The problem your whole nation has that there isn't another party ( serious and "big" one) next to dems and reps. You won't step forward anymore if your policy continues acting like they do since 15-20 years. China will soon be more important than you and I don't know whether I like that :/
We all have different opinions. Instead of working together to solve and fix issues that will greatly affect our country in the present and future, we decide to bicker and argue about how out opinion is superior to the other. Nothing will change, the government in its entirety is corrupt. Politicians tell the people what they want to hear so they can get into office. They make a career out of politics. Politics shouldn't be a career. Oh well, /rant It is my opinion so bash it all you want
Im sorry. I wasnt aware that me calling you out as an imbecile lacked substance. You give your party a bad name. Not I. And for the record, im not a liberal. If there were posts like this from the liberals it would be the same thing.
You are right. Our country is destined to fail because of our goverment system. It cannot succeed and will not succeed. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to actually learn how the system works.
Nothing what could be bashed imo, but I wouldn't call whole politicians corrupt in America. But you should stop making one step forward and two behind.
I will be mostly lurking on this thread, but, I've hears the interview where one if the architects of Obama care called the voters stupid, and he did plainly state that obfuscation and lack if transparency was the best way to trick people Into voting for the bill. I am very curious to hear war the left has to say on this matter. We know the left loves Obama care, so, that's not the issue of discussion. I want to know how they felt about this mans comments. I'll gloss over the mud slinging and hope that we can at least have one or two liberals that can hold a thoughtful commentary on this issue
I would love to see Libertarians rise to a major status. Or mix with Tea Party members. Could be a problem in senate races as libertarians, Tea Party and GOP all steal votes from each other allowing Democrats to win. And nobody needs that.
in all honesty, the fact that this was an interview and there wasnt more public outcry just proves him right. Is it wrong to do it that way? yes. Has it been done before? yes. Has it been done by both parties? yes. Its not a matter of left or right. Its a matter odlf "will our people learn something or continue being ignorant?" and unfortunately, its gonna be the latter. Our country is filled with a bunch of idiots.
You asked for it, you got it. Let's start with "If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor" You demonstrate a lack of understanding of how insurance works. Insurance companies are the ones who determine what providers are in their networks, not the ACA. Yes, some polices were cancelled because they didn't meet the new standards. But there was nothing stopping insurance companies from offering new polices that met the new standards using the same provider network. And the fact is, insurance companies changed providers and provider networks all the time before the ACA. They're going to keep doing it. Because that's how insurance works. Now, I'll grant that Obama's comments were misleading, but they were much less misleading than all the stuff about "death panels" and "if you don't sign up you can go to prisons" that I was hearing from Republican politicians. So please, spare me your indignation about "dishonesty"
They did think of it. ObamaCare is based on RomneyCare, which was based on Republican health care reform ideas in the 90's. The individual mandate comes from conservative Heritage Foundation. "[N]either the federal government nor any state requires all households to protect themselves from the potentially catastrophic costs of a serious accident or illness. Under the Heritage plan, there would be such a requirement...Society does feel a moral obligation to insure that its citizens do not suffer from the unavailability of health care. But on the other hand, each household has the obligation, to the extent it is able, to avoid placing demands on society by protecting itself... A mandate on households certainly would force those with adequate means to obtain insurance protection." The Heritage Foundation October 1, 1989 http://www.heritage.org/research/lectur ... -americans They presented this in legislation back in the 90's Nov. 20, 1993 Consumer Choice Health Security Act (SB 1743) Sponsored by Senator Don Nickles (R-OK) & 24 Republican cosponsors Nov. 23, 1993 Health Equity and Access Reform Today Act (SB 1770) Sponsored by Senator John H. Chafee (R-RI) & 20 cosponsors (2-D, 18-R) That's why these idiots have nothing to replace it with. ObamaCare WAS their idea and they already know that anything they propose is going to have to work LIKE ObamaCare. Go ahead and ask Buckeye what they have to replace it with. He can't answer.
This sounds more like a lack of understanding on the part of the president, who, after all made the misleading statement that doesn't agree with insurance policy. I'll admit I don't know the specifics of how the insurance agency works, but that was not my point. My point was, he misled us. And I think with the officials surrounding him, someone should have known how insurance companies worked (since after all this ACA was his most highly touted domestic achievement). So it is either incompetence or gross skewing of the facts (which I am going to refer to simply as lies).
@ Moose I don't "love" it. I preferred offering MediCare for all. But I'm a pragmatist and I work with what I have. The fact is our health care system has sucked for decades and no one has done zip about it. I'd love for the Republicans to present a plan to fix the health care system. I'd be flippin' overjoyed if they did. They haven't and they're not going to. So I'll go with ObamaCare. It's far from perfect, but it's a start.
This Is something i hadnt heard. Fascinating. I wonder why the republicans hate it so much then? im not a fan of romney. I never was and never will be. But i like the idea of obamacare. I dont particularly think its being implemented well, but then again it doesnt affect me either. And ty for the compliment moose. I dont know if it was, but i will take it as such.
What you have to understand is that "Romneycare" was supported on both sides of the political aisle. It was also designed for a single state with a relatively small population. It was a bill supported by that population. You cannot take this small state bill and slap it on to the rest of the country and hope for the same results. I suppose it was all the Republicans could do by running the actual guy, Mitt Romney, to rail against Obamacare. As far as having a solution. I don't understand this argument... If the old version/ status quo healthcare system pre-ACA was better. How can you pass the ACA which the public views is negative on, an say "at least we had an idea"? A worse idea is better than the lack of an idea. Is that what I'm getting from you?
It does however agree with the ACA. There's nothing in the ACA that stops you from keeping your doctor. Keeping your doctor was up the the insurance company. As for he "mislead" us, he may have mislead people who don't know how things work like yourself and he probably could have made the comment more clear, but as I said, there was plenty of misleading going on by your side. Your side was screaming "They're gonna kill grandma!" and "They're going to put you in prison!" Those weren't misleading comments. They were outright lies. I don't see your outrage about it. So tell me, why is apparently ok for your side to lie to get what they want, but not the other side?
This Fox News **** sucking conservative is still around? Hey everyone listen to me as I regurgitate Fox News
What you have to understand is that "Romneycare" was supported on both sides of the political aisle. It was also designed for a single state with a relatively small population. It was a bill supported by that population. You cannot take this small state bill and slap it on to the rest of the country and hope for the same results. I suppose it was all the Republicans could do by running the actual guy, Mitt Romney, to rail against Obamacare. As far as having a solution. I don't understand this argument... If the old version/ status quo healthcare system pre-ACA was better. How can you pass the ACA which the public views is negative on, an say "at least we had an idea"? A worse idea is better than the lack of an idea. Is that what I'm getting from you?[/quote] That's what Republicans are saying now. That's not what they were saying then. Four Things Romney Wishes He Hadn't Said About Romneycare http://www.thewire.com/politics/2012/06 ... are/54058/ Back before ObamaCare, RomneyCare was "a model for the Nation" It was only after ObamaCare was passed that you guys started that "it was only designed for a single state" stuff. And you don't understand the argument because you're working off of incorrect assumptions. The pre ACA systems wasn't better. It sucked. This is what amuses most about people like you. You act like it was so wonderful before. It wasn't. You could be denied coverage for pre existing conditions, dropped from your policy if you got sick, and premiums were going through the roof. We had the most expensive system in the world and had worse outcomes than many countries that were paying HALF what we were. As for negative public views, a fair percentage don't like it because it doesn't do more. When you poll the things the ACA does, people love it. It's kind of like how Kentucky loves Kynect but hates Obamacare, even tho they're the same things.
@ Moose ObamaCare was barely an issue in 2014 "When asked to choose the most important issue to their vote in the upcoming midterm election, just 8% of registered voters picked the health-care law in October Kaiser Family Foundation polling. That put the ACA behind the economy (16%) and dissatisfaction with government (12%); as an issue it ranked on par with education (10%), the situation in Iraq and Syria (9%), and immigration (6%)." http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/10/2 ... rm-voters/ Why did the GOP win big? "The Worst Voter Turnout in 72 Years Over all, the national turnout was 36.3 percent; only the 1942 federal election had a lower participation rate at 33.9 percent. The reasons are apathy, anger and frustration at the relentlessly negative tone of the campaigns." http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/12/opini ... .html?_r=0 Who turned out to vote? "Based on preliminary exit poll data Tuesday night, we were able to say with some certainty how the 2014 electorate compared with 2012 and 2010. In short: It had more white, older voters — the sort of voters more likely to vote Republican." http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the ... epublican/ So we had only 36% of the population voting, and most of the ones who did show up were older white people. The ones who vote Republican. That's how it usually is in a mid term. The Democrats did lose some ground with their base, but the reality is the Democrats ran a crappy campaign while the Republicans learned from their mistakes in 2012. 2016 will be very different. Then the Republicans will have twice as many open seats in a national election, in which The Democratic base typically turns out in high numbers.