"Let it collapse"

[juttjaw]

Why is everyone still blaming Democrats? It's your own party who's impotent. Get some viagra and trick each other into believing you're still viral. Or, quit stroking each other's limp dicks promising of an orgasm.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Why is everyone still blaming Democrats?

Did you forget who voted for and signed off on ACA?

Newsflash smart guy.....it wasn't the (R)'s....it was Dear Leaders landmark legislation, the greatest gift to mankind since the Democrats invented fire~!!

 

[BoyNextDoor]

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." B. Franklin

Ishmael

WITTES: The exact quotation, which is from a letter that Franklin is believed to have written on behalf of the Pennsylvania General Assembly, reads, those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

SIEGEL: And what was the context of this remark?

WITTES: He was writing about a tax dispute between the Pennsylvania General Assembly and the family of the Penns, the proprietary family of the Pennsylvania colony who ruled it from afar. And the legislature was trying to tax the Penn family lands to pay for frontier defense during the French and Indian War. And the Penn family kept instructing the governor to veto. Franklin felt that this was a great affront to the ability of the legislature to govern. And so he actually meant purchase a little temporary safety very literally. The Penn family was trying to give a lump sum of money in exchange for the General Assembly's acknowledging that it did not have the authority to tax it.

SIEGEL: So far from being a pro-privacy quotation, if anything, it's a pro-taxation and pro-defense spending quotation.

WITTES: It is a quotation that defends the authority of a legislature to govern in the interests of collective security. It means, in context, not quite the opposite of what it's almost always quoted as saying but much closer to the opposite than to the thing that people think it means.

y/w

from NPR

 

[Aglaopheme]

Not sure where you're going with this.

Clearly.

If Republicans are (whatever form of fucked up) because they are against a health plan that originated in a right wing think tank, are Democrats similarly fucked up because they defend it? Let's not forget that Obama came into office with a huge mandate to make big changes, and the votes on party lines to do it, but instead of proposing a single payer solution, he kept saying that congress should offer him a bill. So he pissed away his political capital and we got a Republican health care plan because Democrats in congress would not go against their sponsors from the insurance industry- although many have said that they would have had no choice if Obama had proposed a single payer bill and demanded that they support it. By the time there was a bill at all, Dems had lost the ability to force a bill through congress on their own.
It seems to me that ACA is a horrible scam, but it is a bi-partisan scam. It was at the beginning and it continues to be. Kind of like all our wars and regime-change plots- it doesn't matter who the president is, or who controls congress, we get a very consistent set of policies, and they aren't the ones that most Americans support.

The rest of that is pretty much incorrect on all counts.

 

[Aglaopheme]

So you're saying Clinton and Obama compromised with the Heritage Foundation on the ACA?

The Heritage Foundation came up with a lot of what is currently in the ACA as an alternative to what Clinton was trying to pass.

No one on the right wants to admit just how much of a centerist Obama was. The ACA reflects that.

Who? The Heritage Foundation?

Yes

 

[Ishmael]

WITTES: The exact quotation, which is from a letter that Franklin is believed to have written on behalf of the Pennsylvania General Assembly, reads, those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

SIEGEL: And what was the context of this remark?

WITTES: He was writing about a tax dispute between the Pennsylvania General Assembly and the family of the Penns, the proprietary family of the Pennsylvania colony who ruled it from afar. And the legislature was trying to tax the Penn family lands to pay for frontier defense during the French and Indian War. And the Penn family kept instructing the governor to veto. Franklin felt that this was a great affront to the ability of the legislature to govern. And so he actually meant purchase a little temporary safety very literally. The Penn family was trying to give a lump sum of money in exchange for the General Assembly's acknowledging that it did not have the authority to tax it.

SIEGEL: So far from being a pro-privacy quotation, if anything, it's a pro-taxation and pro-defense spending quotation.

WITTES: It is a quotation that defends the authority of a legislature to govern in the interests of collective security. It means, in context, not quite the opposite of what it's almost always quoted as saying but much closer to the opposite than to the thing that people think it means.

y/w

from NPR

While you dive into the specificity of the quote, you seem to overlook it's general application. It's like someone saying, "The earth is round." And you replying, "Well, it's actually kinda 'pear' shaped." And while you would be correct in your specificity, you are guilty of spouting a distinction without a difference.

All of which is to say that your lame attempt to restrict the meaning to a specific, and transient, subject does NOT in any way restrict, of diminish, the general application of the observation.

Ishmael

 

[Hard_Rom]

What about a non-essential liberty for permanent safety?

 

[RobDownSouth]

Nestled in the pillowy soft bosom of Medicare, gently held in the firm arms of Social Security, Grampa Boxwine once again lectures us on the eeeeeeeeevils of government programs.

 

[Phelia]

i do not know you ( by this name )
but you are right.

they - as in an amorphous [not entirely republican] they -
want to tear down all things ' obama '.

it is "the" goal.


silly shit, that.

the zealotry
you assume as a fait accompli
is...
balanced/checked, as much [if not more] by moderate republicans than by
[watch the train wreck and do nothing]
congressional democrats

the shrill all around
has further faked the actual

Just in case anyone is tempted to take this asshole seriously, a reminder that three months ago he was calling us dumb for failing to see that this was all part of some broader brilliant political strategy, lolol:

play it as you'd like, then...i am certainly too dumb to see the fluid for what certainly is not firmament...

trump has no passion for health care reform...
he has had passion for health care reform as a vote laden slogan...
it has been the anti obamas who have touted repeal and replace
seemingly without any real clue as to how to fix the system...
their passion has been with the meme of anti obamism
( by attacking the signature program)
not the sticky and substantive issues having to do with HC reform...

health care reform is as third rail today as social security has been.
even some in the "freedom caucus" now accept that
some form of universal care is now ubiquitous...
( if only because obamacare has generally introduced this)

are you dumb enough to truly believe that a measly 18 day campaign...
introduction to non-vote congressional dismissal
was a serious attempt at real health care reform?

it was a drive by attempt to make noises
at an issue that was never the real issue
to either trump or congress...

there could have been a deal...
had the honest focus been on the subject,
rather than the namesake....

no one wanted to really open the pandora box.
they much preferred a parting shot at barry...
with some obscuring blame to spread, manure like, on weeds...
( like the freedom caucus and tea party remnants... )
whom the majority will need for more attainable issues...

"health care reform" was a structured whiff...
a check mark ...
a political move...

this "loss" was always intended to 'heal' ( or cauterize )the rifts in the party

 

[BoyNextDoor]

While you dive into the specificity of the quote, you seem to overlook it's general application. It's like someone saying, "The earth is round." And you replying, "Well, it's actually kinda 'pear' shaped." And while you would be correct in your specificity, you are guilty of spouting a distinction without a difference.

All of which is to say that your lame attempt to restrict the meaning to a specific, and transient, subject does NOT in any way restrict, of diminish, the general application of the observation.

Ishmael

I thought it was more like me saying "Oh, you quote Franklin out of context too so as to lend gravitas to an absurdity. "

 

[Ishmael]

I thought it was more like me saying "Oh, you quote Franklin out of context too so as to lend gravitas to an absurdity. "

The statement stands alone, no context is required.

Ishmael

 

[BotanyBoy]

The Heritage Foundation came up with a lot of what is currently in the ACA as an alternative to what Clinton was trying to pass.

Ahh..Ok.

No one on the right wants to admit just how much of a centerist Obama was. The ACA reflects that.

It's not just the right....Dear Leader is still worshiped by his followers.

And he's not much of a centrist, he's just human and sold out as soon as that money was waved in his face just like most of Washington.

We live in a spoiled, ungrateful, self destructive country and I can't blame him for getting hella paid to let everyone rat fuck the citizenry. I'll do as much as I can to do the same, leadership by example and all.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

The statement stands alone, no context is required.

Ishmael

Here is another : The average premium for a family with employer coverage is now almost $3,600 lower than if premium growth since 2010 had matched the decade preceding the Affordable Care Act.

 

[VeraBad]

Let it collapse?

It worked when Chamberlain let Hitler take Czeckoslovakia, didn't it?

 

[Ishmael]

Here is another : The average premium for a family with employer coverage is now almost $3,600 lower than if premium growth since 2010 had matched the decade preceding the Affordable Care Act.

Really? Kaiser has different numbers.

Ishmael

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Just in case anyone is tempted to take this asshole seriously, a reminder that three months ago he was calling us dumb for failing to see that this was all part of some broader brilliant political strategy, lolol:

http://33.media.tumblr.com/38247fcaabe95709c92f149a2289b322/tumblr_inline_np8kneQj7V1qdj4q3_500.gif

http://insidejamarifox.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/P9Zt8se.gif

https://media.giphy.com/media/lE9wZlVFiFaKY/giphy.gif

 

[DrDelirium]

Here is another : The average premium for a family with employer coverage is now almost $3,600 lower than if premium growth since 2010 had matched the decade preceding the Affordable Care Act.

Even if this is accurate, it's meaningless. Premium growth in the previous decade was so high it was forcing massive numbers of people to opt out of insurance altogether, which was distorting the base of insureds toward a higher percentage of sicker, older people, which was further pushing up premiums. This was a death spiral for the private insurance industry and could not be sustained. There is no question of the rate of increase continuing, the question is whether the changes made by the ACA benefited consumers or insurance companies. I would suggest that if the changes benefited consumers there would be no need for penalties for non participation.

 

[phrodeau]

Even if this is accurate, it's meaningless. Premium growth in the previous decade was so high it was forcing massive numbers of people to opt out of insurance altogether, which was distorting the base of insureds toward a higher percentage of sicker, older people, which was further pushing up premiums. This was a death spiral for the private insurance industry and could not be sustained. There is no question of the rate of increase continuing, the question is whether the changes made by the ACA benefited consumers or insurance companies. I would suggest that if the changes benefited consumers there would be no need for penalties for non participation.

The penalties are there to encourage people to get basic medical care, get their children immunized and prevent epidemics.

There are few countries with a higher percentage of unprotected people, and none with as much to lose as the US. Our unhealthy population makes the US a sitting duck for biological attacks.

 

[water505]

So what's the premise here?

"Shuck'N'JiveCare" was designed to fail from the very beginning. Hell folks, we're not even through the 4th year yet and it's going to shit. So much for the "best and brightest" in DC.

Ishmael

The best and brightest lied the best and the most. It worked, and the lemmings are still bought into it.

ACA is an entitlement and as such nearly impossible to take back. It served only as a steppingstone to a single payer, government run system. Astonishingly there are actually living, breathing no information human beings who think that's a good idea for the country. No amount of facts or logic will make them believe otherwise.

They love government more than life itself.

 

[water505]

The penalties are there to encourage people to get basic medical care, get their children immunized and prevent epidemics.

There are few countries with a higher percentage of unprotected people, and none with as much to lose as the US. Our unhealthy population makes the US a sitting duck for biological attacks.

Bullshit. You don't get it, do you????

How does ACA cover basic medical care when there's a $12,000.00 deductible? It's a fact that more people are insured, but fewer people actually get to use it.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

The penalties are there to encourage people to get basic medical care, get their children immunized and prevent epidemics.

There are few countries with a higher percentage of unprotected people, and none with as much to lose as the US. Our unhealthy population makes the US a sitting duck for biological attacks.

This is pretty much delusional...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Why is everyone still blaming Democrats? It's your own party who's impotent. Get some viagra and trick each other into believing you're still viral. Or, quit stroking each other's limp dicks promising of an orgasm.

It's not my party.

This is a Democrat plan.

It is Democrats who are fighting to keep it.

I find it hard to blame anyone else for this law and the expense it has added to our lives...

 

[RobDownSouth]

It's not my party.
This is a Democrat plan.
It is Democrats who are fighting to keep it.
I find it hard to blame anyone else for this law and the expense it has added to our lives...

• Republicans have the White House
• Republicans have the Senate
• Republicans have the House of Representatives.
• Republicans did not have enough votes to repeal the ACA yesterday.
• Therefore, Republicans now own Obamacare.

Even Shepard Smith and Chris Hume of Fox News said so yesterday.

 

[adrina]

• Republicans have the White House
• Republicans have the Senate
• Republicans have the House of Representatives.
• Republicans did not have enough votes to repeal the ACA yesterday.
• Therefore, Republicans now own Obamacare.

Even Shepard Smith and Chris Hume of Fox News said so yesterday.

Heh. How long do you think it'll be before they start transitioning to calling it The ACA?

 

[DrDelirium]

The penalties are there to encourage people to get basic medical care, get their children immunized and prevent epidemics.

There are few countries with a higher percentage of unprotected people, and none with as much to lose as the US. Our unhealthy population makes the US a sitting duck for biological attacks.

Hey, I think you're on to something here! We should provide universal health care to all Americans as part of the Defense budget! We'll have Lockheed-Martin set up a health delivery system based on the F35 and we'll fucking deliver some health to people whether they want it or not, the unpatriotic little fuckers! It'll be just like delivering Democracy to Afghanistan, and that's going great!