Obamacare INVENTED by Conservatives . Do they seek redemption?!?!?!?

[thanatos144]

BTW, Romney's is a State wide policy... What he did there doesn't affect me here. That just gives me one more reason NOT to more to Taxachuessetts.

Why Do Conservatives Support Medicare and Medicaid?

by Jacob G. Hornberger October 4, 2013

For the life of me, I just don’t get conservatives. They profess to love free enterprise and free markets and they say they hate socialism.

Okay, then why do they never call for the repeal of Medicare and Medicaid?


.

Why dont you just admit to being a democrat?

 

[Contumacious]

EVERY AMERICAN MUST BE ****COMPELLED****TO JOIN AN OBAMA-LIKE HEALTHCARE"

HERITAGE FOUNDATION

PAGE 51

1989

I remember when that mandatory crap was being discussed. I was against it then and I am against it now.

Hummmm ,,,,, So you are against people being forced to behave in a responsible manner and for paying for the healthcare of someone who can buy health care but refuses to do so."
.

Yo ding dong the federal government has no authority to force people to behave in a "responsible manner".

Nor did the have the authority to enact medicaid/medicare which caused health care to become unaffordable for many Americans.

.

 

[Pauli007001]

Thank God the few Republicans who were pushing it back then never got it through.

The rest were smart enough to avoid it.

BTW, Romney's is a State wide policy... What he did there doesn't affect me here. That just gives me one more reason NOT to more to Taxachuessetts.

They like to tell you that it is the same, but it's not.
Romney signed the bill because it's what the people wanted, he did not write the bill, it was written by dems, acting under Ted Kennedy's supervision.

 

[Contumacious]

Partisan democrats want the credit for this POS legislation, partisan republicans don't want to have to acknowledge that there party is on board with it and all the theatre is just theatre..

Well, if they seriously want to stop Obamacare and redeem themselves then they have the tools:

Constitution Gives House of Reps the "Weapon" to Destroy ObamaCare


The New American

04 October 2013


Can there be a more fruitful source of dispute, or a kind of dispute more difficult to be settled?

— James Madison speaking at the Constitutional Convention of 1787 on the spending bill battles between the House and Senate that would occur.


As the “Government Shutdown” puppet show continues its run in Washington, D.C., there is power in the Constitution to close down the entire production.

Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution requires that “all bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives, but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other bills.”

The solution to the ObamaCare funding fiasco is right there in black and white."

.

 

[Contumacious]

Another Liberaltarian thread where it is always a republicans fault because we didn't nominate in the crazy old bastard Ron Paul. Grow up . !

Yo ignoramus, can't handle the truth?!?!?!?

.

 

[thanatos144]

Another Liberaltarian thread where it is always a republicans fault because we didn't nominate in the crazy old bastard Ron Paul. Grow up . !

Yo ignoramus, can't handle the truth?!?!?!?

.

I will see if you ever actually use the whole truth.

 

[Vox]

Contumacious, what is your point?

That the classic RINOs are the big spenders as well?

of course, they are.

still makes them a lesser evil in a two-party system.

 

[thanatos144]

Contumacious, what is your point?

That the classic RINOs are the big spenders as well?

of course, they are.

still makes them a lesser evil in a two-party system.

His point is only the great messiah Ron Paul can save us with his Obama like policies.

 

[Contumacious]

Contumacious, what is your point?

That the classic RINOs are the big spenders as well?

of course, they are.

still makes them a lesser evil in a two-party system.

My point is that since there are socialists in BOTH parties, that a fraud is being perpetrated upon the electorate.

The proper designation should be :

Libertarians vs Socialists

.

 

[thanatos144]

Contumacious, what is your point?

That the classic RINOs are the big spenders as well?

of course, they are.

still makes them a lesser evil in a two-party system.

My point is that since there are socialists in BOTH parties, that a fraud is being perpetrated upon the electorate.

The proper designation should be :

Libertarians vs Socialists

.

Why ?

 

[Spiderman]

good grief, still trying to excuse this thug of a man Obama and his comrades in arms..

who the hell is lew Rockwell?

sheesh, it goes on and on with these people

Steph, Obamacare sucks regardless of who proposed the idea.

But as you can see the idea originated in the "conservative"camp. That means that BOTH parties are composed of government supremacist scumbags. And that we are on our own - no one is protecting our best interests.

.

It matters not where an idea originates it matters who forces that idea on the people.

 

[Contumacious]

Contumacious, what is your point?

That the classic RINOs are the big spenders as well?

of course, they are.

still makes them a lesser evil in a two-party system.

My point is that since there are socialists in BOTH parties, that a fraud is being perpetrated upon the electorate.

The proper designation should be :

Libertarians vs Socialists

.

Why ?

My point is that since there are socialists in BOTH parties, that a fraud is being perpetrated upon the electorate.

The proper designation should be :

Libertarians vs Socialists

.

 

[Contumacious]

good grief, still trying to excuse this thug of a man Obama and his comrades in arms..

who the hell is lew Rockwell?

sheesh, it goes on and on with these people

Steph, Obamacare sucks regardless of who proposed the idea.

But as you can see the idea originated in the "conservative"camp. That means that BOTH parties are composed of government supremacist scumbags. And that we are on our own - no one is protecting our best interests.

.

It matters not where an idea originates it matters who forces that idea on the people.

True.

But as I stated earlier they republicans have the means by which to destroy obama hellcare using Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution

.

 

[Vox]

Contumacious, what is your point?

That the classic RINOs are the big spenders as well?

of course, they are.

still makes them a lesser evil in a two-party system.

His point is only the great messiah Ron Paul can save us with his Obama like policies.

I don't consider any politician to be a messiah. I like Ron Paul and I like a lot of libertarian policies, I do not consider them possible to be implemented in our country at this point.
Does not mean we can't implement a lot of principles he stands for.

But in all reality, Ron Paul is not electable on the national arena - not now.
he might be if the economy crashes and inflation skyrockets due to the keynesian coma we've been in for the last 5 years ( and before as well, but it was not coma, it was a stupor before).
But if any turmoil ensues, I can guarantee you, that the most obnoxious and tyrannical elements will come to the top - and those are in a way provoking turmoil.

 

[Vox]

Contumacious, what is your point?

That the classic RINOs are the big spenders as well?

of course, they are.

still makes them a lesser evil in a two-party system.

My point is that since there are socialists in BOTH parties, that a fraud is being perpetrated upon the electorate.

The proper designation should be :

Libertarians vs Socialists

.

true. However, if you have 50% of the country on the taxpayer's feeding tube you can not cut that tube overnight without provoking a revolt.
I know that the feeding tube was introduced exactly for this reason, but cutting it off should be gradual, and the policies of libertarians, no matter how reasonable tey are will not resonate with tube dependents.

 

[OriginalShroom]

You want to claim that Republicans supported this bill??

Name them.

Name the ones who voted for it.

Name the ones who defended it.

Name the ones who helped to write it.

 

[Vox]

You want to claim that Republicans supported this bill??

Name them.

Name the ones who voted for it.

Name the ones who defended it.

Name the ones who helped to write it.

The idea of individual mandate and healthcare reform is not a toxic idea by itself.

It is the way it is implemented - what matters.
The current way is a classic leftist tyranny

 

[Contumacious]

Contumacious, what is your point?

That the classic RINOs are the big spenders as well?

of course, they are.

still makes them a lesser evil in a two-party system.

My point is that since there are socialists in BOTH parties, that a fraud is being perpetrated upon the electorate.

The proper designation should be :

Libertarians vs Socialists

.

true. However, if you have 50% of the country on the taxpayer's feeding tube you can not cut that tube overnight without provoking a revolt.
I know that the feeding tube was introduced exactly for this reason, but cutting it off should be gradual, and the policies of libertarians, no matter how reasonable tey are will not resonate with tube dependents.

I see.

So you go to your doctor tomorrow who diagnoses you with a malignant tumor. Do you want it remove now or after it metastasizes?!?!?!?!?!?

.

 

[Vox]

My point is that since there are socialists in BOTH parties, that a fraud is being perpetrated upon the electorate.

The proper designation should be :

Libertarians vs Socialists

.

true. However, if you have 50% of the country on the taxpayer's feeding tube you can not cut that tube overnight without provoking a revolt.
I know that the feeding tube was introduced exactly for this reason, but cutting it off should be gradual, and the policies of libertarians, no matter how reasonable tey are will not resonate with tube dependents.

I see.

So you go to your doctor tomorrow who diagnoses you with a malignant tumor. Do you want it remove now or after it metastasizes?!?!?!?!?!?

.

it depends on a tumor they all behave in a different manner. some need to be irradiated/chemo first, before the surgery

 

[Pheonixops]

EVERY AMERICAN MUST BE ****COMPELLED****TO JOIN AN OBAMA-LIKE HEALTHCARE"

HERITAGE FOUNDATION

PAGE 51

1989

I remember when that mandatory crap was being discussed. I was against it then and I am against it now.

Hummmm ,,,,, So you are against people being forced to behave in a responsible manner and for paying for the healthcare of someone who can buy health care but refuses to do so.
Personally I think everyone should have health insuranse whether they willingly purchase it or are forced to purchase it. I am tired of deadbeats refusing to carry their part of the load and raising the cost of my health insurance.

Yep, I certainly am guilty of not wanting people to be FORCED to buy health insurance and to incur an additional cost they may not be able to handle. It's much different than having a mandatory law to carry auto insurance, because no one is forcing anyone to buy an automobile, so if you don't own an automobile, you won't have to pay for auto insurance.

When the president first touted his plan, it was supposed to be VOLUNTARY in contrast to Hillary's mandatory plan. Here's what he ran on:


The Blueprint for Change: on Health Care


No one turned away due to illness or pre-existing condition

The Obama Plan will have the following features:
Guaranteed Eligibility: No American will be turned away FROM ANY INSURANCE PLAN because of illness or pre-existing conditions.
Comprehensive Benefits: The benefit package will be similar to that offered through Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), the plan members of Congress have.
Affordable Premiums, Co-Pays and Deductibles.
Subsidies: Those in need who do not qualify for Medicaid or SCHIP will receive an income-related federal subsidy to buy into the new public plan or purchase a private health care plan.
Simplified Paperwork and Reined in Health Costs.
Easy Enrollment:
Portability and Choice Participants will be able to move from job to job without jeopardizing their health care coverage.
Quality and Efficiency: Insurance companies will be required to report data on quality.

Source: Campaign booklet, “Blueprint for Change”, p. 6-9 Feb 2, 2008

Buy private insurance via National Health Insurance Exchange
OBAMA’S PLAN
National Health Insurance Exchange:
The Obama plan will create a National Health Insurance Exchange to help individuals who wish to purchase a private insurance plan. The Exchange will act as a watchdog group and help reform the private insurance market by creating rules and standards for participat-ing insurance plans to ensure fairness and to make individual coverage more affordable and accessible. Insurers would have to issue every applicant a policy, and charge fair and stable premiums that will not depend on how healthy you are. The Exchange will require that all the plans offered are at least as generous as the new public plan and have the same standards for quality and efficiency. The Exchange would evaluate plans and make the differences among the plans, including cost of services, public.

" Walk back with us through the mists of time to early 2008, and you might remember then-candidate Barack Obama defending the rights of hard-working people so they would not be forced to buy health insurance.

Obama's position was different from his two nearest rivals, Hillary Clinton and John Edwards, who included mandates for individuals to buy health insurance in their plans for reform. It was an issue that got downright contentious on the campaign trail. "

" At a debate in South Carolina, Edwards said Obama's plan really wasn't universal health care, since it didn't have a mandate to ensure everyone was covered.

Obama replied that his plan was universal (a claim we rated Barely True ) and explained why he was against a mandate: "A mandate means that in some fashion, everybody will be forced to buy health insurance. ... But I believe the problem is not that folks are trying to avoid getting health care. The problem is they can't afford it. And that's why my plan emphasizes lowering costs."