was assassin ...[text shortened]... report as president just google "JFK sucked as president" and read the reasons.
They are many.

OK. Thanks for continuing this discussion.
I did google the "JFK failures as a president". Not "sucks", as that is a bit pejorative. And, found several articles that directly approached that subject. I also, as I said, substituted in Eisenhower, Truman, FDR, Hoover and Coolidge. As the years went by, there were fewer applicable articles on each president, but in general, they all had the same number of points of criticism. Truth is, any president can be criticized. Some, indeed, were worse than others. In that search I did find a listing of the 10 Worst Presidents by US News and World Reports. (It was a compilation of 5 surveys.) JFK was not among them. (Nor was Lincoln, although I do agree with you there: he suspended Habeas Corpus throughout the War, and imprisoned political opponents such as Clement Vallandigham, as an example. He also provoked the attack on Fort Sumter by sending a re-supply convoy, when restraint may have cooled things down.) James Buchanan was #1! Sad, because he was the only Pa president, and that's where I've always lived. And his only sin was not preventing the Civil War! That was unfair! But then, they put WH Harrison at #8, just for being dead after 1 month.
Anyway, as to Kennedy, (using Trivia-Library.com): one of the points against him was his handling of the Bay of Pigs. I've already addressed that, and disagreed. Eisenhower warned against the military/industrial complex in his farewell speech, and JFK was right in opposing the plans of the CIA, who was, and is, the "chai boy" for said complex. Point #4 I disagree with. He would have withdrawn from Vietnam, and had already ordered a cut-back in personnel in SE Asia before he was killed, which was immediately rescinded by Johnson. Point #2 is superfluous: every president who has an opposition party in Congress has "problems" with them. And point #3 seems all hyperbole. Anyway, if you look at the balance of his pluses and minuses, my view is that he'd be near the leader of the +/- list (in the NHL!). His legacy has always been smeared by those he offended and opposed, and those people have been, and are, quite powerful. As to the media extolling the Kennedy's aura: well, they do the same for just about everyone these days. He was just one of the first to be so afflicted by the superficial press.
But to say: "what has been known"? That reminds me of the Dothraki's favorite affirmative in Game of Thrones! (It is known!) You must not allow your System I thinking to take control in a debate. System II needs to be activated, uncomfortable as it may be.

Originally posted by normbenign
When I saw the OP, I wondered "More smoothly than what?"

More smoothly than less smoothly.