A compromise on the ACA.

Ishmael Pequod said:
You don't have a problem with nuns paying for someone else's birth control?
Click to expand...
Given that no church org has to include a b.c rider, I don't think you can make this claim.

Now, if you don't like the concept of cost sharing, that's a discussion we can have.

First you can tell us how you propose we fund care for the highest risk patients....keeping in mind that one day you'll be there.
 
Ishmael Pequod said:
Obama is forcing nuns to pay for birth control. I thought you leftist trash wanted everyone out of your vagina? Oh, im sorry. I forgot someone has to pay your bills. Never mind.
Click to expand...


No stupid, the ACA is telling religious based organizations that if they want to run a SECULAR BUSINESS, then they have to adhere to State and Federal laws! Now there are EXEMPTIONS to those organizations that are wholly based within the church. But other than that....well, I could go on, but I doubt you want to hear anything other than what Limbaugh or the WND or Newsmax pablum feeds you. Carry on.
 
Damocles said:
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Again, please demonstrate how there is "zero competition" in the free market of life insurance, because to date I haven't seen a lack of life/medical insurance commercials from various companies, nor has the various mailings to my parents offering various rates and such have stopped. You seem to be confusing "standards" with the word "denial". See it works like this; LAWS are passed through the congress & senate to "regulate" commerce (it's in the Constitution...look it up). And remember, the ACA's blueprint was drawn up by a conservative think tank and implemented by Gov. Mitt Romney (to a SUCCESS in his state). If what YOU say were true, then there would be NO PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES IN THE USA AT PRESENT. Clearly, that is not the case. Clearly, you're just stubbornly parroting right wing rhetoric without any proof.
Click to expand...


People keep saying this, but they all seem to conveniently "forget" that he vetoed a ton of the changes that the liberals put on it and they overrode the vetoes. That "Romneycare" wasn't anything like what the conservative think tank put forward.

When asked what changes he would have made to "Romneycare" he said that he would have liked it if his vetoes had stood.

Here is an explanation for the politically challenged who only read their leftwing sites.

http://www.examiner.com/article/romneycare-explained
Click to expand...

cut the "leftwing sites" crap, Damo...when you quickly reference a conservative on yourself.

Catch what I wrote..."implemented"....I never said there weren't changes or compromises, now did I? And when the program was a SUCCESS, Romney ONLY shied away from it when he debated Obama (to court the bat shit crazy tea party folk, don't cha know). And it was the Heritage Foundation that came up with the original ideas, I believe.

But here's a more even keel review of the situation:

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/03/romneycare-facts-and-falsehoods/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top