Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
uhhhhh, not really Dillo...they can still come after you by garnishing your wages if you make a lot of money or they can take out what they believe you owe in penalty from your tax refund....those type of things....so it still can have some bite to it...cool---so it's a voluntary deal---no penalty for non compliance.
Well Immie, I just listened. You are a LIAR.
Like I just said, you are the one that is the liar. They both stated unequivocally that they supported jail time for those who do not comply. You can continue to lie as long as you want. I have come to expect that from you. Maybe you would like to point out where I am wrong, rather than make such foolish statements without defending your point? No? I didn't think so. You cannot deny that they both stated penalties were appropriate and neither one of them denied that jail time was out of the question when it was asked of them point blank. If you are stupid enough to think... well, we know you are stupid enough to think that they were not supporting jail time for non-compliance.
Immie
BULLSHIT Immie, NEITHER Pelosi or Obama "stated unequivocally that they supported jail time for those who do not comply"
Either you are a liar, or you have a comprehension problem.
Only Democrats passed this bill, not a single Republican voted for it, at least in the house, if memory serves....so are you saying that Democrats made certain that people would not go to jail if they did not succumb to the penalty? Why would they do that if they are all "obamabots" and follow him blindly?
, bfgrn, rdean, Luddley whatshisname, mamooth, jake starkey, Synthaholic, Joeb131 and the like. 
Like I just said, you are the one that is the liar. They both stated unequivocally that they supported jail time for those who do not comply. You can continue to lie as long as you want. I have come to expect that from you. Maybe you would like to point out where I am wrong, rather than make such foolish statements without defending your point? No? I didn't think so. You cannot deny that they both stated penalties were appropriate and neither one of them denied that jail time was out of the question when it was asked of them point blank. If you are stupid enough to think... well, we know you are stupid enough to think that they were not supporting jail time for non-compliance.
Immie
BULLSHIT Immie, NEITHER Pelosi or Obama "stated unequivocally that they supported jail time for those who do not comply"
Either you are a liar, or you have a comprehension problem.
Bullshit bfgrn. You are both an idiot and a liar.
It was as plain as the nose on your face that they both support jail time for those who will not succumb. Only an idiot would deny that. Also, Meister posted proof positive that it was the original intent.
Yes, it got taken out. But only an Obama whore would deny that they did wanted jail time for non-compliance.
Immie
Like I just said, you are the one that is the liar. They both stated unequivocally that they supported jail time for those who do not comply. You can continue to lie as long as you want. I have come to expect that from you. Maybe you would like to point out where I am wrong, rather than make such foolish statements without defending your point? No? I didn't think so. You cannot deny that they both stated penalties were appropriate and neither one of them denied that jail time was out of the question when it was asked of them point blank. If you are stupid enough to think... well, we know you are stupid enough to think that they were not supporting jail time for non-compliance.
Immie
BULLSHIT Immie, NEITHER Pelosi or Obama "stated unequivocally that they supported jail time for those who do not comply"
Either you are a liar, or you have a comprehension problem.
Dumb ass I asked you a question, you didn't answer it.
Did any of them rule out thew option of going to jail? Did anyone say no one is going to jail in those video's? This is a yes or no question do not dance like they did.
Only Democrats passed this bill, not a single Republican voted for it, at least in the house, if memory serves....so are you saying that Democrats made certain that people would not go to jail if they did not succumb to the penalty? Why would they do that if they are all "obamabots" and follow him blindly?
No, it was a compromise. Pelosi had to negotiate to get her own coven to comply.
And nowhere have I ever stated they were all "Obamabots". I think everyone of them would stab him in the back if they thought they could gain something out of it. In fact, I have never called a one of them an Obamabot. Obamabots are people on these sites such as Care4all
Immie
BULLSHIT Immie, NEITHER Pelosi or Obama "stated unequivocally that they supported jail time for those who do not comply"
Either you are a liar, or you have a comprehension problem.
Dumb ass I asked you a question, you didn't answer it.
Did any of them rule out thew option of going to jail? Did anyone say no one is going to jail in those video's? This is a yes or no question do not dance like they did.
He won't answer. He won't even try to obfuscate like they did.
Immie
Dumb ass I asked you a question, you didn't answer it.
Did any of them rule out thew option of going to jail? Did anyone say no one is going to jail in those video's? This is a yes or no question do not dance like they did.
He won't answer. He won't even try to obfuscate like they did.
Immie
You are a liar Immie. YOU SAID: Pelosi or Obama "stated unequivocally that they supported jail time for those who do not comply"
NEITHER Pelosi or Obama "stated unequivocally that they supported jail time for those who do not comply"
He's chicken shit.BULLSHIT Immie, NEITHER Pelosi or Obama "stated unequivocally that they supported jail time for those who do not comply"
Either you are a liar, or you have a comprehension problem.
Dumb ass I asked you a question, you didn't answer it.
Did any of them rule out thew option of going to jail? Did anyone say no one is going to jail in those video's? This is a yes or no question do not dance like they did.
He won't answer. He won't even try to obfuscate like they did.
Immie
BULLSHIT Immie, NEITHER Pelosi or Obama "stated unequivocally that they supported jail time for those who do not comply"
Either you are a liar, or you have a comprehension problem.
Bullshit bfgrn. You are both an idiot and a liar.
It was as plain as the nose on your face that they both support jail time for those who will not succumb. Only an idiot would deny that. Also, Meister posted proof positive that it was the original intent.
Yes, it got taken out. But only an Obama whore would deny that they did wanted jail time for non-compliance.
Immie
What Meister posted is what REPUBLICANS said, not Pelosi, Obama or any Democrat. It was Dave Camp (R-MI). He is among the very same group of traitors who "made a strategic decision: we would make no deal with the administration. No negotiations, no compromise, nothing. We were going for all the marbles. This would be Obama’s Waterloo". NOW, you want me to take their word as truth Immie?
These are the same traitors who forced Democrats to remove a provision that could save billions of dollars in Medicare spending. They twisted 'advanced directives', a compassionate, family-friendly measure into 'death panels'. About 30% of Medicare spending goes toward the last year of a person's life. That is because too often the elderly patient is no longer cognizant and able to make personal decisions. Relatives make decisions to extend their loved one's lives where the patient would not. Advance directives allows the person to decide what they want at the end of their life.
Advanced directives: puts decisions in proper hands
It’s hard to imagine how a compassionate, family-friendly measure — a measure that ultimately respects individual rights — could be twisted so grossly into the erroneous phrase “death panels.”
But, prepare yourself for more lies and more nonsense, because President Barack Obama has decided to do the right thing — and his critics already have resorted to fear-mongering and name-calling.
The concept of advanced directives was pioneered in La Crosse, thanks to our two first-class health care institutions.
It’s a simple concept: An individual, with the help of family, should have the ultimate say in the type of end-of-life care the individual receives. The best way to do that is through a careful consultation, with family and physician, before there is a health crisis — while the individual is still capable of having a rational voice in the decision.
Too often, those decisions are made when it’s too late for the individual to make the decisions. Instead, grieving family members are left to make the decision — and at times it’s nothing more than a guess.
Would the individual want extraordinary measures taken when the end is near? Why wouldn’t we trust the individual — in advance and when thinking clearly — to make that decision?
For those who crusade for the rights of the individual, here’s the question: Why are you so opposed to the individual being able to set down on paper, with help from family and physician, the standards and wishes for end-of-life care?
The issue of death panels became so hot during this year’s debate on health-care reform legislation that Democrats decided to pull that provision from the bill.
Bullshit bfgrn. You are both an idiot and a liar.
It was as plain as the nose on your face that they both support jail time for those who will not succumb. Only an idiot would deny that. Also, Meister posted proof positive that it was the original intent.
Yes, it got taken out. But only an Obama whore would deny that they did wanted jail time for non-compliance.
Immie
What Meister posted is what REPUBLICANS said, not Pelosi, Obama or any Democrat. It was Dave Camp (R-MI). He is among the very same group of traitors who "made a strategic decision: we would make no deal with the administration. No negotiations, no compromise, nothing. We were going for all the marbles. This would be Obama’s Waterloo". NOW, you want me to take their word as truth Immie?
These are the same traitors who forced Democrats to remove a provision that could save billions of dollars in Medicare spending. They twisted 'advanced directives', a compassionate, family-friendly measure into 'death panels'. About 30% of Medicare spending goes toward the last year of a person's life. That is because too often the elderly patient is no longer cognizant and able to make personal decisions. Relatives make decisions to extend their loved one's lives where the patient would not. Advance directives allows the person to decide what they want at the end of their life.
Advanced directives: puts decisions in proper hands
It’s hard to imagine how a compassionate, family-friendly measure — a measure that ultimately respects individual rights — could be twisted so grossly into the erroneous phrase “death panels.”
But, prepare yourself for more lies and more nonsense, because President Barack Obama has decided to do the right thing — and his critics already have resorted to fear-mongering and name-calling.
The concept of advanced directives was pioneered in La Crosse, thanks to our two first-class health care institutions.
It’s a simple concept: An individual, with the help of family, should have the ultimate say in the type of end-of-life care the individual receives. The best way to do that is through a careful consultation, with family and physician, before there is a health crisis — while the individual is still capable of having a rational voice in the decision.
Too often, those decisions are made when it’s too late for the individual to make the decisions. Instead, grieving family members are left to make the decision — and at times it’s nothing more than a guess.
Would the individual want extraordinary measures taken when the end is near? Why wouldn’t we trust the individual — in advance and when thinking clearly — to make that decision?
For those who crusade for the rights of the individual, here’s the question: Why are you so opposed to the individual being able to set down on paper, with help from family and physician, the standards and wishes for end-of-life care?
The issue of death panels became so hot during this year’s debate on health-care reform legislation that Democrats decided to pull that provision from the bill.
This opinion has zero to do with the discussion. Why are you bringing it up in this thread? Why are you trying to change the subject? You may not like what Meister posted and you can say it is all right wing lies, but you heard it from their own mouths. They were both very clearly asked if they supported jail time for non-compliance. They both very clearly answered that penalties are appropriate. They were both repeatedly asked if they supported jail time and they repeatedly obfuscated their replies and only a moron would state that they did not support jail time. If they did not think jail time was appropriate, THEY WOULD HAVE SAID SO.
Oh and by the way, I support the idea of advanced directives.
I do not support the idea of some government flunky making life and death decisions on whether or not I should receive a procedure which has absolutely nothing to do with advanced directives which are legal documents that I write detailing what I want in regards to my final days.
edit:
And I know full well that insurance companies have their own "death panels". The difference in this case is that if I don't like the decisions made by the insurance company's panel, I am free to shop around for a "better deal", whereas in the case of Obamacare, I get the same flunkies regardless of which government policy I choose.
Immie
What Meister posted is what REPUBLICANS said, not Pelosi, Obama or any Democrat. It was Dave Camp (R-MI). He is among the very same group of traitors who "made a strategic decision: we would make no deal with the administration. No negotiations, no compromise, nothing. We were going for all the marbles. This would be Obama’s Waterloo". NOW, you want me to take their word as truth Immie?
These are the same traitors who forced Democrats to remove a provision that could save billions of dollars in Medicare spending. They twisted 'advanced directives', a compassionate, family-friendly measure into 'death panels'. About 30% of Medicare spending goes toward the last year of a person's life. That is because too often the elderly patient is no longer cognizant and able to make personal decisions. Relatives make decisions to extend their loved one's lives where the patient would not. Advance directives allows the person to decide what they want at the end of their life.
Advanced directives: puts decisions in proper hands
It’s hard to imagine how a compassionate, family-friendly measure — a measure that ultimately respects individual rights — could be twisted so grossly into the erroneous phrase “death panels.”
But, prepare yourself for more lies and more nonsense, because President Barack Obama has decided to do the right thing — and his critics already have resorted to fear-mongering and name-calling.
The concept of advanced directives was pioneered in La Crosse, thanks to our two first-class health care institutions.
It’s a simple concept: An individual, with the help of family, should have the ultimate say in the type of end-of-life care the individual receives. The best way to do that is through a careful consultation, with family and physician, before there is a health crisis — while the individual is still capable of having a rational voice in the decision.
Too often, those decisions are made when it’s too late for the individual to make the decisions. Instead, grieving family members are left to make the decision — and at times it’s nothing more than a guess.
Would the individual want extraordinary measures taken when the end is near? Why wouldn’t we trust the individual — in advance and when thinking clearly — to make that decision?
For those who crusade for the rights of the individual, here’s the question: Why are you so opposed to the individual being able to set down on paper, with help from family and physician, the standards and wishes for end-of-life care?
The issue of death panels became so hot during this year’s debate on health-care reform legislation that Democrats decided to pull that provision from the bill.
This opinion has zero to do with the discussion. Why are you bringing it up in this thread? Why are you trying to change the subject? You may not like what Meister posted and you can say it is all right wing lies, but you heard it from their own mouths. They were both very clearly asked if they supported jail time for non-compliance. They both very clearly answered that penalties are appropriate. They were both repeatedly asked if they supported jail time and they repeatedly obfuscated their replies and only a moron would state that they did not support jail time. If they did not think jail time was appropriate, THEY WOULD HAVE SAID SO.
Oh and by the way, I support the idea of advanced directives.
I do not support the idea of some government flunky making life and death decisions on whether or not I should receive a procedure which has absolutely nothing to do with advanced directives which are legal documents that I write detailing what I want in regards to my final days.
edit:
And I know full well that insurance companies have their own "death panels". The difference in this case is that if I don't like the decisions made by the insurance company's panel, I am free to shop around for a "better deal", whereas in the case of Obamacare, I get the same flunkies regardless of which government policy I choose.
Immie
It has EVERYTHING to do with the discussion. Republicans lied, deceived, undermined and employed fear-mongering throughout the whole process from start to finish. THEY MADE "a strategic decision: we would make no deal with the administration. No negotiations, no compromise, nothing." They were given scripts authored by Frank Luntz to scare people into supporting their domestic terrorism.
Meister is quoting a Republican who is using EXISTING TAX EVASION LAWS to scare people. NO WHERE in either the House or Senate bill is there any mention of jail time.
The House version of the health care bill says NOTHING about jail time. The penalty for failure to purchase insurance is a tax, not jail time. If a person does not have acceptable health care coverage, Section 501 imposes a tax on that person "not to exceed the applicable national average premium":
Page 297 of the House Bill:
a) TAX IMPOSED.-In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of-
(1) the taxpayer's modified adjusted gross income for the taxable year, over
(2) the amount of gross income specified in section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.
(b) LIMITATIONS.-
(1) TAX LIMITED TO AVERAGE PREMIUM.-
(A) IN GENERAL.-The tax imposed under subsection (a) with respect to any taxpayer for any taxable year shall not exceed the applicable national average premium for such taxable year.
This opinion has zero to do with the discussion. Why are you bringing it up in this thread? Why are you trying to change the subject? You may not like what Meister posted and you can say it is all right wing lies, but you heard it from their own mouths. They were both very clearly asked if they supported jail time for non-compliance. They both very clearly answered that penalties are appropriate. They were both repeatedly asked if they supported jail time and they repeatedly obfuscated their replies and only a moron would state that they did not support jail time. If they did not think jail time was appropriate, THEY WOULD HAVE SAID SO.
Oh and by the way, I support the idea of advanced directives.
I do not support the idea of some government flunky making life and death decisions on whether or not I should receive a procedure which has absolutely nothing to do with advanced directives which are legal documents that I write detailing what I want in regards to my final days.
edit:
And I know full well that insurance companies have their own "death panels". The difference in this case is that if I don't like the decisions made by the insurance company's panel, I am free to shop around for a "better deal", whereas in the case of Obamacare, I get the same flunkies regardless of which government policy I choose.
Immie
It has EVERYTHING to do with the discussion. Republicans lied, deceived, undermined and employed fear-mongering throughout the whole process from start to finish. THEY MADE "a strategic decision: we would make no deal with the administration. No negotiations, no compromise, nothing." They were given scripts authored by Frank Luntz to scare people into supporting their domestic terrorism.
Meister is quoting a Republican who is using EXISTING TAX EVASION LAWS to scare people. NO WHERE in either the House or Senate bill is there any mention of jail time.
The House version of the health care bill says NOTHING about jail time. The penalty for failure to purchase insurance is a tax, not jail time. If a person does not have acceptable health care coverage, Section 501 imposes a tax on that person "not to exceed the applicable national average premium":
Page 297 of the House Bill:
a) TAX IMPOSED.-In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of-
(1) the taxpayer's modified adjusted gross income for the taxable year, over
(2) the amount of gross income specified in section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.
(b) LIMITATIONS.-
(1) TAX LIMITED TO AVERAGE PREMIUM.-
(A) IN GENERAL.-The tax imposed under subsection (a) with respect to any taxpayer for any taxable year shall not exceed the applicable national average premium for such taxable year.
Yet, in their own words, both Obama and Pelosi very clearly supported jail time for non-compliance to their decree.
And, your op-ed piece has nothing whatsoever to do with the discussion at hand which is did Pelosi and Obama support jail time for those who would not succumb to their power? The answer is very clearly yes.
If asked, I would agree with you. Republicans lied. I will stipulate to that. I never stated otherwise. The fact is and you can hear them say it time and time again, Obama and Pelosi thought that those who did not comply deserved jail time. The fact is that if they could have gotten away with it, that provision... that penalty would be starring us all in the face today.
Immie
Yet, in their own words, both Obama and Pelosi very clearly supported jail time for non-compliance to their decree.
And, your op-ed piece has nothing whatsoever to do with the discussion at hand which is did Pelosi and Obama support jail time for those who would not succumb to their power? The answer is very clearly yes.
If asked, I would agree with you. Republicans lied. I will stipulate to that. I never stated otherwise. The fact is and you can hear them say it time and time again, Obama and Pelosi thought that those who did not comply deserved jail time. The fact is that if they could have gotten away with it, that provision... that penalty would be starring us all in the face today.
Immie
it is indeed looking pretty grim for the Obamneycare opponents.
It has EVERYTHING to do with the discussion. Republicans lied, deceived, undermined and employed fear-mongering throughout the whole process from start to finish. THEY MADE "a strategic decision: we would make no deal with the administration. No negotiations, no compromise, nothing." They were given scripts authored by Frank Luntz to scare people into supporting their domestic terrorism.
Meister is quoting a Republican who is using EXISTING TAX EVASION LAWS to scare people. NO WHERE in either the House or Senate bill is there any mention of jail time.
The House version of the health care bill says NOTHING about jail time. The penalty for failure to purchase insurance is a tax, not jail time. If a person does not have acceptable health care coverage, Section 501 imposes a tax on that person "not to exceed the applicable national average premium":
Page 297 of the House Bill:
a) TAX IMPOSED.-In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of-
(1) the taxpayer's modified adjusted gross income for the taxable year, over
(2) the amount of gross income specified in section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.
(b) LIMITATIONS.-
(1) TAX LIMITED TO AVERAGE PREMIUM.-
(A) IN GENERAL.-The tax imposed under subsection (a) with respect to any taxpayer for any taxable year shall not exceed the applicable national average premium for such taxable year.
Yet, in their own words, both Obama and Pelosi very clearly supported jail time for non-compliance to their decree.
And, your op-ed piece has nothing whatsoever to do with the discussion at hand which is did Pelosi and Obama support jail time for those who would not succumb to their power? The answer is very clearly yes.
If asked, I would agree with you. Republicans lied. I will stipulate to that. I never stated otherwise. The fact is and you can hear them say it time and time again, Obama and Pelosi thought that those who did not comply deserved jail time. The fact is that if they could have gotten away with it, that provision... that penalty would be starring us all in the face today.
Immie
I feel sorry for you Immie. You have been brainwashed by right wing propaganda. But you are lying when you say Pelosi and Obama's INTENT was to put people in jail for not buying health insurance.
You have just become a far right wing scum bag Immie. That would make Obama and Pelosi evil human beings. Is THAT what you believe Immie?
Yet, in their own words, both Obama and Pelosi very clearly supported jail time for non-compliance to their decree.
And, your op-ed piece has nothing whatsoever to do with the discussion at hand which is did Pelosi and Obama support jail time for those who would not succumb to their power? The answer is very clearly yes.
If asked, I would agree with you. Republicans lied. I will stipulate to that. I never stated otherwise. The fact is and you can hear them say it time and time again, Obama and Pelosi thought that those who did not comply deserved jail time. The fact is that if they could have gotten away with it, that provision... that penalty would be starring us all in the face today.
Immie
I feel sorry for you Immie. You have been brainwashed by right wing propaganda. But you are lying when you say Pelosi and Obama's INTENT was to put people in jail for not buying health insurance.
You have just become a far right wing scum bag Immie. That would make Obama and Pelosi evil human beings. Is THAT what you believe Immie?
LMAO, Well, you have been a far left wing scum bag for as long as I can remember so you are way ahead of me. And to be honest with you, I'm not that far right. You are hilarious when you make such a moronic claim. Have you once had a nice thing to say about anyone on the right? Not on this site you have not.
Obama and Pelosi are corrupt individuals. Obama and Pelosi are authoritarians. I don't have a lot of respect for either one of them nor Bush, Boehner, McCain, Reid or the whole lot of them. Would I call them evil? No, I reserve that for people like Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot.
Truthfully, if given an opportunity to have dinner with the President, I would snap at the opportunity. I think a personal chat with him would be fabulous and no, unlike you with Bush, I would not call him every dirty name in the book. I would find the time very interesting. I would not care to have dinner with Pelosi or Bush. Hillary would be interesting. Boehner would not. I'd like to have dinner with Jesse Jackson too, probably not so much with Al Sharpton. Definitely not Rush Limbaugh, but maybe Rachel Maddow. Maybe Bill O'Reilly but not Michael Savage... not in a heart beat. There was a time when I would have invited Sean Hannity to dinner, but no longer.
Hell, I'd even invite you for dinner! Do you like beer? I won't serve seafood. I'm allergic to it. Do you like steak? As rude to me as you have been in these last two conversations, I'd still enjoy breaking bread with you.
I wonder can you honestly say the same thing about people on the right and left? Are there members of the opposition that you could treat like human beings? Are there any on the left you would not want to be in the same room with?
Immie
Prosecution is authorized under the Code for a variety of offenses. Depending on the level of the noncompliance, the following penalties could apply to an individual:
Section 7203 misdemeanor willful failure to pay is punishable by a fine of up to $25,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year.
Section 7201 felony willful evasion is punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.
When confronted with this same issue during its consideration of a similar individual mandate tax, the Senate Finance Committee worked on a bipartisan basis to include language in its bill that shielded Americans from civil and criminal penalties. The Pelosi bill, however, contains no similar language protecting American citizens from civil and criminal tax penalties that could include a $250,000 fine and five years in jail.
The Senate Finance Committee had the good sense to eliminate the extreme penalty of incarceration. Speaker Pelosis decision to leave in the jail time provision is a threat to every family who cannot afford the $15,000 premium her plan creates. Fortunately, Republicans have an alternative that will lower health insurance costs without raising taxes or cutting Medicare, said Camp.
According to the Congressional Budget Office the lowest cost family non-group plan under the Speakers bill would cost $15,000 in 2016.
Pelosi?s Obamacare: Pay up or pay fines, jail time | You Decide Politics
