Boehner blinks!

Liberty said:
Well,,,, it's what I hear from reps all over the country, and this is such a bad law that I can't imagine a lot of people calling up saying they want it.

The real noticeable fact is the republicans are fighting to do something about it. When the truth is, most of them want it just as much as the dems. They surely don't want to make any waves to stop it. Risking their jobs.
Click to expand...

Did you ever stop to consider that they tell you it's a bad law because it will cut into their profits? Do you ever listen to anybody who doesn't have money in the game? Do you have any idea of your own that causes you to think it's a bad law?

Do you understand that the monied interests have turned your country's health care into a scheme that costs twice as much per capita in taxes than does Canada's. Which Canada's is of course rated higher in most respects?
 
So whether you agree with the ACA or not; whether you agree it's a good law or not;

the fact remains the republicans are not doing their job per the constitution - keeping the US from defaulting.
And a clause in the Fourteenth Amendment essentially says that the feds cannot renege on debts, meaning the cap could, if it came down to a court decision, be declared unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

http://blogs.reuters.com/breakingviews/2011/06/28/default-not-an-option-under-u-s-constitution/

Why are you defending a bunch of republicans that are defying the constitution?
 
monty1 said:
Did you ever stop to consider that they tell you it's a bad law because it will cut into their profits?
Click to expand...
The law profits big money, and big gov't.
monty1 said:
Do you ever listen to anybody who doesn't have money in the game?
Click to expand...
I'm poor and don't have big money in the game. And am not going to be forced.
monty1 said:
Do you have any idea of your own that causes you to think it's a bad law?
Click to expand...
. 1. ObamaCare was written by the health insurance and drug industry lobbyists.
2. Obamacare has a Review Panel to monitor benfits given to Seniors and what should and should not be allowed regarding health care treatments
3. ObamaCare puts in place new rules that prohibit plans with annual limits.
4. Obamacare puts 15 unelected bureaucrats in charge of meeting a budget target in Medicare with its newly created Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) .
5. Obamacare delivers a strong blow to Medicare Advantage (MA), which allows seniors to receive Medicare benefits from a private health plan of their choosing.
6. ObamaCare expands Medicaid (medical care for the poor) to everyone (under the Medicare age of 65) who has income less than 133% the federal poverty level.
7. ObamaCare will shorten the amount of time Doctors have with each patient, and lengthen the amount of time patients will have to wait.
8. ObamaCare means a two-tier Health Care System.
9. Obamacare attempts to address the challenge of covering people with pre-existing conditions with heavy-handed mandates, especially the requirement that all Americans enroll in government-approved insurance plans (the so-called “individual mandate”).
10. Obamacare is deeply unpopular because it is based on a bureaucratic, government-centered vision of American health care.
11. Obamacare will require us to pay insurers for “preventive care” as defined by government.
12. Obamacare will restrict the ability of insurance companies to consider health risks when setting insurance premiums.
13. Obamacare asserts on Congress’s behalf a power to restrain the liberty of an extremely broad group of Americans, and these Americans have not revealed any tendency to endanger their neighbors as the ex-inmates had in Comstock .
14. Obamacare is at least a step toward the egalitarianism Jesus tried to teach us.
15. Obamacare is probably the first case to ever involve what is arguably a sleeper tax — that is, a tax that isn’t called a tax in the law itself, but may behave like one.
16. Obamacare and the EPA will together revoke and invalidate the US Constitution.
17. Obamacare includes provisions for people who are so bad off they can’t afford a premium.
18. Obamacare failure now evident as health care costs rise nationwide.

monty1 said:
Do you understand that the monied interests have turned your country's health care into a scheme that costs twice as much per capita in taxes than does Canada's. Which Canada's is of course rated higher in most respects?
Click to expand...
Two wrongs don't make a right.
 
tekkychick said:
So whether you agree with the ACA or not; whether you agree it's a good law or not;

the fact remains the republicans are not doing their job per the constitution - keeping the US from defaulting.


http://blogs.reuters.com/breakingviews/2011/06/28/default-not-an-option-under-u-s-constitution/

Why are you defending a bunch of republicans that are defying the constitution?
Click to expand...

Because for the first time in my life they're fighting for me on this one issue. Otherwise I can't stand them.

Why are you defending a bunch of dems who want to inslave you? They haven't given you healthcare. They're only controlling it and the masses, and history shows that that only helps the rich.
 
Liberty said:
Well,,,, it's what I hear from reps all over the country, and this is such a bad law that I can't imagine a lot of people calling up saying they want it.

The real noticeable fact is the republicans are fighting to do something about it. When the truth is, most of them want it just as much as the dems. They surely don't want to make any waves to stop it. Risking their jobs.

Short answer, I call congressmen, and women all over the country. Why don't you try it.
Click to expand...

the short answer to your last short question is that I would only ever call the congressman and senators that represent me. To attempt to influence the vote of some elected official that does not represent me seems unethical at best.
 
Liberty said:
Because for the first time in my life they're fighting for me on this one issue. Otherwise I can't stand them.

Why are you defending a bunch of dems who want to inslave you? They haven't given you healthcare. They're only controlling it and the masses, and history shows that that only helps the rich.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is better to be enslaved by the drug companies and insurance company then for the government to seek a way to make healthcare affordable for all. People are screwed up because they believe that medical care should be profitable.
 
Last edited:
Jarod said:
Obama Care is no longer the issue anymore, according to the Republicans.
Click to expand...

They are lying, IMO.

Both sides are looking at the long-term budget consequences. The current hangup, despite the soundbytes of the past 48 yrs, is still Obamacare, IMO. But they have to change their argument somehow to save face AND to get back into negotiations with the Prez.
 
maineman said:
the short answer to your last short question is that I would only ever call the congressman and senators that represent me. To attempt to influence the vote of some elected official that does not represent me seems unethical at best.
Click to expand...

Some of them won't even take the comment via their website if you aren't in their district; others will take it but say they won't respond.
 
Liberty said:
Because for the first time in my life they're fighting for me on this one issue. Otherwise I can't stand them.

Why are you defending a bunch of dems who want to inslave you? They haven't given you healthcare. They're only controlling it and the masses, and history shows that that only helps the rich.
Click to expand...
we have to try something else, i have my doubts too, but this was legislated, passed Constitutional review, passed a POTUS re-election.

At some point the will of the people has to be done, even if Obamacare isn't popular in the polling, it did survive the law making process
 
Liberty said:
Because for the first time in my life they're fighting for me on this one issue. Otherwise I can't stand them.

Why are you defending a bunch of dems who want to inslave you? They haven't given you healthcare. They're only controlling it and the masses, and history shows that that only helps the rich.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry? Before ACA, who controlled my healthcare? My insurance company.

Who controls my healthcare now? My insurance company, but now they are bound by more rules they have to follow that benefit me. And there are things in the ACA that will push doctors and hospitals to look at most effective care, ways to lower costs for care, etc. AND because more people will have health insurance, fewer will be using the emergency rooms, which means health care costs overall will drop.

Why am I not supposed to like the ACA?
 
maineman said:
the short answer to your last short question is that I would only ever call the congressman and senators that represent me. To attempt to influence the vote of some elected official that does not represent me seems unethical at best.
Click to expand...
Well you need to get a ball and chain around your neck about to be thrown in a lake kind of desperation such as people like me to get a true bit of urgency. Me and millions wouldn't be so involved right now if Obamacare wasn't hanging over our heads.

Besides, asking on call totals isn't a bad thing. What's the harm?
 
Liberty said:
Because for the first time in my life they're fighting for me on this one issue. Otherwise I can't stand them.
.
Click to expand...

And so you are ok with repubs acting unconstitutionally because you feel it benefits you.

Would you have been so charitable in overlooking the unconstitutionality of not paying the debt if the Dems had held up extending the funding until a national background check list for gun owners (with all necessary funding) was passed? Or until the sequester cuts were overturned? or until the Voting Rights Act portion that the Supreme court shot down because the areas affected hadn't been updated in years was updated?
 
tekkychick said:
I'm sorry? Before ACA, who controlled my healthcare? My insurance company.

Who controls my healthcare now? My insurance company, but now they are bound by more rules they have to follow that benefit me. And there are things in the ACA that will push doctors and hospitals to look at most effective care, ways to lower costs for care, etc. AND because more people will have health insurance, fewer will be using the emergency rooms, which means health care costs overall will drop.

Why am I not supposed to like the ACA?
Click to expand...

Exactly, during cancer treatment my insurance company gave me a list of preferred providers, I could go to other doctors or treatment facilities, but I would have to pay more. They allowed certain treatments and drugs, but wouldn't pay for others.

They determined how long I could stay in the hospital for certain operations and treatments.

It is why I laugh when people make these statements about government when people have been denied treatment in favor of profit from insurance companies since insurance was implemented.
 
Rana said:
Yes, it is better to be enslaved by the drug companies and insurance company then for the government to seek a way to make healthcare affordable for all. People are screwed up because they believe that medical care should be profitable.
Click to expand...
This law did not make healthcare more affordable for me, and millions of others.

It made it cost more.

Why do you say that?

Not only that, but I'm going to be penalized now because I can't afford it.
 
tekkychick said:
I'm sorry? Before ACA, who controlled my healthcare? My insurance company.

Who controls my healthcare now? My insurance company, but now they are bound by more rules they have to follow that benefit me. And there are things in the ACA that will push doctors and hospitals to look at most effective care, ways to lower costs for care, etc. AND because more people will have health insurance, fewer will be using the emergency rooms, which means health care costs overall will drop.

Why am I not supposed to like the ACA?
Click to expand...
I think you're going to be shocked in the end.
 
tekkychick said:
And so you are ok with repubs acting unconstitutionally because you feel it benefits you.

Would you have been so charitable in overlooking the unconstitutionality of not paying the debt if the Dems had held up extending the funding until a national background check list for gun owners (with all necessary funding) was passed? Or until the sequester cuts were overturned? or until the Voting Rights Act portion that the Supreme court shot down because the areas affected hadn't been updated in years was updated?
Click to expand...
There is no unconstitutionality issues here.
 
Rana said:
Exactly, during cancer treatment my insurance company gave me a list of preferred providers, I could go to other doctors or treatment facilities, but I would have to pay more. They allowed certain treatments and drugs, but wouldn't pay for others.

They determined how long I could stay in the hospital for certain operations and treatments.

It is why I laugh when people make these statements about government when people have been denied treatment in favor of profit from insurance companies since insurance was implemented.
Click to expand...

Exactly...it was completely profit based and still will be. At least with the govt, it would be basic bureaucratic incompetence and bribery that would control it. As it is, we now have both. At least if there was a govt-only option, we'd be able to narrow things down a bit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top