Realization Slaps Obama Voters in the Face - Finally

If you're going to complain about the Koch brothers... then I'd expect you to do the same for your billionaire financiers, such as Soros, Buffett, Gates, et al. Liberals are the epitome of hypocrisy.

 

It has everything to do with government involvement in the healthcare of the individual. Think bigger. It's not beyond your scope... unless it is. Then be happy with who you are.

Yes, let's look at all those 2nd and 3rd world countries with nationalized health care... Ahhh, what it must be like to be sooo dependent on the government for everything.

 

You're mistaking "general welfare" to mean "social welfare."

 

The Constitution was written with slavery in mind. The Founding Fathers were actually quite brilliant and prophetic.

 

You are entitled to your opinion, nobody's perfect.

 

Indeed.

 

No. The only people to have read it is the insurance industry that wrote it, the lawyers who will get rich from it and some very sick people with waaaayy too much time on their hands.


Not even the apologists in here, and THEY know the details all right!, have read it.

They are working on a talking point release from the White House meant for paid bloggers and forum trolls

 

So you reject the concept of freedom of speech?

But its OK for you to call Yosh a "birther" without even presenting evidence.

Well, back at you Obama boy, thsat makes you, you sitting down?, a HYPOCRITE!

as well as a fascist...

Now back to our regularly scheduled programming, it juts gets so frustrating with all these trolls making demands...

make a contribution, document some of your pathetically vapid claims once in a while and people might by so disgusted

 

Oh then that means death panels are OK?

I notice you didn't dispute that....that's like taking issue with whether Lake Meade is regularly patrolled when people in their late 80's have been left homeless by Obamacuts

 

so now its generic government involvement. What nonsense. I guess your ideal would be to have for profit transplant exchanges where organs go to the highest bidder and there are no regulations regarding sourcing, priorities etc.

Its amazing how anti-government interference types are so ignorant of how much their daily lives are improved by government services and regulations.

yet another myopic and distorted view from your tiny bubble.

If only you knew of what you speak.
Like many it appears as though you don't know what you don't know and aren't in the least bit interested in knowing.
Unfortunately that also seems to be the newest definition of "tea party patriotism".

 

You're the one who made a thread backed by zero evidence. Just seems like a desperate attempt to discredit Obamacare without even knowing why. But, this site isn't filled with the most intelligent people.

 

death panels don't exist. Are fairies, gnomes and unicorns, OK?

And here I thought that it was the Republicans that forced "fiscal responsibility" on the free spending Obama in an all out effort to avoid "bankruptcy".

Seems its now convenient for the right to blame nasty Obama for "punishing" the elderly, and attempting to deny millions of kids of food while preserving huge agri-subsidies etc. etc.

Monumental Chutzpah.
The tragedy for America is that there's actually people who are oblivious to such hypocritical contradictions while blindly helping to navigate the economy and nation over the cliff.

looks terrible on you.

 

I don't even think you know what Obamacare is... Do you realize that Obamacare is a federally mandated health insurance program that creates strict rules for private insurers to follow? That it outlines what is covered, what's not covered, who's covered, who isn't covered, etc? Do you realize that now the chain of events, when you go to the doctor with insurance, has increased from 2 stops to 3? No longer is it just a relationship between you, your doctor and your insurance agency, but now it's a relationship between you, your doctor, your insurance agency and your federal government.

lol... Thank GOD I have government to regulate my life, because otherwise I wouldn't have any idea what to do with myself on a daily basis. Without them, I'd probably just spend my time wasting away on a futon in someone's garage.

No, friend, unlike you and people like you, I believe in personal responsibility. I'm in charge of my own well being, my own health care and my own life. I don't require government guidance and I certainly don't want them involved with my health care.

Yep, my tiny bubble... of which millions of like-minded Americans fit within. I like to call it a Mycaptopian Bubble... because it's my little capitalist utopia, where freedom reigns and government fears the people. It's a happy place.

If only I knew! That reminds me of those noteworthy words of Donald Rumsfeld, "There are things you know, things you don't know, and things you don't know you don't know."

I wonder... do you even know what you sound like? You're a hysterical loon, screeching arbitrary randomness that has absolutely no purpose for being screeched. I mean, really... everything you just stated was completely obtuse. It's akin to saying "Your ideas are really bad, because your ideas are really bad." Ok, but why? If you're going to debate, you can at least add a contrasting argument.

 

General Welfare encompasses anything that is good for the union and it's citizens. It also includes having a military, an infrastructure, emergency agencies and so on.

 

This whole thread was started by the publication of this article: http://www.mercurynews.com/nation-world/ci_24248486/obamacares-winners-and-losers-bay-area

I could have sworn that this was in my OP, which is where the follow-up quotes (from the article) would have been from. Now, I can't find the link in the original, which is odd.

- - - Updated - - -

And I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a Founding Father to agree that Nationalized Healthcare would be for the good of the union and its citizens.

 

One of the first bills passed by the founding fathers was An Act for the relief of sick and disabled seamen

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Act_for_the_relief_of_sick_and_disabled_seamen

It levied a tax to provide health care for merchant seamen.

So in 1798, there was a notion that taxing individuals to provide mandated health care services for a class of workers was constitutional.

 

Not sure what a statue lf young barack obama has to do with anyone named barry soetoro. Perhaps you csn tell us who barry soetoro is?

 

Did you read the article? It tells you who Barry is. Are you seriously denying that Barack went by Barry and was adopted as a step son to Lolo Soetoro? Are you denying that he lived in Indonesia? Are you denying that he went to school there, as he was growing up?

http://www.examiner.com/article/is-he-barack-obama-or-barry-soetoro

Does any of this have to do with the OP? Nope... but I'll play your game.

 

Bogus. It does not determine what "isn't" covered or who "isn't" covered. The insurance companies are free to cover more than the mandatory benefits... and they do.

I don't consider many people on here clueless, but with statements like that you're winning me over.

 

And? Did you actually read what this did? It taxed seamen to provide care for seamen. No insurance involved. No mandates for every citizen.

 

Oh, ok... So the Federal Government doesn't tally up plans for specific groups? I thought there were plans for those with pre-existing conditions and plans for those without?

No limitations/restrictions? I beg to differ: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-23/turns-out-obamacare-is-going-to-limit-your-choices.html

Yes, you probably do. God forbid anyone believe in personal responsibility. Your reaction to that statement is merely ridiculous. "Clueless?" Really? I'm clueless, because I want to be self-sufficient? You're a new kind of brilliant.

 

It taxed seamen, and provided insurance, the seaman were provided care in government run hospitals and clinics, or it paid for care in private facilities if no government facilities were available.

SO your problem is the scope of the mandate, which isn't a mandate on every citizen, just on every citizen with sufficient income.

 

Of course I would. You're comparing apples and bananas. One has nothing to do with the other. I'll let this article show you why: http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/20...re-has-nothing-to-do-with-the-seamen-of-1798/

 

Our founding fathers made it clear that the constitution can be amended to create a more perfect union and that the SCOTUS would determine what is and is not constitutional. The AHCA was passed in both houses of congress, signed by the President and validated by the SCOTUS.
Still, the question remains, would this be something the founding fathers would have done themselves. There is an example of this. In July of 1798, Congress passed "An Act for the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seaman," which was signed by President Adams. Basically, the merchant sailors were taxed to form a health care system through the government that provided care for them when they became injured, sick, in July of 1798, Congress passed "An Act for the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seaman," which was signed by President Adams. Basically, ,merchant sailors where taxed to create a health care system through the government to provide health care for sailors if they became injured, sick, or disabled. This is because their role in our economy was vital and that made their health care a concern of the government. From that idea, it could also be said that a strong healthy work force benefits our economy and allowing sick people to spread disease and illnesses without proper healthcare creates a weaker society.

 

That article fails on a number of points, the most glaring is the attempted sleight of hand to rebrand an individual mandate into an employer mandate, by claiming that the master of the ship had to pay the tax, but the tax was deducted from the seaman's wages.
Kind of like claiming that income taxes are taxes on the employer, even though they are deducted from the individual's paycheck.