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.
Liberalism is trust of the people, tempered by prudence; conservatism, distrust of people, tempered by fear.
William E. Gladstone (1809 1898)
It is pretty amazing just how stupid you right wing parrots really are, but parrots can only mimic, not think.
Hannity is a HACK.
Liberalism is totally based on logic, reason and pragmatism. There really is no hard 'ideology' for liberalism, except liberals put people before property. Liberals have a firm grasp on reality and address problems using the best method. It doesn't have to be an idea that a liberal came up with. The health care law called 'Obamacare' is a PERFECT example. It is almost wholly a Republican idea, right down to the 'individual mandate, your you right wing 'ideologue' parrots chirp whatever morons like Hannity tell you.
Conservatism is totally based on emotion, the strongest human emotion...FEAR.
Democrats never agree on anything, that's why they're Democrats. If they agreed with each other, they would be Republicans.
Will Rogers
That has to be the most disengenuous piece of crap that has been posted here for a long time. It never ceases to amaze me how you libs do not even understand the philosophy that you embrace. everything you said above is wrong---------every word of it.
conservativism is based on individual rights and freedom.
liberalism is based on the fear of failure and the idea that the state should be your momma for life.
Hey pea brain, EXPLAIN how you right wing parrots can be for something Republicans propose and vehemently against it when Democrats propose the same fucking thing?
The ACA is almost a carbon copy of the health care bills the Heritage foundation crafted for Republicans.
Liberalism is trust of the people, tempered by prudence; conservatism, distrust of people, tempered by fear.
William E. Gladstone (1809 1898)
It is pretty amazing just how stupid you right wing parrots really are, but parrots can only mimic, not think.
Hannity is a HACK.
Liberalism is totally based on logic, reason and pragmatism. There really is no hard 'ideology' for liberalism, except liberals put people before property. Liberals have a firm grasp on reality and address problems using the best method. It doesn't have to be an idea that a liberal came up with. The health care law called 'Obamacare' is a PERFECT example. It is almost wholly a Republican idea, right down to the 'individual mandate, your you right wing 'ideologue' parrots chirp whatever morons like Hannity tell you.
Conservatism is totally based on emotion, the strongest human emotion...FEAR.
Democrats never agree on anything, that's why they're Democrats. If they agreed with each other, they would be Republicans.
Will Rogers
That has to be the most disengenuous piece of crap that has been posted here for a long time. It never ceases to amaze me how you libs do not even understand the philosophy that you embrace. everything you said above is wrong---------every word of it.
conservativism is based on individual rights and freedom.
liberalism is based on the fear of failure and the idea that the state should be your momma for life.
They cannot actually defend this piece of garbage legislation, so they set themselves up on a higher plain. To every American's detriment
In other words they are deflecting from the facts of the bill
That has to be the most disengenuous piece of crap that has been posted here for a long time. It never ceases to amaze me how you libs do not even understand the philosophy that you embrace. everything you said above is wrong---------every word of it.
conservativism is based on individual rights and freedom.
liberalism is based on the fear of failure and the idea that the state should be your momma for life.
They cannot actually defend this piece of garbage legislation, so they set themselves up on a higher plain. To every American's detriment
In other words they are deflecting from the facts of the bill
The facts of the bill is that it is almost a carbon copy of the health care bills the Heritage foundation crafted for Republicans.
That has to be the most disengenuous piece of crap that has been posted here for a long time. It never ceases to amaze me how you libs do not even understand the philosophy that you embrace. everything you said above is wrong---------every word of it.
conservativism is based on individual rights and freedom.
liberalism is based on the fear of failure and the idea that the state should be your momma for life.
They cannot actually defend this piece of garbage legislation, so they set themselves up on a higher plain. To every American's detriment
In other words they are deflecting from the facts of the bill
The facts of the bill is that it is almost a carbon copy of the health care bills the Heritage foundation crafted for Republicans.
That has to be the most disengenuous piece of crap that has been posted here for a long time. It never ceases to amaze me how you libs do not even understand the philosophy that you embrace. everything you said above is wrong---------every word of it.
conservativism is based on individual rights and freedom.
liberalism is based on the fear of failure and the idea that the state should be your momma for life.
Hey pea brain, EXPLAIN how you right wing parrots can be for something Republicans propose and vehemently against it when Democrats propose the same fucking thing?
The ACA is almost a carbon copy of the health care bills the Heritage foundation crafted for Republicans.
Since when does the Heritage Foundation = "all Republicans?" Furthermore, the ACA hardly resembles what Heritage proposed. They certainly never dreamed up these Orwellian "healthcare exchanges."
ObamaCare cannot be fixed. It is Too Big To Succeed with so many aspects that are not understood, that attempt to "fix it" carry too much risk of yet more horrible (un)intended consequences.
They cannot actually defend this piece of garbage legislation, so they set themselves up on a higher plain. To every American's detriment
In other words they are deflecting from the facts of the bill
The facts of the bill is that it is almost a carbon copy of the health care bills the Heritage foundation crafted for Republicans.
So? They does not change anything. Hack much?
There is no such thing as an almost carbon copy
Hey pea brain, EXPLAIN how you right wing parrots can be for something Republicans propose and vehemently against it when Democrats propose the same fucking thing?
The ACA is almost a carbon copy of the health care bills the Heritage foundation crafted for Republicans.
Since when does the Heritage Foundation = "all Republicans?" Furthermore, the ACA hardly resembles what Heritage proposed. They certainly never dreamed up these Orwellian "healthcare exchanges."
Yea, we sure as hell don't want any of that 'free market' shit in the law, now do we???
Obama says Heritage Foundation is source of health exchange idea
"A lot of the ideas in terms of the (health insurance) exchange, just being able to pool and improve the purchasing power of individuals in the insurance market, that originated from the Heritage Foundation."
Barack Obama on Tuesday, March 30th, 2010 in an interview on NBC's Today show
Did Heritage originate the idea? Our research suggests that while Heritage has advocated for health insurance exchanges for many years, others did, too. Scholars credit Alain C. Enthoven -- an emeritus professor at the Stanford University Graduate School of Business who worked in the Defense Department during the Kennedy and Johnson administrations -- with popularizing the idea for an exchange as many as three decades ago.
Still, there's little doubt that Heritage has been a consistent and eager promoter of the exchange idea, especially during the effort to design a new health care system for Massachusetts. That effort concluded with the Democratic legislature joining with the Republican governor, Romney, to implement a system that includes a health insurance exchange.
On numerous occasions, Heritage scholars wrote approvingly of the exchange system in Massachusetts, known as the Connector. In a paper about the Massachusetts plan published on April 11, 2006, Edmund Haislmaier, a Heritage fellow in health care policy, wrote of the "truly significant and transformative health system changes that the legislation would set in motion."
Specifically, Haislmaier wrote that "this concept of organizing a state's insurance markets around a central clearinghouse represents a dramatic departure from recent state health insurance reform proposals. States have spent the past 15 years trying to expand health care coverage to small-business employees, with virtually no positive results. The Massachusetts legislation represents a bipartisan commitment to move away from the policies that have largely failed to make progress in covering the uninsured for the past 15 years."
In another paper, titled, "The Rationale for a Statewide Health Insurance Exchange," and published on Oct. 5, 2006, Heritage scholar Robert Moffit wrote that "the best option is a health insurance market exchange." Comparing it to a farmers' market or the used-car dealer CarMax, Moffit said the exchange "would expand coverage and choice" and would represent "a revolutionary change in the health insurance market."
Journalists seemed to give Heritage credit, as well. During 2006, columns and articles citing Heritage's role in promoting the health exchange idea ran in such publications as the Washington Post, the Dallas Morning News, the New Orleans Times-Picayune and the National Review.
We feel the president is largely right on this point. The idea for exchanges may have "originated" outside Heritage, but in well over a decade leading up to the introduction of the president's health care plan, Heritage clearly took a high-profile role in touting it, culminating in the proposal enacted in Massachusetts. And given that, they can hardly be shocked that the president is noting the think tank's role in developing the overall concept (even if he did so in a self-serving way).
more
Is it the same idea? After Obama made his comment, we spoke to both Haislmaier and to Stuart Butler, Heritage's vice president for domestic policy. Both argued that the plan now enacted into law is fundamentally different in structure than the one Heritage advocated.
"What Obama and Capitol Hill did was to take a mainstream idea and push it toward a much more interventionist, regulatory model, as opposed to the original idea, which was more market-based," Butler said in an interview.
The question of whether to create a state Obamacare insurance benefit exchange is a source of great confusion for state legislators and governors nationwide. Proponents of the exchanges, among them Obamacare's ideological supporters and many of the private businesses hoping to profit from exchange contracts, are adding to the confusion by claiming, conservatives favor creating an exchange. They often point to the Heritage Foundation, which helped develop the exchange concept and was involved in the creation of Romneycare in Massachusetts, cited by some as the prototype for Obamacare.
However, Heritage explicitly opposes Obamacare exchanges. In a recent report, Heritage health policy expert Edmund F. Haislmaier writes, Health insurance exchanges are a good idea if they are used to implement patient-centered and market-based health reforms that enhance choices and value for customers. The exchanges prescribed by Obamacare will have the opposite effect.
Elsewhere in the report Haislmaier says:
The first point to understand is that the entire design for health insurance exchanges in the PPACA is a perversion of the core concept of what is an otherwise sound approach to improving health insurance markets.
". . . Rather than serving as a mechanism for expanding health insurance choice, variety, and competition, and for spurring plans and providers to innovate and offer customers better value, Obamacare exchanges will impose new regulations, administer new subsidies, standardize coverage, and restrict consumer choice and insurer competition more than it is already. Thus, in the PPACA Congress has perverted the exchange concept into a bureaucratic tool for federal subsidization, standardization, and micromanagement of health insurance coverage by the Department of Health and Human Services.
Try HillaryCare there sport. They had a few years to rewrite it after it's defeat in the 90's. I agree with someone that called you a HACK.That has to be the most disengenuous piece of crap that has been posted here for a long time. It never ceases to amaze me how you libs do not even understand the philosophy that you embrace. everything you said above is wrong---------every word of it.
conservativism is based on individual rights and freedom.
liberalism is based on the fear of failure and the idea that the state should be your momma for life.
They cannot actually defend this piece of garbage legislation, so they set themselves up on a higher plain. To every American's detriment
In other words they are deflecting from the facts of the bill
The facts of the bill is that it is almost a carbon copy of the health care bills the Heritage foundation crafted for Republicans.
Since when does the Heritage Foundation = "all Republicans?" Furthermore, the ACA hardly resembles what Heritage proposed. They certainly never dreamed up these Orwellian "healthcare exchanges."
Yea, we sure as hell don't want any of that 'free market' shit in the law, now do we???
Obama says Heritage Foundation is source of health exchange idea
"A lot of the ideas in terms of the (health insurance) exchange, just being able to pool and improve the purchasing power of individuals in the insurance market, that originated from the Heritage Foundation."
Barack Obama on Tuesday, March 30th, 2010 in an interview on NBC's Today show
Did Heritage originate the idea? Our research suggests that while Heritage has advocated for health insurance exchanges for many years, others did, too. Scholars credit Alain C. Enthoven -- an emeritus professor at the Stanford University Graduate School of Business who worked in the Defense Department during the Kennedy and Johnson administrations -- with popularizing the idea for an exchange as many as three decades ago.
Still, there's little doubt that Heritage has been a consistent and eager promoter of the exchange idea, especially during the effort to design a new health care system for Massachusetts. That effort concluded with the Democratic legislature joining with the Republican governor, Romney, to implement a system that includes a health insurance exchange.
On numerous occasions, Heritage scholars wrote approvingly of the exchange system in Massachusetts, known as the Connector. In a paper about the Massachusetts plan published on April 11, 2006, Edmund Haislmaier, a Heritage fellow in health care policy, wrote of the "truly significant and transformative health system changes that the legislation would set in motion."
Specifically, Haislmaier wrote that "this concept of organizing a state's insurance markets around a central clearinghouse represents a dramatic departure from recent state health insurance reform proposals. States have spent the past 15 years trying to expand health care coverage to small-business employees, with virtually no positive results. The Massachusetts legislation represents a bipartisan commitment to move away from the policies that have largely failed to make progress in covering the uninsured for the past 15 years."
In another paper, titled, "The Rationale for a Statewide Health Insurance Exchange," and published on Oct. 5, 2006, Heritage scholar Robert Moffit wrote that "the best option is a health insurance market exchange." Comparing it to a farmers' market or the used-car dealer CarMax, Moffit said the exchange "would expand coverage and choice" and would represent "a revolutionary change in the health insurance market."
Journalists seemed to give Heritage credit, as well. During 2006, columns and articles citing Heritage's role in promoting the health exchange idea ran in such publications as the Washington Post, the Dallas Morning News, the New Orleans Times-Picayune and the National Review.
We feel the president is largely right on this point. The idea for exchanges may have "originated" outside Heritage, but in well over a decade leading up to the introduction of the president's health care plan, Heritage clearly took a high-profile role in touting it, culminating in the proposal enacted in Massachusetts. And given that, they can hardly be shocked that the president is noting the think tank's role in developing the overall concept (even if he did so in a self-serving way).
more
From your article:
Is it the same idea? After Obama made his comment, we spoke to both Haislmaier and to Stuart Butler, Heritage's vice president for domestic policy. Both argued that the plan now enacted into law is fundamentally different in structure than the one Heritage advocated.
"What Obama and Capitol Hill did was to take a mainstream idea and push it toward a much more interventionist, regulatory model, as opposed to the original idea, which was more market-based," Butler said in an interview.
Here's another quote from one of the authors of the so-called "healthcare exchanges:"
Heritage Foundation Opposes Obamacare "Exchanges" [Mackinac Center]
The question of whether to create a state Obamacare insurance benefit exchange is a source of great confusion for state legislators and governors nationwide. Proponents of the exchanges, among them Obamacare's ideological supporters and many of the private businesses hoping to profit from exchange contracts, are adding to the confusion by claiming, conservatives favor creating an exchange. They often point to the Heritage Foundation, which helped develop the exchange concept and was involved in the creation of Romneycare in Massachusetts, cited by some as the prototype for Obamacare.
However, Heritage explicitly opposes Obamacare exchanges. In a recent report, Heritage health policy expert Edmund F. Haislmaier writes, Health insurance exchanges are a good idea if they are used to implement patient-centered and market-based health reforms that enhance choices and value for customers. The exchanges prescribed by Obamacare will have the opposite effect.
Elsewhere in the report Haislmaier says:
The first point to understand is that the entire design for health insurance exchanges in the PPACA is a perversion of the core concept of what is an otherwise sound approach to improving health insurance markets.
". . . Rather than serving as a mechanism for expanding health insurance choice, variety, and competition, and for spurring plans and providers to innovate and offer customers better value, Obamacare exchanges will impose new regulations, administer new subsidies, standardize coverage, and restrict consumer choice and insurer competition more than it is already. Thus, in the PPACA Congress has perverted the exchange concept into a bureaucratic tool for federal subsidization, standardization, and micromanagement of health insurance coverage by the Department of Health and Human Services.
Bottom line: Obamacare exchanges bare no resemblance to what the Heritage Foundation proposed. Obama is using the term "exchanges" as a fig leaf to cover what his Orwellian bureaucracies really do.
Liberalism is trust of the people, tempered by prudence; conservatism, distrust of people, tempered by fear.
William E. Gladstone (1809 1898)
It is pretty amazing just how stupid you right wing parrots really are, but parrots can only mimic, not think.
Hannity is a HACK.
Liberalism is totally based on logic, reason and pragmatism. There really is no hard 'ideology' for liberalism, except liberals put people before property. Liberals have a firm grasp on reality and address problems using the best method. It doesn't have to be an idea that a liberal came up with. The health care law called 'Obamacare' is a PERFECT example. It is almost wholly a Republican idea, right down to the 'individual mandate, your you right wing 'ideologue' parrots chirp whatever morons like Hannity tell you.
Conservatism is totally based on emotion, the strongest human emotion...FEAR.
Democrats never agree on anything, that's why they're Democrats. If they agreed with each other, they would be Republicans.
Will Rogers
That has to be the most disengenuous piece of crap that has been posted here for a long time. It never ceases to amaze me how you libs do not even understand the philosophy that you embrace. everything you said above is wrong---------every word of it.
conservativism is based on individual rights and freedom.
liberalism is based on the fear of failure and the idea that the state should be your momma for life.
Hey pea brain, EXPLAIN how you right wing parrots can be for something Republicans propose and vehemently against it when Democrats propose the same fucking thing?
The ACA is almost a carbon copy of the health care bills the Heritage foundation crafted for Republicans.
Obamacare hasn't even begun yet. Nobody will be taking your advice about Obamacare, we will see soon how well it works for everyone.
As for letting the free market take over, we've seen how well that doesn't work. You're forgetting the greed factor. It is what led us to creating Obamacare in the first place.
Affordable healthcare is necessary for a robust economy to finally take hold.
Is that why Congress wanted to be exempt from Obamacare?
and the unions?
It's Hillarycare on steroids and the Statist Progressives have been waiting for 100 years to foist it...Get control of healthcare? YOU have control of the people.That has to be the most disengenuous piece of crap that has been posted here for a long time. It never ceases to amaze me how you libs do not even understand the philosophy that you embrace. everything you said above is wrong---------every word of it.
conservativism is based on individual rights and freedom.
liberalism is based on the fear of failure and the idea that the state should be your momma for life.
Hey pea brain, EXPLAIN how you right wing parrots can be for something Republicans propose and vehemently against it when Democrats propose the same fucking thing?
The ACA is almost a carbon copy of the health care bills the Heritage foundation crafted for Republicans.
No, its not. You are the pea brain in this debate.
They cannot actually defend this piece of garbage legislation, so they set themselves up on a higher plain. To every American's detriment
In other words they are deflecting from the facts of the bill
The facts of the bill is that it is almost a carbon copy of the health care bills the Heritage foundation crafted for Republicans.
So? They does not change anything. Hack much?
There is no such thing as an almost carbon copy
Thank you for pointing out my horrific error....fixedThe facts of the bill is that it is almost a carbon copy of the health care bills the Heritage foundation crafted for Republicans.
So? They does not change anything. Hack much?
There is no such thing as an almost carbon copy
They doesn't?
Try HillaryCare there sport. They had a few years to rewrite it after it's defeat in the 90's. I agree with someone that called you a HACK.They cannot actually defend this piece of garbage legislation, so they set themselves up on a higher plain. To every American's detriment
In other words they are deflecting from the facts of the bill
The facts of the bill is that it is almost a carbon copy of the health care bills the Heritage foundation crafted for Republicans.
It fits and sticks.
Thank you for pointing out my horrific error....fixedSo? They does not change anything. Hack much?
There is no such thing as an almost carbon copy
They doesn't?
Thank you for pointing out my horrific error....fixedThey doesn't?
Wingnuts have been doing that to me so I thought I'd return the favor. Thanks for fixing, I wouldn't have slept tonight thinking about it.
