Did you guys read the article? Costs have doubled in the last decade, and tripled since 2001. The Affordable Care Act was passed in 2010. Costs have actually slowed since the ACA.
This here is prejudiced, bigoted, and is a real problem for most younger liberals.
They actually believe that conservatives don’t like the ACA due to fear, and not wanting to think critically, when in fact, it is the people who think critically that understand the bill is harmful, and the ones who want to disregard any debate on the bill via ad hominem (what you just did) that are in fact not thinking critically.
I posted what, 5 links below? Did I not “think” enough for you?
You posted how many? None. Just one post attacking ad hominem as if it proved your point. Attacking someone else doesn’t prove your point.
And the conservatives are the arrogant ones I take it, correct?
You don’t have to state your opinion. Who cares right? You’re just right.
And when it comes to saying that everyone is stupid, and just blames the ACA without knowledge you don’t have to you know actually speak the truth when you say that.
You can just talk like a belligerent jack ass right?
It’s easy to just blame other people and not think critically about anything isn’t it? Jack ass.
May 21, 2015 at 5:30 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
47
17
Maybe you’re both too poor morally and too ignorant intellectually to see what you just did and why I just tore you apart.
Do I have to spell it out for you, or did you get it, child?
Since you apparently like to talk and make holier-than-thou posts by telling people what is right and wrong and how to post anonymous comments online, please bob, go ahead, spell it out for me.
May 22, 2015 at 12:19 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
52
1
“Why should I believe facts? They confuse and scare me. It’s just easier to blame the ACA and not think critically about anything.”
That was not a holier than thou post?
Are you this stupid? Or this much of an immoral person? Which? Do you not understand your first post belittled anyone who had a legitimate reason to not like the ACA? You took all people who don’t like the ACA and basically said facts scare them and they don’t know how to think.
I listed 5 links showing thought on the bill. What was that, me just being stupid? You kind of have to prove these people are stupid and scared rather than just say it.
My whole point was that you were being a holier than thou person. And yes, I don’t walk in and do what you just did.
If that makes you make a comment about holier than thou to justify your immoral and ignorant actions, you might then see why I called you a child, child.
And I’m calling you one again because you may as well have just went on Jerry Springer and said “you don’t know me” your words lack substance. Do you not see that?
Sorry bob, I still don’t get it – maybe I am stoopid. Can you explain it to me again maybe this time without any insults?
My post was a reply to Sally Ann who commented to Original Bob that “Affordable” Care Act was in fact Affordable.
I was not saying EVERYONE who felt the Affordable Care Act is not good is ignoring facts – I was commenting that Original Bob ignored the facts written in the article that costs have slowed since the ACA was implemented when he said the ACA was not affordable.
PS: Why didn’t you call out Original Bob for his use of quotation marks to indicate sarcasm? You gave someone else a lot of grief for doing that earlier this week – why aren’t you consistent with your criticism?
May 26, 2015 at 11:14 am
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
40
3
Bob, I know you like to debate with facts, links and it does sail right over the heads of liberals who still cling to the notion that Obamacare is all good and Conservatives are all bad for not liking it because we can’t think critically. Conservatives have been thinking critically for 5 years now and this “Law” of unintended consequences is still the worst legislation ever passed by Congress and set into law.
May 26, 2015 at 2:09 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
10
3
I find it really rather ironic how you emphasize stupid as stoopid, considering you were the buffoon who came in here stating that anyone who didn’t like the ACA was “stoopid”. The way you use “stoopid” is as if it was used childishly against you while you yourself used it childishly.
May 26, 2015 at 4:34 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
7
4
Confused,
He used the sarcasm properly.
“affordable” as in not affordable.
The other fellow said “thank you” rudely. It doesn’t score points, and made him an ass.
Saying affordable sarcastically to say a bill is not affordable, is hardly the same.
“you were the buffoon who came in here stating that anyone who didn’t like the ACA was “stoopid”
No, I never said that you stupid buffoon. Once again:
I was not saying EVERYONE who felt the Affordable Care Act is not good is ignoring facts – I was commenting that Original Bob ignored the facts written in the article that costs have slowed since the ACA was implemented when he said the ACA was not affordable.
May 26, 2015 at 4:48 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
16
5
I should also note:
I have corrected agent NUMEROUS times. I have also told him how he should not talk SEVERAL times.
I have told him we have a duty as conservatives to debate properly. In this page alone I corrected him about Ron, and told him that even he has a preconceived notion, and so does the other girl (Sally) who has just as much truth as him. That doesn’t show a bias, child.
I go after a primary few here for a good reason. They hold the most (false) moderate power.
Ron and Rosenblatt. These two do the most false equivalency I have seen.
The others I go after for other reasons, mainly, being brats.
Libby, Planet, You in this case.
May 26, 2015 at 4:52 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
38
4
He was not ignoring the facts.
He was stating that it was not affordable. You assumed he was ignoring the facts because you have a fixation on republicans ignoring facts. I will ask you again:
Do you not vote democrat?
It’s easy to see. Answer the question.
No one, other than someone with an affinity against conservatives would have felt the need to demean bob for a post that was simply saying the ACA was not affordable. I know motivation. You don’t have one in the absence of going after a conservative “no nothing”
May 26, 2015 at 7:16 pm
No longer Confused says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
21
1
Do you not vote democrat?
No bob, I do not. In the past few elections, all my votes went to Republicans. Congressmen, Senators and a no-vote for Obama … in two separate elections!
You are the one demeaning me, sir. You assumed I’m a Dem and went after me for “attacking” the GOP, yet I vote Republican and CLEARLY kept telling you I was replying to ONE guy with no intentions of insulting the whole party.
I will be happy to put this conversation to rest if you kindly apologize to me for making false assumptions and false accusations. Are you willing to extend an olive branch my way?
May 27, 2015 at 12:55 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
9
6
Well at that point I am clearly wrong, so yes, I am.
May 28, 2015 at 9:42 am
Confused says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
7
14
Worst. Apology. Ever.
May 28, 2015 at 2:02 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
I said I am willing and I was wrong.
I’m sorry.
Is this better?
May 28, 2015 at 2:26 pm
Confused says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Thank you bob. Your apology is accepted.
May 20, 2015 at 3:31 pm
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
189
57
Sally Ann, are you the new Libby defending the Law of Unintended Consequences, you know the one where the average family would save $2,500 per year on Healthcare costs and if you liked your plan, you could keep it and if you liked your doctor, you could keep him? Jonathon Gruber really brainwashed you, didn’t he? By the way, the vaunted state exchanges are almost all belly up now after we, the taxpayers funded them with over $5 Billion with a B.
I noticed in your diatribe that you said nothing to dispute the facts Sally posted.
Also, we only spent $5 billion to prop up the exchanges? Man, that’s a drop in the bucket compared to the $1 trillion we’re wasting on the disaster that is the F-35 fighter jet program. A program that Senator John McCain has said “in a nutshell, the [Joint Strike Fighter] program has been both a scandal and a tragedy” and that its repeated cost overruns “have made it worse than a disgrace.”
I’d rather see that trillion dollars reallocated to helping sick people than throwing it down the toilet on the biggest waste of money in this country’s history.
May 20, 2015 at 4:52 pm
integrity matters says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
61
14
David – See my post below disputing Sally’s post.
Regarding the govt wasting money, how are all those wind farm investments going for the govt??
I have no doubt that the govt could balance the budget if they focused on cutting out the waste and fraud that has permeated the govt. Obama should start there before asking to raise taxes on anybody.
May 20, 2015 at 6:13 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
20
2
Oy vey.
David,
I’m going to post a lot of links, and you’ll need to see a big picture when I do.
Here is one showing why healthcare spending has gone down, during what has been a slow economy.
In light of how much spending has gone down (not premiums) premiums should have slowed (as they did) and I would say the evidence shows the premiums as a percentage of GDP and earning growth has not in fact been a good percentage.
Note this trend has been going for some time. Here’s an article on it in the 90’s.
There is much evidence to show the economy is the reason behind the slight difference. When you then adjust for the poor economy, and stagnant wages, is the percent increase actually low? The answer is not just no, it’s hell no.
Charts showing inflation adjusted that the wages really haven’t done much at all in the last few years.
So we have premiums still rising during economic sluggish growth, while wages are low, all the worst combinations going on.
May 21, 2015 at 12:10 pm
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
82
4
Hey Bob, one other reason why Healthcare costs are slowing is the wonderful Obamacare policies with high deductibles, high out of pocket expenses and people just do not have the money to pay for Healthcare out of their pockets, so they just don’t go to the doctor or hospital unless it is an emergency and have no choice. Emergency rooms are being flooded with no insurance people and Obamacare people and the hospital has to figure out how to collect.
May 21, 2015 at 4:27 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
35
6
Agent,
It’s a whole lot of things, I certainly don’t know all of.
When people on the left try to claim that this bill is God’s gift to the world and that they are the only one’s who have researching abilities or knowledge on it, the arrogance angers me.
Your view point has truth. Even Sally’s has truth, but each an agenda in it. Her agenda is to justify the law. Yours is to make it not justified. I don’t mean to insult you when I say that. Everyone has a preconceived notion on aspects even after they have researched it, especially on something as controvertial as this law.
However, the reason I said oy ve was watching the liberals here use your conservative leaning to demean your opinion.
I would prefer to use facts to disregard someone’s facts. I consider it honest debate, fair debate.
That’s why I went off on confused. We should all try to be that way. Debate on issues.
May 20, 2015 at 3:47 pm
SWFL Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
82
6
Sally Ann, since when do we read the article and comment on the facts? That’s not how this blogging works. We interject our own facts to fit our opinions. I’ll be the first to admit that the ACA was not the answer. On the other hand, we created more prescription drugs for “new” diseases/ailments over the past 20 years that doctors must administer or they face malpractice. Ads are all over TV. Add in the new technology in medicine that doesn’t heal faster or better but finds & uncovers more problems and it’s inevitable that costs go up. Want a healthcare policy that costs what it did in 2001 – exclude any drug or medical test/procedure that was invented after 2001 and the policy would be pretty cheap
I don’t know about you SW, but I see wall to wall prescription meds advertised every night which have just came out. Usually, they have a list of side effects a mile long. They actually rival the GEICO ads in frequency.
May 20, 2015 at 5:02 pm
integrity matters says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
12
18
SWFL – you said “Add in the new technology in medicine that doesn’t heal faster or better but finds & uncovers more problems and it’s inevitable that costs go up.”
This blanket statement is so ignorant of common sense, it is incredible. If new technology finds and uncovers a problem, it at least gives a person a chance to fight it. The problem doesn’t go away just because its not found. Additionally, all medicines don’t work for all people.
I’ll be the first to admit that medicines and procedures cost too much money, but, I’d rather have them available for when I need them than not have them available at all.
May 20, 2015 at 4:36 pm
integrity matters says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
133
34
Hey Sally – There is nothing in this article that PROVES that healthcare costs have slowed since the ACA. The costs are still going up AND the terms of the coverage have worsened for many if not most.
Some of the people who got subsidies apparently had a higher income tax burden that surprised them. We still have not felt the full effect because all of the laws have not kicked in yet.
Tell me, why does the govt care if my employer wants to be generous and provide a better healthcare plan and benefits? Why should they or I be taxed for that? Don’t you think that is going to take even more money out of the economy?
All of you people who think the ACA was/is a good thing are so blind, it is frightening. And, you all are lining up to support HilLIARy. God help us!
While not the best option (I’d prefer something similar to the FEHB), I think the ACA is better than what we previously had. That being said, I AM NOT supporting Hillary at all. Please take your false assumptions somewhere else.
May 21, 2015 at 10:47 am
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
45
21
So Who, if you aren’t lining up behind HiLLiary, is it Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders? There isn’t much choice on the left side of the fence.
May 21, 2015 at 11:17 am
Who is doing what now?!? says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
14
14
Why can’t I consider someone on the right or a third party candidate? Why are you forcing me to vote liberal? That’s asinine.
Unlike you, I am not a low information voter who blindly votes along party lines without considering all options first.
I want to know EVERYONE who is officially running before I make a decision. Is that okay with you, Agent – can I learn about all who are running before I decide who gets my vote?
May 21, 2015 at 12:00 pm
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
99
17
Who, please give us a candidate who is running on a third party platform. Where is this third party? I suppose we could consider Bernie Sanders as third party since he is technically an Independent although as Socialist as possibly he can be.
You could pick among about 15 Republican candidates since they add about three per week. Any one of them would be 100% better than the one who passed Obamacare and is continuing his ruinous leftist agenda.
By the way, he went down to the Coast Guard Academy for their graduation and told the cadets that the biggest threat to our National Security was – are you ready, Climate Change????? This is the type of leadership we have had for the past 6+ years. I think the cadets may have been rolling their eyes a bit on that statement.
What part of Who is doing what now’s statement, “I want to know EVERYONE who is officially running before I make a decision”, do you not understand?
You said, “You could pick among about 15 Republican candidates since they add about three per week.” Just like me, Who is doing what now just may do that, if we believe that person is the most qualified for the job based on all candidates on the ballot. That is how it is suppose to work. Not totally discounting a candidate solely based on their party affiliation.
Please tell the class how President Obama has ANYHTING to do with the 2016 election and why anything he has done, not done, said, or not said should factor in someone’s decision in 2016.
May 21, 2015 at 12:23 pm
Who is doing what now?!? says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
27
5
Where is this third party you ask? Maybe ask google next time before you post a question that shows your ignorance.
Before deciding who gets my vote, I want to know EVERYONE who is running AND their history AND their platforms in order to be a fully informed voter. Agreed?
Since you asked, here is a list of the 16 third party candidates who have declared they’re running for President.
• Paul Chehade ◄ DECLARED
• Ken Cross ◄ DECLARED
• Mark Dutter ◄ DECLARED
• Marc Feldman ◄ DECLARED
• Martin Hahn ◄ DECLARED
• David Hendrix ◄ DECLARED
• David Holcomb ◄ DECLARED
• Lynn Sandra Kahn ◄ DECLARED
• Steve Kerbel ◄ DECLARED
• Chad Koppie ◄ DECLARED
• Bishop Julian Lewis, Jr. ◄ DECLARED
• Mark Pendleton ◄ DECLARED
• Darryl Perry ◄ DECLARED
• Scott Smith ◄ DECLARED
• Tami Stainfield ◄ DECLARED
• Samm Tittle ◄ DECLARED
May 21, 2015 at 12:47 pm
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
59
4
Well Ron, you and Who have a lot of studying to do to pick your new candidate for 2016. Perhaps you will settle for Roseanne Barr of the Peace & Freedom Party. We know how carefully you scrutinized Obama before you voted for him. Are you still sticking with your story that you are not a Socialist?
May 21, 2015 at 1:12 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
51
9
The easy answer to Ron, who is being a hypocrite:
Trends among party matter.
That’s why Obama’s voting matters.
Otherwise the next person will think they won the fight, and continue the policy.
Defeating Obama’s policies is exactly the point.
And I might add, you had this philosophy when it came to the potential president after Bush W (before Obama was elected)
Yes. Unlike you, I am a well-informed voter who does study each candidate and will vote for who I believe is the most qualified or, in some cases, the least unqualified. As a matter of fact, I have voted for more Republicans, especially on a local and state level, than Democrats.
It is not my story that I am not a Socialist, it is a fact.
Are you still sticking to your story that you are not a Progressive, even though you want to increase my taxes so my wealth is distributed to you?
How exactly am I being a hypocrite? When I call someone else a hypocrite, I present the evidence. Where is yours?
You said, “And I might add, you had this philosophy when it came to the potential president after Bush W (before Obama was elected)” Upon what statement did I make that are you basing your statement?
I disagree that trends among party matter. That is simple, lazy thinking. I believe each candidate is their owm person and should be given a fair evaluation based on their past actions and vision for the future, regardless of party affiliation and the previous president from that party.
If Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders or whoever is running as the Democratic candidate runs on a platform to continue President Obama’s policies, then I would agree with you. Should we assume that if the Republican nominee wins in 2016 they will go back to President GW Bush’s policies?
May 21, 2015 at 6:27 pm
integrity matters says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
44
3
Ron –
You claim to be a well informed voter and vote for the most qualified or least unqualified candidate. Did you vote for Obama in both elections?
If you did, you are either a liar or not as well-informed as you think you are.
Obama had NO experience coming into the first election and certainly much less than McCain. For the record, McCain was not my first choice, but he certainly had more experience than Obama.
The second election is debatable as to who actually had the most experience given Romney’s business and political background. Again, he was not my first choice.
Regardless, Obama’s lies and poor decisions during the first term should have made even a semi-informed voter run to Romney. Instead, the politically illiterate of society, with the help of the liberal media, went with the status quo.
I am guessing you either pick and choose which of my posts you read or have Agent’s level of reading comprehension.
I did vote for President Obama in both elections because I felt John McCain, by select Sarah Palin as his running mate and his impulse to go to war instead of searching for a peaceful resolution, shows poor judgement in his decision making.
How can you say John McCain hadmore experience than Barack Obama? Neither have held the office or any other executive experience.
You said, “Obama’s lies and poor decisions during the first term should have made even a semi-informed voter run to Romney.” I flat out reject that statement. President Obama was no less truthful than previous presidents and I personally do not think he made any decisions that have been proven to be detrimental to me or the country as a whole.
Quaestion, if Mitt Romney was such a great governor, why did he lose MA to President Obama by over 23 points? Don’t tell me it is becasue MA is so liberal. They are the same people who elected him to be governor over a Democratic candidate.
Regarding his business expereince. Do you understand how his business modeled worked? basically, he was picking winners and losers. Isn’t that was Obama’s administration was acuused of? Funny thing is, Obama’s administration was more successful.
In addition, if a company Bain purchased was rescued, they made money. If the company failed, they made money. What a risk taker.
Finally, I took the 47% comment very personal and believe it offended senior citizens, military personnel, middle class families, and the working poor.
May 20, 2015 at 3:49 pm
FFA says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
71
18
The govt has no business sticking their nose into private business or my health care…
Hi FFA. I agree. Can you believe we have had 5 years of this nonsense, endured all the lies about Obamacare and its effects on the American people and there are still those trumpeting its merits? What merits?
Celtica – I agree that businesses should not be burdened with the responsibility to provide healthcare. That’s why the govt needs to mind their own business.
However, I am not opposed to employers OFFERING as a BENEFIT healthcare coverage. In the capitalist environment, it is one way for them to attract and retain quality employees. Employers who cannot afford to do so should not be required, but they have to realize, like many things in life, you get what you pay for.
Unfortunately, Obama and the rest of the left think that “others” should get what “others” pay for.
How about the 93 million chronically unemployed or under employed? Do we just tell them to go back to the Emergency Room for treatment? Who pays for that?
May 20, 2015 at 5:15 pm
integrity matters says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
48
12
Celtica – Those are not my “other words”, so please do not imply what I am trying to say.
Unless your are too ignorant to know already, obviously, most employers offer family coverage. Also, Medicare was originally meant for those that were below the poverty line. However, the govt misappropriated those funds like they did with Social Security. As a result, they are severely underfunded and on the brink of bankruptcy.
History has a way of repeating itself, so how long do you think it will be before Obamacare goes the same route?
Integrity, why should employers pay medical care for spouses and children — or even the employee. It unnecessarily drives up the cost of the product to the paying public and is a burden to the business. You conveniently skip over that part. Or maybe it just hasn’t entered your consciousness. I thought people were supposed to be more self sufficient in the GOP – ???
Wishful thinking on your part that Obamacare will go away. It won’t. Not even by the GOP — it’s out there and will remain so as otherwise, they will be in the unique position of having GOP millionaires take away a very basic human need while gifting themselves Rolls Royce medical plans (well beyond the Cadillac plans).
Not if the GOP wishes to remain in the Senate, House — or even capture the White House.
As for Social Security, the GOP hated it back in the 1930s and yet it is still here.. I shudder to think what Bush would have done with it if he has his way with privatizing it so his Wall Street buds would get their hands on all that mula. You know, because the Iraq war turned out so well.
May 21, 2015 at 10:24 am
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
70
8
Celtica, your ignorance of how the Health Insurance industry has worked for decades is amazing. You ask why an employer should pay for spouses and children? They haven’t been. The employee has been paying it out of his payroll deduction. Yes, policies have offered family coverage, but the employer does not pay it. They have paid for employee cost as a benefit when the employee is hired. In many cases, the wife also worked and was covered under her employer policy. They would then pick which plan they wanted to cover the children on in terms of cost and coverage.
Obamacare is now on life support. The State Exchanges we spent $5 billion to set up are about belly up and unless Congress bails them out, the only thing left is the wonderful billion dollar Healthcare.gov and we know what a success that has been, don’t we?
May 21, 2015 at 10:40 am
integrity matters says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
52
10
Celtica – try to pay attention
First, I agreed with you that employers should not be required to provide healthcare. However, I am not opposed to them voluntarily providing healthcare as a benefit. Just like profit sharing, some employers make it available and some do not. Those employers that offer such benefits attract the best talent, which in theory, gives them the best opportunity to succeed.
Second, I never said Obamacare was going to go away, as much as I would like it to. My comment was that it will end up like Social Security and Medicare in that it will be an economic money pit that will continue to cause taxes to go up. Once the govt implements a program, they always try to throw more money at it to try to make it work instead of recognizing its failure and ending it. It becomes, in their eyes, too big to fail.
Regarding Bush’s idea about privatizing Social Security (the “retirement fund aspect”), there are both pro’s and cons. In my opinion, I would much rather manage my own money and direct how it is invested than rely on the govt. First of all, they would not be able to spend MY money on other programs like they have been doing for decades. Second, they have obviously shown they are incapable and unqualified to manage those funds. Third, the only “con” I see is that if I lose any money it is because I made a poor decision. If that happens, I have no one to blame but myself.
Nice parting shot on the Irag war comment. It actually was working out initially until Obama got into office. Obama sure showed us that his decision to pull out and tell the enemy when we were going to leave has worked so well.
Agent — 93 million chronically unemployed? Really? I would suggest they see their mommy or daddy or even the school nurse to kiss their boo-boos as they are too young — to work.
The total number of full time employees in the U.S. is 120 million, with another 27 million on a part time basis. Unemployed is at 8.5 million. Of the 308 million in US according to the census, 193 million are in the age group 18-64, leaving 55 million who are either going to school, non working spouses — or those who are sick or do not need to work.
As usual Celtica, your figures are bogus. The figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show the civilian labor participation rate (62.8%) is the lowest since 1978. Guess who was in office then? Initials are JC. 92,898,000 of Americans were not in the labor force in February. These Americans did not have a job and were not actively trying to get one. When Obama took office in 2009, it was at 80,529,000. Since then, 12,369,000 more have left the workforce. The bogus unemployment rate does not account for all these who have given up and left the workforce. We are supporting them all on every entitlement benefit known to man and many have got on Disability with Social Security even though they are capable of working.
Agent, you have been known to make stuff up. And so it goes with your ridiculous number of 93 million chronically unemployed. Please cite sources for your assertion. I am betting you cannot.
May 21, 2015 at 4:21 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
42
6
Have you noticed how she believes your main concern is making the poor pay for it?
This is the issue with liberal high ground mentalities. They aren’t in all liberals, but there are some like Celtica who believe they are morally correct and take disagreement as being immoral.
She cannot fathom that you are actually thinking about what is best for all in society.
She thinks your issue is what you pay, what the poor pay, etc.
She pulled the same crap on me and I immediately knocked her down a peg.
This is a question of how best to disperse healthcare.
Hey Celtica, how is your reading comprehension this week? I cited the Bureau of Labor Statistics in my figures. You may want to Google it and find out yourself where the 93 million came from and how far off your beliefs are.
May 20, 2015 at 4:54 pm
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
72
5
Libby/Celtica, I hate to tell you this, but FFA is his own boss and has his own agency. He is burdened with Obamacare, tried to sell it with limited success and has put up with all the snafus, cost and idiocy of the Federal Government.
So where are these taxes going to come from to pay for the universal healthcare you desire?
You’re being extremely disingenuous and you’re contradicting yourself.
You want them to pay for it, and for some reason for the government to distribute it.
Businesses are always more trustworthy than the government. If one business does something bad, I have choices. Go figure.
When you give too much power for the government to intervene in business, you allow cronyism. In order to stop that we need to keep the government out of it, entirely. No exceptions.
Stop being foolish. Even if you took business out of the equation and put the entire cost on the employee, the employee would need a higher income. The higher income would probably cost the employer more because they would now have to pay additional Soc Sec and unemployment taxes on that income.
For once, please try to think through the cause and effect of your brilliant ideas.
Dear Integrity: stop being so cranky. If Obamacare is a burden on business, then providing healthcare to employees is also a burden on business. Plain and simple. Talk about thinking things through.
You sure don’t mind taking healthcare from others because you think you pay for it, but you sure do mind if you think your healthcare is impacted — even though others pay for it.
Just another observation.
May 21, 2015 at 1:15 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25
12
Another form of disingenuous argument from you.
Do you even understand that you didn’t at all direct my comment?
You stated that businesses shouldn’t bear the responsibility. I pointed out you clearly do want them to bear the responsibility, and then said keep the government out of universal health care. It isn’t about the method of paying to me (as I have said several times I support a public option, whereas you have clearly said several times you support universal, as in no private healthcare)
It is about what provides best. The government should not be the sole provider of insurance. They need to stay completely out of how private business gives healthcare.
This allows them both to operate separately, and wholly at the same time, and for checks and balances, and most importantly, options.
May 21, 2015 at 1:17 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
28
9
Celtica,
He isn’t contradicting himself.
Businesses choose one, they don’t choose the other.
Also, they are not the same. False equivalency. Look it up.
Obama is interfering in the costs of said cost of health care, and inflating it by regulating it. If he wants to provide a public OPTION he is welcome, but regulating health care distribution is not ok and can lead to a cronyism environment. The government should not dictate how healthcare companies operate.
May 21, 2015 at 1:21 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
67
43
To emphasize a point, since you are basically a brat, and said a bigoted comment to me
“Bob, you are already paying for other people’s health care each and every time you buy a product or service.”
Made the assumption I’m pissed off about paying for people’s healthcare and am greedy.
Let me first start by saying conservatives give more time and money to the poor. Our issue is not paying for the poor, as you have wrongfully, and now MUST apologize for wrongfully accusing me of (being greedy)
Our issue is with the government screwing up the ability for people to care for themselves.
That is the issue.
You liberals are so messed up, you put yourselves as a moral superiority. You care for the gays more, you care for the blacks more, you care for the poor more, you care for equality more. Such arrogance and I am quite sick of it.
There are legitimate debates to be had without accusing people of not wanting to help the poor.
P.S. I give a larger share of my money to the poor to you, of that I am certain. When I paid for my wedding I nearly went broke because I did not pause a single month in my charitable contributions.
Note a couple aspects there. I paid for my wedding. Did you pay for yours?
I paid charitable contributions at the same time. If you paid for yours, did you pause for some buying for you and your special day?
Don’t attack my charitable notions without expecting me to do the same to you.
Bob, all I said to you is: “Bob, you are already paying for other people’s health care each and every time you buy a product or service.”
It is unfortunate that you need to stoop to name calling and attacks and state assumptions that were never made or implied directly to you.
If you are insulted, which screen name are you using so I can tailor my insults?
May 21, 2015 at 1:46 pm
integrity matters says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
39
10
Dear Celtica: I am not cranky. I am just tired of the foolish jibberish and ignorance of anyone who continues to support or justify Obamacare AND who believes the continual lies that Obama keeps telling.
He had the chance to unify this country and has done the exact opposite with his leftist ideology. Social and racial tensions are at their highest since the sixties because of his opinionated approach to problems. Most of which that were made before having all the facts. His policies and decisions have been poor, whether they dealt with local or foreign issues.
He is a disgrace to the office of the Presidency.
May 21, 2015 at 1:56 pm
integrity matters says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
28
8
Celtica – you said
“If Obamacare is a burden on business, then providing healthcare to employees is also a burden on business. Plain and simple. Talk about thinking things through.”
I have thought things through. In my example, the business has the CHOICE to provide healthcare coverage. The govt is mandating it.
By the way, I am not taking healthcare from anyone. Also, I AM paying my portion for my own healthcare. My employer pays the rest. No govt subsidy for me.
Neither you nor any of the other leftist cohorts on here have answered my question why it is okay for the govt to tax my “cadillac” healthplan? Is it a jealousy thing that I shouldn’t be so blessed? Is it simply a way to redistribute the wealth?
Integrity: Clearly, Obama and Obamacare just make you cranky.
Hopefully, the next Supreme Court decision will make you less cranky. However, if the SCOTUS upholds the King lawsuit, it’s curtains to the GOP who will be in the unique position of taking away benefits from sick people and who will never be elected again. Unfortunately for all of us, that will keep you permanently cranky.
May 21, 2015 at 6:14 pm
integrity matters says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
31
2
Celtica – Believe what you want to believe.
Please answer two questions for me.
1) Do you think Obama is a liar?
2) Do you continue to support his agenda?
Did Obama lie? Yep, that is the nature of politics and that is why they are not men of the cloth.
Did Bush lie? Repeatedly, causing untold tens of thousands to die. They are still dying.
Do I support Obama agenda? I Support Obamacare. Supporting a whole agenda is not realistic for an independent because that would be so Republican.
1) Do you think Obama is a liar?
2) Do you continue to support his agenda?
May 21, 2015 at 12:28 pm
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
152
21
FFA, following is what a friend sent me. It is humorous, but every word of it is true. Nice summary by an engineer from Purdue.
Here are the 10,535 pages of the Affordable Care Act condensed to just 4 sentences.
1. In order to insure the uninsured, we first have to uninsure the insured.
2. Next, we require the newly uninsured to be re-insured.
3. To re-insure the newly uninsured, they are required to pay higher premiums to be re-insured than they paid to be insured.
4. The higher premiums are required so that the original insured, who became uninsured and then re-insured, can pay to insure the original uninsured whose insurance will be free of charge to them.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is called “redistribution of wealth” or, by its more common name, Socialism.
Ron, how lazy were you on your thinking to think that Obama was the right choice? Obviously, you didn’t check his background out very carefully on who he hung out with, was taught by in Chicago or his Community Organizing days. If you truly thought he was the best candidate, you are a Socialist and always have been. Your father in law was entirely correct in his analysis of your political beliefs.
Somehow, you make my father-in-law look like a genius.
What beneift do you gain from incorrectly calling me a Socialist? Please provide your evidence where I have called for government control of ALL industries. THAT is Socialism.
Ron, he didn’t have to be a genius to correctly assess your belief system. The benefit I gain is exposing you for that belief system you hold so dear. Anyone who supposedly does research into candidates to glean info on them and then votes for the most liberal Socialist in the history of this country and thinks he was the best candidate for the job is by definition a Socialist. End of story!
You have yet to PROVE President Obama is a Socialist based on his statements and actions and the true definition of Socialism. Therefore, not end of story.
Why is exposing someone for something they are not so important to you?
May 26, 2015 at 10:03 am
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
51
31
So you are still lost in the Socialist belief system Ron? Still trying to justify your vote? I feel sorry for you man. One might think that after 6 years of this nonsense, you would wake up, but you are like Rip Van Winkle and are still in a deep slumber.
I do not need to justify my vote, but you should respect the votes of others. I have NEVER questioned your voting record, because no citizen has the right to question or criticize the vote of another.
Still no PROOF President Obama is a Socialist. For the record, your opinion and anecdotal evidence are not proof.
Wake me up with some evidence that President Obama is a Socialist based on his words, voting record and/or actions. Be sure to cite the true definition of Socialism to each piece of evidence.
For the record, “spreading the wealth around” is not a call for Socialism because it has nothing to do with the economy.
Who is the uninformed voter? Oh yeah, YOU!!
May 26, 2015 at 12:25 pm
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
55
35
Ron, I am afraid your answer is so weak, it defies logic about your voting record. All of your so called research on candidates and you just happened to pick the current Socialist in Chief twice. One time should have convinced you enough was enough, but then again, we should have expected someone who is from a decidedly Blue State to not see the light. Two mid term disasters for the Democrats and yes, it was all because of Obama’s policies, make no mistake about it. You take dumb to a new level.
You man my voting record where I vote for more Republicans than Democrats. That voting record?
Please list at least 3 Socialist agenda items President Obamam had implemented in his 1st term. Please include how the definition of Socialism applies to each.
May 20, 2015 at 4:52 pm
Gone Fishin' says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
56
3
At about the same prem rate, the plan I had in 2013 would’ve cost me $30 versus $205 I was just billed for a visit that included 10 mins w/ the internist ($145) and lab work using a single vial of blood parsed out into 4 billable test ($60). In 2013 at same facility, it would’ve been $20 for the doc and $10 for the lab work. God help those who need an Rx or any procedure to be done.
I know just what you mean Gone. By the way, the drug formularies have also changed and many name brands are not included in them. That puts it all on the consumer when there is no generic equivalent. My wife’s prescription bills are very high as a result which is abominable.
bob, I am sick of your bumbling. If I were as mad as you about the laws of the country I lived in I would move to a different one and live a happier life. People shouldn’t have to leave their home behind but I sense that you do your research and know your history and understand that sometimes people must get away from a government that has gone too far.
Please define and explain. What precisely are you doing here? What is anyone doing here. Debating points of a law and shaping the society they live in. Shall I go to one that doesn’t talk about issues?
That seems to be your point of contention. When have I complained about the country I live in?
There is no utopia. I do debate with guys about laws. And if you note, most my posts in this particular article have been related to what people are doing or saying in order to disregard honest debate.
Ron I called a fraud, as there are differences in the party, when he said Agent doesn’t know hot to vote without bias. I told him he does have bias and is a hypocrite.
Confused I said he can’t take a whole people who don’t like a law, and call them all stupid.
I told Dave the same basic thing, that there are reasons with facts to show the same point Agent was making, that the law is not lowering the cost of health care.
At which point in those posts did I say I hate my country?
Is reflection hating your country in the U.S. now?
“Confused I said he can’t take a whole people who don’t like a law, and call them all stupid.”
If you want people to take your points seriously, I suggest you stop lying. I already explained this to you above – I did not say that. Again:
I was not saying EVERYONE who felt the Affordable Care Act is not good is ignoring facts – I was commenting that Original Bob ignored the facts written in the article that costs have slowed since the ACA was implemented when he said the ACA was not affordable.
That is a big difference. I was just talking about Original Bob’s comment and you took it as me calling everyone who does not agree with the law as stupid.
I suggest taking a moment before you post to make sure you actually comprehend what people are saying before you jump down their throat.
Right off the bat Confused, you said he must ignore facts and it’s easier to listen to fear mongering. You are out right lying as to your leanings and why you said what you said.
You do think republicans are stupid. I read your post fine, and prior posts.
Also note, you mentioned my bias…What bias? You never said you were democrat, unless you just admitted to your bias by stating I only pursue liberals, and simultaneously accused me of being a liar, while simultaneously calling republicans who think the ACA isn’t affordable stupid, then saying you had no intention of saying that about all people, just original bob. LIAR.
“It costs that much for an apple a day and Mom’s chicken soup? Are they still calling this debacle the “Affordable” Care Act?”
This post, did not merit your reply unless you have a fixated issue with republicans who are against the ACA.
He said it wasn’t affordable. It isn’t. The only thing I can surmise, is that you don’t like people who say that, you aren’t used to people saying that, you think, that saying that means he doesn’t study facts.
Then I pay attention to demographics. Which leaning of person tends to believe the other side ignores facts, doesn’t do research, is bigoted, and homophobic? I’m sorry, but it is the left. The right usually attacks moral character, not intellect. If they go after facts they usually say you’re listening to the wrong people.
The way you disregarded it made it clear you were a left leaner. Correct me if I’m wrong Confused. Do you not vote left? Please do lie and say you don’t, or admit I made the correct assertion.
Right now, you were eviscerated in the argument. Your only hope is to question my character in that I even went after you for going after all people who question the ACA.
You’re in over your head.
My intellect is far exceeding yours. Admit that truth, then get lost.
I replied to your other comment and answered your question above. It has not posted yet, so I can not copy and paste it here too.
Please scroll up to see my response. You can also search for my amended user name since there will only be 2 posts with that text string.
Should the post not appear during the day Wed May 27, I will post it again. I will be happy to continue to answer your questions after you read and reply my recent comment (~7:20PM EST 5/26/15)
May 27, 2015 at 9:58 am
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
70
5
Bob, did you see what your Democratic Congressman said about the fiasco known as Obamacare? He was a big supporter of the law and he accidentally told the truth about it. He said the next big problem is that people cannot access the care they are entitled to. High deductibles, high out of pocket expenses. It costs too much to access the care. He added – That is the deceptive part of it. Of course, Democrats want to throw more money at it to “fix” it. This law cannot be fixed without bankrupting the country.
May 27, 2015 at 9:59 am
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
57
5
Bob, I forgot to add the name Jim McDermott as the Democrat from the great state of Washington who is now admitting there was something wrong with Obamacare even though he voted for it without reading it.
May 26, 2015 at 2:55 pm
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
107
59
Bob, you are anything but a “bumbler”. Your comments do tend to make the left leaners mad so they suggest you leave to another country. Perhaps they should look for another country where they will be happier. How about North Korea, Venezuela or Cuba?
You are absolutely correct about Ron. He professes to look at all the candidates records, has voted for some Republicans although he is proud to be an Obama voter twice. He is without shame on why he voted for him and that is why he is the biggest Socialist on this blog. Celtica runs a distant second.
I don’t think he voted for Obama twice, but yes, he does oversell himself as a moderate.
I’m pretty sure he’s mentioned he didn’t vote Obama one of the two times, and the other he alluded he didn’t vote Obama, rather against McCain. I think.
Thanks for the comment though.
My leaning against the left comes from my clear understanding of leaning left in society and the power that comes with it. I can’t allow myself to lean a way that is far easier to lean, and has literally taken away my options for internet carriers here, shipping carriers in Ohio and Oregon, my religious freedom on flying out a priest in WA, and constantly calls the other side a bunch of war mongering, elderly killing, poor ignoring people.
If anything, this makes me the way most rebel democrats are.
Actually Bob, Ron admitted to voting for Obama twice. He voted against McCain and then turned around and voted against Romney. You can see it in all its glory on his 5-22 post at 1:59 PM. He went into quite a rant against both of them. I had to hold my nose to vote for McCain, but even at that, he would have been a whole lot better than what we got. Romney would have been better still since he understood business and would have reigned in the unfriendly departments and agencies like EPA which tend to cripple business. He also would have repealed Obamacare and replaced it with something that would have been 100% better.
You said, “I had to hold my nose to vote for McCain, but even at that, he would have been a whole lot better than what we got.”. You do not KNOW that. What you should have said is, I had to hold my nose to vote for McCain, but even at that, IN MY OPINION he would have been a whole lot better than what we got.
You said, “He (Romney) also would have repealed Obamacare and replaced it with something that would have been 100% better.” He did not present any real solutions as a replacement. Please explain the differences between the PPACA and the healthcare reform he passed in MA and how his plan would be 100% better.
Let’s see if you can do some real research wiithout resorting to insults.
Ypu still have yet to PROVE President Obama is a Socialist. Maybe you will fair better with this challenge.
May 27, 2015 at 1:11 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
64
39
Actually Ron, we do know that.
McCain would not have passed the bills that reinflated the housing market. He definitely would have let the housing prices be what they were.
He would not have passed a stimulus, or the QE spending, which was part of how we inflated the housing markets.
I very much so doubt you realize how much Obama has destroyed the economy. I’m not talking in the now.
What do you think will happen when interest rates rise? Houses are not affordable, and he pushed up the cost of them on purpose.
The issue was houses were not affordable, people would default on loans, banks would go bankrupt, etc.
So I will ask again: What do you think will happen when this fake low interest rate period is over?
Housing prices will finally need to adjust for one. But it ensured and set up a second bubble.
You can’t do worse than what he did to fix the economy. You literally could not have done worse. Nothing, which is likely what McCain would have done, would have been better.
Actually, you do not KNOW because you cannot possibly KNOW.
How many times have president gone against their campign promises? How many times have we see the House of Representatives and/or Senate obstruct things the president wants to accomplish?
Now to address yopu points:
1. You do not know that his economic advisers would not have pushed for the stimulus. Remember, there was a Republican president who signed multiple stimulus packages. In addition, nobody knows exactly how much the stimulus actually helped or hurt the economy because the altrenantive was not implemented and may or may not have had worse results. Finally, the inflated housing market is one of the results connsumer spending and confidence began to rebound. Without that, nobody know how much longer the recession would have lasted and could have easily become a depression.
2. NOBODY has ever quantified that President Obama has destroyed the economy. In fact, I have presented more than enough data to show the economy has improved, even if at an anemic rate, since his first year in office. If the only data point you have as an indicator is the Labor Participation Rate, I have already debunked that by showing the lagest increase in the LPR in recent histroy occurred during President Carter’s administration. Was that economy booming?
3. Rearding an increase in interest rates. It depends on many factors, such as how much the rate increase, other economic conditions, how stable the housing market really is and not just someone’s opinion, etc. It could be a disaster or it may be a bump in the road while we adjust to higher rates.
4. You said, “You can’t do worse than what he did to fix the economy. You literally could not have done worse. Nothing, which is likely what McCain would have done, would have been better.” I must respectfully disagree becasue the economy was in far worse shape when he took office, regardless of who was to blame.
Until you start debating on facts, data and results, and not just throwing temper tantrums based on opinion and “methodology” you will continute to lose, child.
May 29, 2015 at 1:19 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
78
55
Republicans, other than George W Bush, have never pushed a spending package with the idea that it would help the economy. McCain would not have pushed a stimulus. You are arguing that OCCASIONALLY people break from party, while ignoring essentially patterns through history. Again, this is why I say you are not a moderate. Any time you hear a republican in the mix you ASSUME something that republicans don’t typically do, will be done, while you assume spending (the new deal with FDR) is something they won’t do (the stimulus and overall government solution of Obama) then you try to say Reagan used spending to fix the economy (which he fought against) and use that to say they are all the same.
I know your tactics, you aren’t a moderate.
Moving on:
DO YOU DENY, AND I TYPE THIS ALL CAPS, BECAUSE I NEED TO HAMMER IT HOME, THAT OBAMA INTENTIONALLY INFLATED THE COST OF HOUSES?
That one enough is enough to show NO ONE could have been worse. You are assuming that a republican would have come in and said “the problem is that the cost of houses went too low, I need ot increase the cost of them”
Ignoring the fact that were a republican to say that housing costs needed to go up when they were not affordable to the middle class would ELIMINATE ALL SUPPORT and therefore be impossible to pass NO REPUBLICAN none, let me repeat that NONE would pass it.
Therefore, I know that the WORST possible action was taken (attempting to inflate the housing market) and NO action can be worse than that.
We WILL have a second housing collapse as a result. DO YOU DENY THIS? It is a fact. NOT an opinion, you idiotic lying two faced swine!
I did not say President Reagan used spending to fix the economy, just that it happened while he was the president. And since he gets credit for fixing the economy he inherited, he must take responsibility for anything that may have added the recovery. That is how the real world works.
You asked, “DO YOU DENY, AND I TYPE THIS ALL CAPS, BECAUSE I NEED TO HAMMER IT HOME, THAT OBAMA INTENTIONALLY INFLATED THE COST OF HOUSES?” First tell me exactly what he did, all by himself, the intentionally inlate the cost of housing. If you can do this, I will agree with you.
How could the worse possible action been taken if the economy has been consistently improving since President Obama’s first year in office? Especially wehen we have experienced a Great Depression, Great Recession, and other multiple recession previously? Your logic makes absolutely no sense.
QUANTIFY, that means put into numbers, that President Obama has DESTROYED, meaning ruined beyond repair, the economy.
I agree with you that there will be another housing collapse, just like there will be another recession, stock market collapse (correction), etc. There si always something and it is not the job or the responsibility of the President of the United States to be able stop it. It is the market itself. If you don’t agree, then you must blame the 2 Republican president who presided over the Great Depression and Great Recession.
Nice insult. Way to go 3rd grade, child.
May 29, 2015 at 3:20 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
71
35
I haven’t bothered reading your follow up.
Do you know why I got riled up toward the end?
I legitimately thought you voted Obama only once. You are not a moderate. At all. Voting for Obama once you could be. Twice? Not possible. At all.
You have successfully tricked me. And that pisses me off. While I often call you a false moderate and want for you to admit it, I was hoping I was wrong and you would prove me wrong.
But this? Obama twice? Telling me I have no reason to believe MC Cain or Romney would have been better than Obama?
You are delusional! It is in no way moderate. The spending Obama did for the recovery is not something a republican would have done. PERIOD.
Regan presided during spending passed. He didn’t put forward a spending package geared to saving the economy.
Republicans never make government programs to save the economy. Even Bush W technically didn’t. He passed Tarp to save businesses from going under, he didn’t pass an annual spending stimulus designed to stimulate the economy.
You said, “He (Ron) is without shame on why he voted for him and that is why he is the biggest Socialist on this blog.” Please explain how voting for someone who is NOT a Socilaist, makes me a Socialist. Do you have any other evidence, outside of my desire for Universal Health Care, paid for by the government, but run by private companies, that I am a Socialist? Of course not.
I’m sorry Ron. It is not a stretch to say the only possible way we will become a communist nation is through people like Obama, who does it one step at a time.
I’ve seen your arguments here and they are wrong.
You usually use false equivalency to ignore every step toward socialism that Obama makes. It is rather frustrating to watch.
Just like you use false equivalency to compare Reagan’s spending.
Then you ignore his proposed spending, with a democrat congress. It wasn’t Reagan’s spending. It was indefinitely liberal spending.
May 27, 2015 at 2:16 pm
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
107
62
Bob, Ron is a lot like the golf commercial where the guy tops one shot, shanks another shot, kicks his ball out of the rough and then tells his partners “Don’t count that”. I have given him chapter and verse on Obama, the Socialist on previous blogs. I am not going to keep giving it to him over and over because he doesn’t understand the Obama agenda and apparently does not think there is anything wrong with what has been done for 6+ years or he wouldn’t have voted for him twice.
First, he is President Obama, not Dictator Obama. Take some time to read the Constitution to undersatend how little power the president really has in this country. That is by design.
Second, please lay out the steps.
It is not a false equivalency to compare the sepnding during President Reagan’s terms and President Obama’s. They both inhertied poor economic conditions, increased spending more than all other president combined, and signed some tax increases. A couple of interesting differences, The annual deficit has been declining since President Obama’s first fuill yaer in office, but they kept increasing during President Reagans. And the number of federal employees increased during President Reagan’s terms, but have decreased during President Obama’s. You can blame or give credit to anyone you like, these are facts.
You think you given me chapter and version, but all you have given me are some tax proposals, which are not even Socialist. You speak in Conservative/Republican talking ponits, but cannot provide evidence to back it up outside of opinion and anecdotes.
May 27, 2015 at 2:51 pm
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
54
24
Ron, you really should learn to use Google more and you might learn something about the President you hold so dear. All I had to do was Google – Obama’s Socialist Policies and it gave 22 good examples and I am sure they just scratched the surface.
I did exactly what you said and I read the piece from Mr. Conservative. Did you, or did you just see the headline? If you take those as truth and proof President Obama is a Socialist, I now understand why you are so confused.
Not one of the 22, even if true, is Socialsm, by the true definition. If you disagree, then present your case using the true definition of Socialism.
Why am I not surprised Ron? Almost everyone on this blog knows we have the Socialist in Chief in charge for the past 6+ years except for you. We are presented with his actions every week, sometimes several times a week. He has been a very busy guy implementing his Cloward & Pivin strategy he learned so well to bring this country down. I think the only ones further left may be Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren. Won’t it be interesting to see those two on the debate stage? You can eliminate Hillary to vote for since she is far too corrupt and is falling like a rock.
And if you look to your left, kids, you will see Agent once again sidestepping a direct question and diverting the conversation away from the topic being discussed.
If you would just answer my questions directly the first time, I would not have to keep asking.
All you ever provide are unsupported talking points and references to ill-informed, right-wing, Conservative websites and sources.
The fact that you are quoting a fictional author, speaks volumes for your poor understanding of economics, politics and the real world.
Your idea of reasoning is to expect people to take your word, unchallenged, that everything you say is gospel. Well, that does not work with actually intelligent people.
This is why most intelligent people are not Conservatives.
On todays internet (Foxnews.com), please note that carriers are expected to raise rates by double digits this coming year. Some rates will be 26% to 30% in some areas. Gee, I thought this law of unintended consequences was going to keep healthcare costs down. Looks to me to be a serious implosion. Stay tuned for more bad news on this Progressive solution to Healthcare costs.
Thank you for yet another endorsement for Universal Healthcare!
June 2, 2015 at 4:01 pm
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
36
1
Ron, you will never see me endorse Universal Healthcare. Let’s get rid of Obamacare and go back to the drawing board with Conservative solutions. If you want Universal Care like Great Britain, I suggest you get a transfer. They put people on the Pathway to Death over there rather than treat them.
Please provide the Conservative solution, including the benefits, savings, costs, and how it will be paid for.
Let me guess, every man, woman and child for themselves.
May 28, 2015 at 10:23 am
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
126
1
Ron, I have tried to reason with you for about 4 years now to no avail. I am tired of your diatribe and your demanding loaded questions. How about I leave you with a quote from a famous author.
There is no difference between Communism and Socialism, except in the means of achieving the same ultimate end: Communism proposes to enslave men by force, Socialism- by vote. It is merely the difference between Murder and Suicide. Ayn Rand
It costs that much for an apple a day and Mom’s chicken soup? Are they still calling this debacle the “Affordable” Care Act?
Progressive Democrats are. Anyone living in the real world aren’t.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
This here is prejudiced, bigoted, and is a real problem for most younger liberals.
They actually believe that conservatives don’t like the ACA due to fear, and not wanting to think critically, when in fact, it is the people who think critically that understand the bill is harmful, and the ones who want to disregard any debate on the bill via ad hominem (what you just did) that are in fact not thinking critically.
I posted what, 5 links below? Did I not “think” enough for you?
You posted how many? None. Just one post attacking ad hominem as if it proved your point. Attacking someone else doesn’t prove your point.
You want to prove it, go ahead.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
“Why would I care about what you think?”
And the conservatives are the arrogant ones I take it, correct?
You don’t have to state your opinion. Who cares right? You’re just right.
And when it comes to saying that everyone is stupid, and just blames the ACA without knowledge you don’t have to you know actually speak the truth when you say that.
You can just talk like a belligerent jack ass right?
It’s easy to just blame other people and not think critically about anything isn’t it? Jack ass.
Maybe you’re both too poor morally and too ignorant intellectually to see what you just did and why I just tore you apart.
Do I have to spell it out for you, or did you get it, child?
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
“Why should I believe facts? They confuse and scare me. It’s just easier to blame the ACA and not think critically about anything.”
That was not a holier than thou post?
Are you this stupid? Or this much of an immoral person? Which? Do you not understand your first post belittled anyone who had a legitimate reason to not like the ACA? You took all people who don’t like the ACA and basically said facts scare them and they don’t know how to think.
I listed 5 links showing thought on the bill. What was that, me just being stupid? You kind of have to prove these people are stupid and scared rather than just say it.
My whole point was that you were being a holier than thou person. And yes, I don’t walk in and do what you just did.
If that makes you make a comment about holier than thou to justify your immoral and ignorant actions, you might then see why I called you a child, child.
And I’m calling you one again because you may as well have just went on Jerry Springer and said “you don’t know me” your words lack substance. Do you not see that?
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Bob, I know you like to debate with facts, links and it does sail right over the heads of liberals who still cling to the notion that Obamacare is all good and Conservatives are all bad for not liking it because we can’t think critically. Conservatives have been thinking critically for 5 years now and this “Law” of unintended consequences is still the worst legislation ever passed by Congress and set into law.
I find it really rather ironic how you emphasize stupid as stoopid, considering you were the buffoon who came in here stating that anyone who didn’t like the ACA was “stoopid”. The way you use “stoopid” is as if it was used childishly against you while you yourself used it childishly.
Confused,
He used the sarcasm properly.
“affordable” as in not affordable.
The other fellow said “thank you” rudely. It doesn’t score points, and made him an ass.
Saying affordable sarcastically to say a bill is not affordable, is hardly the same.
False equivalency.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
I should also note:
I have corrected agent NUMEROUS times. I have also told him how he should not talk SEVERAL times.
I have told him we have a duty as conservatives to debate properly. In this page alone I corrected him about Ron, and told him that even he has a preconceived notion, and so does the other girl (Sally) who has just as much truth as him. That doesn’t show a bias, child.
I go after a primary few here for a good reason. They hold the most (false) moderate power.
Ron and Rosenblatt. These two do the most false equivalency I have seen.
The others I go after for other reasons, mainly, being brats.
Libby, Planet, You in this case.
He was not ignoring the facts.
He was stating that it was not affordable. You assumed he was ignoring the facts because you have a fixation on republicans ignoring facts. I will ask you again:
Do you not vote democrat?
It’s easy to see. Answer the question.
No one, other than someone with an affinity against conservatives would have felt the need to demean bob for a post that was simply saying the ACA was not affordable. I know motivation. You don’t have one in the absence of going after a conservative “no nothing”
Do you not vote democrat?
No bob, I do not. In the past few elections, all my votes went to Republicans. Congressmen, Senators and a no-vote for Obama … in two separate elections!
You are the one demeaning me, sir. You assumed I’m a Dem and went after me for “attacking” the GOP, yet I vote Republican and CLEARLY kept telling you I was replying to ONE guy with no intentions of insulting the whole party.
I will be happy to put this conversation to rest if you kindly apologize to me for making false assumptions and false accusations. Are you willing to extend an olive branch my way?
Well at that point I am clearly wrong, so yes, I am.
Worst. Apology. Ever.
I said I am willing and I was wrong.
I’m sorry.
Is this better?
Thank you bob. Your apology is accepted.
Sally Ann, are you the new Libby defending the Law of Unintended Consequences, you know the one where the average family would save $2,500 per year on Healthcare costs and if you liked your plan, you could keep it and if you liked your doctor, you could keep him? Jonathon Gruber really brainwashed you, didn’t he? By the way, the vaunted state exchanges are almost all belly up now after we, the taxpayers funded them with over $5 Billion with a B.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
David – See my post below disputing Sally’s post.
Regarding the govt wasting money, how are all those wind farm investments going for the govt??
I have no doubt that the govt could balance the budget if they focused on cutting out the waste and fraud that has permeated the govt. Obama should start there before asking to raise taxes on anybody.
Oy vey.
David,
I’m going to post a lot of links, and you’ll need to see a big picture when I do.
Here is one showing why healthcare spending has gone down, during what has been a slow economy.
In light of how much spending has gone down (not premiums) premiums should have slowed (as they did) and I would say the evidence shows the premiums as a percentage of GDP and earning growth has not in fact been a good percentage.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/health-care/obamacare-and-the-weak-economy-are-slowing-health-care-spending-growth-20141203
Fact check saying the same thing.
http://www.factcheck.org/2014/11/the-great-premium-debate-continues/
http://amarillo.com/stories/011398/slows.shtml#.VV0HmlKH-uI
Note this trend has been going for some time. Here’s an article on it in the 90’s.
There is much evidence to show the economy is the reason behind the slight difference. When you then adjust for the poor economy, and stagnant wages, is the percent increase actually low? The answer is not just no, it’s hell no.
Then there is this.
http://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/Household-Income-Distribution.php
Charts showing inflation adjusted that the wages really haven’t done much at all in the last few years.
So we have premiums still rising during economic sluggish growth, while wages are low, all the worst combinations going on.
Hey Bob, one other reason why Healthcare costs are slowing is the wonderful Obamacare policies with high deductibles, high out of pocket expenses and people just do not have the money to pay for Healthcare out of their pockets, so they just don’t go to the doctor or hospital unless it is an emergency and have no choice. Emergency rooms are being flooded with no insurance people and Obamacare people and the hospital has to figure out how to collect.
Agent,
It’s a whole lot of things, I certainly don’t know all of.
When people on the left try to claim that this bill is God’s gift to the world and that they are the only one’s who have researching abilities or knowledge on it, the arrogance angers me.
Your view point has truth. Even Sally’s has truth, but each an agenda in it. Her agenda is to justify the law. Yours is to make it not justified. I don’t mean to insult you when I say that. Everyone has a preconceived notion on aspects even after they have researched it, especially on something as controvertial as this law.
However, the reason I said oy ve was watching the liberals here use your conservative leaning to demean your opinion.
I would prefer to use facts to disregard someone’s facts. I consider it honest debate, fair debate.
That’s why I went off on confused. We should all try to be that way. Debate on issues.
Sally Ann, since when do we read the article and comment on the facts? That’s not how this blogging works. We interject our own facts to fit our opinions. I’ll be the first to admit that the ACA was not the answer. On the other hand, we created more prescription drugs for “new” diseases/ailments over the past 20 years that doctors must administer or they face malpractice. Ads are all over TV. Add in the new technology in medicine that doesn’t heal faster or better but finds & uncovers more problems and it’s inevitable that costs go up. Want a healthcare policy that costs what it did in 2001 – exclude any drug or medical test/procedure that was invented after 2001 and the policy would be pretty cheap
I don’t know about you SW, but I see wall to wall prescription meds advertised every night which have just came out. Usually, they have a list of side effects a mile long. They actually rival the GEICO ads in frequency.
SWFL – you said “Add in the new technology in medicine that doesn’t heal faster or better but finds & uncovers more problems and it’s inevitable that costs go up.”
This blanket statement is so ignorant of common sense, it is incredible. If new technology finds and uncovers a problem, it at least gives a person a chance to fight it. The problem doesn’t go away just because its not found. Additionally, all medicines don’t work for all people.
I’ll be the first to admit that medicines and procedures cost too much money, but, I’d rather have them available for when I need them than not have them available at all.
Hey Sally – There is nothing in this article that PROVES that healthcare costs have slowed since the ACA. The costs are still going up AND the terms of the coverage have worsened for many if not most.
Some of the people who got subsidies apparently had a higher income tax burden that surprised them. We still have not felt the full effect because all of the laws have not kicked in yet.
Tell me, why does the govt care if my employer wants to be generous and provide a better healthcare plan and benefits? Why should they or I be taxed for that? Don’t you think that is going to take even more money out of the economy?
All of you people who think the ACA was/is a good thing are so blind, it is frightening. And, you all are lining up to support HilLIARy. God help us!
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
So Who, if you aren’t lining up behind HiLLiary, is it Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders? There isn’t much choice on the left side of the fence.
Why can’t I consider someone on the right or a third party candidate? Why are you forcing me to vote liberal? That’s asinine.
Unlike you, I am not a low information voter who blindly votes along party lines without considering all options first.
I want to know EVERYONE who is officially running before I make a decision. Is that okay with you, Agent – can I learn about all who are running before I decide who gets my vote?
Who, please give us a candidate who is running on a third party platform. Where is this third party? I suppose we could consider Bernie Sanders as third party since he is technically an Independent although as Socialist as possibly he can be.
You could pick among about 15 Republican candidates since they add about three per week. Any one of them would be 100% better than the one who passed Obamacare and is continuing his ruinous leftist agenda.
By the way, he went down to the Coast Guard Academy for their graduation and told the cadets that the biggest threat to our National Security was – are you ready, Climate Change????? This is the type of leadership we have had for the past 6+ years. I think the cadets may have been rolling their eyes a bit on that statement.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Where is this third party you ask? Maybe ask google next time before you post a question that shows your ignorance.
Before deciding who gets my vote, I want to know EVERYONE who is running AND their history AND their platforms in order to be a fully informed voter. Agreed?
Since you asked, here is a list of the 16 third party candidates who have declared they’re running for President.
• Paul Chehade ◄ DECLARED
• Ken Cross ◄ DECLARED
• Mark Dutter ◄ DECLARED
• Marc Feldman ◄ DECLARED
• Martin Hahn ◄ DECLARED
• David Hendrix ◄ DECLARED
• David Holcomb ◄ DECLARED
• Lynn Sandra Kahn ◄ DECLARED
• Steve Kerbel ◄ DECLARED
• Chad Koppie ◄ DECLARED
• Bishop Julian Lewis, Jr. ◄ DECLARED
• Mark Pendleton ◄ DECLARED
• Darryl Perry ◄ DECLARED
• Scott Smith ◄ DECLARED
• Tami Stainfield ◄ DECLARED
• Samm Tittle ◄ DECLARED
Well Ron, you and Who have a lot of studying to do to pick your new candidate for 2016. Perhaps you will settle for Roseanne Barr of the Peace & Freedom Party. We know how carefully you scrutinized Obama before you voted for him. Are you still sticking with your story that you are not a Socialist?
The easy answer to Ron, who is being a hypocrite:
Trends among party matter.
That’s why Obama’s voting matters.
Otherwise the next person will think they won the fight, and continue the policy.
Defeating Obama’s policies is exactly the point.
And I might add, you had this philosophy when it came to the potential president after Bush W (before Obama was elected)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Ron –
You claim to be a well informed voter and vote for the most qualified or least unqualified candidate. Did you vote for Obama in both elections?
If you did, you are either a liar or not as well-informed as you think you are.
Obama had NO experience coming into the first election and certainly much less than McCain. For the record, McCain was not my first choice, but he certainly had more experience than Obama.
The second election is debatable as to who actually had the most experience given Romney’s business and political background. Again, he was not my first choice.
Regardless, Obama’s lies and poor decisions during the first term should have made even a semi-informed voter run to Romney. Instead, the politically illiterate of society, with the help of the liberal media, went with the status quo.
What’s your excuse, if you voted for him again?
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
The govt has no business sticking their nose into private business or my health care…
Hi FFA. I agree. Can you believe we have had 5 years of this nonsense, endured all the lies about Obamacare and its effects on the American people and there are still those trumpeting its merits? What merits?
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Celtica – I agree that businesses should not be burdened with the responsibility to provide healthcare. That’s why the govt needs to mind their own business.
However, I am not opposed to employers OFFERING as a BENEFIT healthcare coverage. In the capitalist environment, it is one way for them to attract and retain quality employees. Employers who cannot afford to do so should not be required, but they have to realize, like many things in life, you get what you pay for.
Unfortunately, Obama and the rest of the left think that “others” should get what “others” pay for.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
How about the 93 million chronically unemployed or under employed? Do we just tell them to go back to the Emergency Room for treatment? Who pays for that?
Celtica – Those are not my “other words”, so please do not imply what I am trying to say.
Unless your are too ignorant to know already, obviously, most employers offer family coverage. Also, Medicare was originally meant for those that were below the poverty line. However, the govt misappropriated those funds like they did with Social Security. As a result, they are severely underfunded and on the brink of bankruptcy.
History has a way of repeating itself, so how long do you think it will be before Obamacare goes the same route?
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Celtica, your ignorance of how the Health Insurance industry has worked for decades is amazing. You ask why an employer should pay for spouses and children? They haven’t been. The employee has been paying it out of his payroll deduction. Yes, policies have offered family coverage, but the employer does not pay it. They have paid for employee cost as a benefit when the employee is hired. In many cases, the wife also worked and was covered under her employer policy. They would then pick which plan they wanted to cover the children on in terms of cost and coverage.
Obamacare is now on life support. The State Exchanges we spent $5 billion to set up are about belly up and unless Congress bails them out, the only thing left is the wonderful billion dollar Healthcare.gov and we know what a success that has been, don’t we?
Celtica – try to pay attention
First, I agreed with you that employers should not be required to provide healthcare. However, I am not opposed to them voluntarily providing healthcare as a benefit. Just like profit sharing, some employers make it available and some do not. Those employers that offer such benefits attract the best talent, which in theory, gives them the best opportunity to succeed.
Second, I never said Obamacare was going to go away, as much as I would like it to. My comment was that it will end up like Social Security and Medicare in that it will be an economic money pit that will continue to cause taxes to go up. Once the govt implements a program, they always try to throw more money at it to try to make it work instead of recognizing its failure and ending it. It becomes, in their eyes, too big to fail.
Regarding Bush’s idea about privatizing Social Security (the “retirement fund aspect”), there are both pro’s and cons. In my opinion, I would much rather manage my own money and direct how it is invested than rely on the govt. First of all, they would not be able to spend MY money on other programs like they have been doing for decades. Second, they have obviously shown they are incapable and unqualified to manage those funds. Third, the only “con” I see is that if I lose any money it is because I made a poor decision. If that happens, I have no one to blame but myself.
Nice parting shot on the Irag war comment. It actually was working out initially until Obama got into office. Obama sure showed us that his decision to pull out and tell the enemy when we were going to leave has worked so well.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
As usual Celtica, your figures are bogus. The figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show the civilian labor participation rate (62.8%) is the lowest since 1978. Guess who was in office then? Initials are JC. 92,898,000 of Americans were not in the labor force in February. These Americans did not have a job and were not actively trying to get one. When Obama took office in 2009, it was at 80,529,000. Since then, 12,369,000 more have left the workforce. The bogus unemployment rate does not account for all these who have given up and left the workforce. We are supporting them all on every entitlement benefit known to man and many have got on Disability with Social Security even though they are capable of working.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Have you noticed how she believes your main concern is making the poor pay for it?
This is the issue with liberal high ground mentalities. They aren’t in all liberals, but there are some like Celtica who believe they are morally correct and take disagreement as being immoral.
She cannot fathom that you are actually thinking about what is best for all in society.
She thinks your issue is what you pay, what the poor pay, etc.
She pulled the same crap on me and I immediately knocked her down a peg.
This is a question of how best to disperse healthcare.
Hey Celtica, how is your reading comprehension this week? I cited the Bureau of Labor Statistics in my figures. You may want to Google it and find out yourself where the 93 million came from and how far off your beliefs are.
Libby/Celtica, I hate to tell you this, but FFA is his own boss and has his own agency. He is burdened with Obamacare, tried to sell it with limited success and has put up with all the snafus, cost and idiocy of the Federal Government.
So where are these taxes going to come from to pay for the universal healthcare you desire?
You’re being extremely disingenuous and you’re contradicting yourself.
You want them to pay for it, and for some reason for the government to distribute it.
Businesses are always more trustworthy than the government. If one business does something bad, I have choices. Go figure.
When you give too much power for the government to intervene in business, you allow cronyism. In order to stop that we need to keep the government out of it, entirely. No exceptions.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Celtica –
Stop being foolish. Even if you took business out of the equation and put the entire cost on the employee, the employee would need a higher income. The higher income would probably cost the employer more because they would now have to pay additional Soc Sec and unemployment taxes on that income.
For once, please try to think through the cause and effect of your brilliant ideas.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Another form of disingenuous argument from you.
Do you even understand that you didn’t at all direct my comment?
You stated that businesses shouldn’t bear the responsibility. I pointed out you clearly do want them to bear the responsibility, and then said keep the government out of universal health care. It isn’t about the method of paying to me (as I have said several times I support a public option, whereas you have clearly said several times you support universal, as in no private healthcare)
It is about what provides best. The government should not be the sole provider of insurance. They need to stay completely out of how private business gives healthcare.
This allows them both to operate separately, and wholly at the same time, and for checks and balances, and most importantly, options.
Celtica,
He isn’t contradicting himself.
Businesses choose one, they don’t choose the other.
Also, they are not the same. False equivalency. Look it up.
Obama is interfering in the costs of said cost of health care, and inflating it by regulating it. If he wants to provide a public OPTION he is welcome, but regulating health care distribution is not ok and can lead to a cronyism environment. The government should not dictate how healthcare companies operate.
To emphasize a point, since you are basically a brat, and said a bigoted comment to me
“Bob, you are already paying for other people’s health care each and every time you buy a product or service.”
Made the assumption I’m pissed off about paying for people’s healthcare and am greedy.
Let me first start by saying conservatives give more time and money to the poor. Our issue is not paying for the poor, as you have wrongfully, and now MUST apologize for wrongfully accusing me of (being greedy)
Our issue is with the government screwing up the ability for people to care for themselves.
That is the issue.
You liberals are so messed up, you put yourselves as a moral superiority. You care for the gays more, you care for the blacks more, you care for the poor more, you care for equality more. Such arrogance and I am quite sick of it.
There are legitimate debates to be had without accusing people of not wanting to help the poor.
P.S. I give a larger share of my money to the poor to you, of that I am certain. When I paid for my wedding I nearly went broke because I did not pause a single month in my charitable contributions.
Note a couple aspects there. I paid for my wedding. Did you pay for yours?
I paid charitable contributions at the same time. If you paid for yours, did you pause for some buying for you and your special day?
Don’t attack my charitable notions without expecting me to do the same to you.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Dear Celtica: I am not cranky. I am just tired of the foolish jibberish and ignorance of anyone who continues to support or justify Obamacare AND who believes the continual lies that Obama keeps telling.
He had the chance to unify this country and has done the exact opposite with his leftist ideology. Social and racial tensions are at their highest since the sixties because of his opinionated approach to problems. Most of which that were made before having all the facts. His policies and decisions have been poor, whether they dealt with local or foreign issues.
He is a disgrace to the office of the Presidency.
Celtica – you said
“If Obamacare is a burden on business, then providing healthcare to employees is also a burden on business. Plain and simple. Talk about thinking things through.”
I have thought things through. In my example, the business has the CHOICE to provide healthcare coverage. The govt is mandating it.
By the way, I am not taking healthcare from anyone. Also, I AM paying my portion for my own healthcare. My employer pays the rest. No govt subsidy for me.
Neither you nor any of the other leftist cohorts on here have answered my question why it is okay for the govt to tax my “cadillac” healthplan? Is it a jealousy thing that I shouldn’t be so blessed? Is it simply a way to redistribute the wealth?
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Celtica – Believe what you want to believe.
Please answer two questions for me.
1) Do you think Obama is a liar?
2) Do you continue to support his agenda?
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
FFA, following is what a friend sent me. It is humorous, but every word of it is true. Nice summary by an engineer from Purdue.
Here are the 10,535 pages of the Affordable Care Act condensed to just 4 sentences.
1. In order to insure the uninsured, we first have to uninsure the insured.
2. Next, we require the newly uninsured to be re-insured.
3. To re-insure the newly uninsured, they are required to pay higher premiums to be re-insured than they paid to be insured.
4. The higher premiums are required so that the original insured, who became uninsured and then re-insured, can pay to insure the original uninsured whose insurance will be free of charge to them.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is called “redistribution of wealth” or, by its more common name, Socialism.
Ron, how lazy were you on your thinking to think that Obama was the right choice? Obviously, you didn’t check his background out very carefully on who he hung out with, was taught by in Chicago or his Community Organizing days. If you truly thought he was the best candidate, you are a Socialist and always have been. Your father in law was entirely correct in his analysis of your political beliefs.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Ron, he didn’t have to be a genius to correctly assess your belief system. The benefit I gain is exposing you for that belief system you hold so dear. Anyone who supposedly does research into candidates to glean info on them and then votes for the most liberal Socialist in the history of this country and thinks he was the best candidate for the job is by definition a Socialist. End of story!
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
So you are still lost in the Socialist belief system Ron? Still trying to justify your vote? I feel sorry for you man. One might think that after 6 years of this nonsense, you would wake up, but you are like Rip Van Winkle and are still in a deep slumber.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Ron, I am afraid your answer is so weak, it defies logic about your voting record. All of your so called research on candidates and you just happened to pick the current Socialist in Chief twice. One time should have convinced you enough was enough, but then again, we should have expected someone who is from a decidedly Blue State to not see the light. Two mid term disasters for the Democrats and yes, it was all because of Obama’s policies, make no mistake about it. You take dumb to a new level.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
At about the same prem rate, the plan I had in 2013 would’ve cost me $30 versus $205 I was just billed for a visit that included 10 mins w/ the internist ($145) and lab work using a single vial of blood parsed out into 4 billable test ($60). In 2013 at same facility, it would’ve been $20 for the doc and $10 for the lab work. God help those who need an Rx or any procedure to be done.
I know just what you mean Gone. By the way, the drug formularies have also changed and many name brands are not included in them. That puts it all on the consumer when there is no generic equivalent. My wife’s prescription bills are very high as a result which is abominable.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
My “bumbling”.
Please define and explain. What precisely are you doing here? What is anyone doing here. Debating points of a law and shaping the society they live in. Shall I go to one that doesn’t talk about issues?
That seems to be your point of contention. When have I complained about the country I live in?
There is no utopia. I do debate with guys about laws. And if you note, most my posts in this particular article have been related to what people are doing or saying in order to disregard honest debate.
Ron I called a fraud, as there are differences in the party, when he said Agent doesn’t know hot to vote without bias. I told him he does have bias and is a hypocrite.
Confused I said he can’t take a whole people who don’t like a law, and call them all stupid.
I told Dave the same basic thing, that there are reasons with facts to show the same point Agent was making, that the law is not lowering the cost of health care.
At which point in those posts did I say I hate my country?
Is reflection hating your country in the U.S. now?
Maybe you’re the one who is bumbling. Not I.
“Confused I said he can’t take a whole people who don’t like a law, and call them all stupid.”
If you want people to take your points seriously, I suggest you stop lying. I already explained this to you above – I did not say that. Again:
I was not saying EVERYONE who felt the Affordable Care Act is not good is ignoring facts – I was commenting that Original Bob ignored the facts written in the article that costs have slowed since the ACA was implemented when he said the ACA was not affordable.
That is a big difference. I was just talking about Original Bob’s comment and you took it as me calling everyone who does not agree with the law as stupid.
I suggest taking a moment before you post to make sure you actually comprehend what people are saying before you jump down their throat.
And he gave NO indication that he didn’t have good reasons for thinking that,
So you, as you think ALL people who don’t like the ACA on a cost basis thought he was stupid.
And as I’m sure you think of republicans.
Let’s ask you out right, since I did not lie in any way, especially since that requires intent, which now makes you a willful liar for public points:
Do you believe that republicans who say the cost of the affordable care act is high, are stupid?
My reading comprehension is not the issue. I comprehend what you wrote, you whiny little brat.
Right off the bat Confused, you said he must ignore facts and it’s easier to listen to fear mongering. You are out right lying as to your leanings and why you said what you said.
You do think republicans are stupid. I read your post fine, and prior posts.
Also note, you mentioned my bias…What bias? You never said you were democrat, unless you just admitted to your bias by stating I only pursue liberals, and simultaneously accused me of being a liar, while simultaneously calling republicans who think the ACA isn’t affordable stupid, then saying you had no intention of saying that about all people, just original bob. LIAR.
“It costs that much for an apple a day and Mom’s chicken soup? Are they still calling this debacle the “Affordable” Care Act?”
This post, did not merit your reply unless you have a fixated issue with republicans who are against the ACA.
He said it wasn’t affordable. It isn’t. The only thing I can surmise, is that you don’t like people who say that, you aren’t used to people saying that, you think, that saying that means he doesn’t study facts.
Then I pay attention to demographics. Which leaning of person tends to believe the other side ignores facts, doesn’t do research, is bigoted, and homophobic? I’m sorry, but it is the left. The right usually attacks moral character, not intellect. If they go after facts they usually say you’re listening to the wrong people.
The way you disregarded it made it clear you were a left leaner. Correct me if I’m wrong Confused. Do you not vote left? Please do lie and say you don’t, or admit I made the correct assertion.
Right now, you were eviscerated in the argument. Your only hope is to question my character in that I even went after you for going after all people who question the ACA.
You’re in over your head.
My intellect is far exceeding yours. Admit that truth, then get lost.
I replied to your other comment and answered your question above. It has not posted yet, so I can not copy and paste it here too.
Please scroll up to see my response. You can also search for my amended user name since there will only be 2 posts with that text string.
Should the post not appear during the day Wed May 27, I will post it again. I will be happy to continue to answer your questions after you read and reply my recent comment (~7:20PM EST 5/26/15)
Bob, did you see what your Democratic Congressman said about the fiasco known as Obamacare? He was a big supporter of the law and he accidentally told the truth about it. He said the next big problem is that people cannot access the care they are entitled to. High deductibles, high out of pocket expenses. It costs too much to access the care. He added – That is the deceptive part of it. Of course, Democrats want to throw more money at it to “fix” it. This law cannot be fixed without bankrupting the country.
Bob, I forgot to add the name Jim McDermott as the Democrat from the great state of Washington who is now admitting there was something wrong with Obamacare even though he voted for it without reading it.
Bob, you are anything but a “bumbler”. Your comments do tend to make the left leaners mad so they suggest you leave to another country. Perhaps they should look for another country where they will be happier. How about North Korea, Venezuela or Cuba?
You are absolutely correct about Ron. He professes to look at all the candidates records, has voted for some Republicans although he is proud to be an Obama voter twice. He is without shame on why he voted for him and that is why he is the biggest Socialist on this blog. Celtica runs a distant second.
I don’t think he voted for Obama twice, but yes, he does oversell himself as a moderate.
I’m pretty sure he’s mentioned he didn’t vote Obama one of the two times, and the other he alluded he didn’t vote Obama, rather against McCain. I think.
Thanks for the comment though.
My leaning against the left comes from my clear understanding of leaning left in society and the power that comes with it. I can’t allow myself to lean a way that is far easier to lean, and has literally taken away my options for internet carriers here, shipping carriers in Ohio and Oregon, my religious freedom on flying out a priest in WA, and constantly calls the other side a bunch of war mongering, elderly killing, poor ignoring people.
If anything, this makes me the way most rebel democrats are.
Actually Bob, Ron admitted to voting for Obama twice. He voted against McCain and then turned around and voted against Romney. You can see it in all its glory on his 5-22 post at 1:59 PM. He went into quite a rant against both of them. I had to hold my nose to vote for McCain, but even at that, he would have been a whole lot better than what we got. Romney would have been better still since he understood business and would have reigned in the unfriendly departments and agencies like EPA which tend to cripple business. He also would have repealed Obamacare and replaced it with something that would have been 100% better.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Actually Ron, we do know that.
McCain would not have passed the bills that reinflated the housing market. He definitely would have let the housing prices be what they were.
He would not have passed a stimulus, or the QE spending, which was part of how we inflated the housing markets.
I very much so doubt you realize how much Obama has destroyed the economy. I’m not talking in the now.
What do you think will happen when interest rates rise? Houses are not affordable, and he pushed up the cost of them on purpose.
The issue was houses were not affordable, people would default on loans, banks would go bankrupt, etc.
So I will ask again: What do you think will happen when this fake low interest rate period is over?
Housing prices will finally need to adjust for one. But it ensured and set up a second bubble.
You can’t do worse than what he did to fix the economy. You literally could not have done worse. Nothing, which is likely what McCain would have done, would have been better.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Republicans, other than George W Bush, have never pushed a spending package with the idea that it would help the economy. McCain would not have pushed a stimulus. You are arguing that OCCASIONALLY people break from party, while ignoring essentially patterns through history. Again, this is why I say you are not a moderate. Any time you hear a republican in the mix you ASSUME something that republicans don’t typically do, will be done, while you assume spending (the new deal with FDR) is something they won’t do (the stimulus and overall government solution of Obama) then you try to say Reagan used spending to fix the economy (which he fought against) and use that to say they are all the same.
I know your tactics, you aren’t a moderate.
Moving on:
DO YOU DENY, AND I TYPE THIS ALL CAPS, BECAUSE I NEED TO HAMMER IT HOME, THAT OBAMA INTENTIONALLY INFLATED THE COST OF HOUSES?
That one enough is enough to show NO ONE could have been worse. You are assuming that a republican would have come in and said “the problem is that the cost of houses went too low, I need ot increase the cost of them”
Ignoring the fact that were a republican to say that housing costs needed to go up when they were not affordable to the middle class would ELIMINATE ALL SUPPORT and therefore be impossible to pass NO REPUBLICAN none, let me repeat that NONE would pass it.
Therefore, I know that the WORST possible action was taken (attempting to inflate the housing market) and NO action can be worse than that.
We WILL have a second housing collapse as a result. DO YOU DENY THIS? It is a fact. NOT an opinion, you idiotic lying two faced swine!
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
I haven’t bothered reading your follow up.
Do you know why I got riled up toward the end?
I legitimately thought you voted Obama only once. You are not a moderate. At all. Voting for Obama once you could be. Twice? Not possible. At all.
You have successfully tricked me. And that pisses me off. While I often call you a false moderate and want for you to admit it, I was hoping I was wrong and you would prove me wrong.
But this? Obama twice? Telling me I have no reason to believe MC Cain or Romney would have been better than Obama?
You are delusional! It is in no way moderate. The spending Obama did for the recovery is not something a republican would have done. PERIOD.
Regan presided during spending passed. He didn’t put forward a spending package geared to saving the economy.
Republicans never make government programs to save the economy. Even Bush W technically didn’t. He passed Tarp to save businesses from going under, he didn’t pass an annual spending stimulus designed to stimulate the economy.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
I’m sorry Ron. It is not a stretch to say the only possible way we will become a communist nation is through people like Obama, who does it one step at a time.
I’ve seen your arguments here and they are wrong.
You usually use false equivalency to ignore every step toward socialism that Obama makes. It is rather frustrating to watch.
Just like you use false equivalency to compare Reagan’s spending.
Then you ignore his proposed spending, with a democrat congress. It wasn’t Reagan’s spending. It was indefinitely liberal spending.
Bob, Ron is a lot like the golf commercial where the guy tops one shot, shanks another shot, kicks his ball out of the rough and then tells his partners “Don’t count that”. I have given him chapter and verse on Obama, the Socialist on previous blogs. I am not going to keep giving it to him over and over because he doesn’t understand the Obama agenda and apparently does not think there is anything wrong with what has been done for 6+ years or he wouldn’t have voted for him twice.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Ron, you really should learn to use Google more and you might learn something about the President you hold so dear. All I had to do was Google – Obama’s Socialist Policies and it gave 22 good examples and I am sure they just scratched the surface.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Especially on Media Matters, Moveon.org, MSNBC, Huffington Post and anything coming from the true believer Ron.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Why am I not surprised Ron? Almost everyone on this blog knows we have the Socialist in Chief in charge for the past 6+ years except for you. We are presented with his actions every week, sometimes several times a week. He has been a very busy guy implementing his Cloward & Pivin strategy he learned so well to bring this country down. I think the only ones further left may be Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren. Won’t it be interesting to see those two on the debate stage? You can eliminate Hillary to vote for since she is far too corrupt and is falling like a rock.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
HEADLINES LIBERALS AND OBAMACARE SUPPORTERS!
On todays internet (Foxnews.com), please note that carriers are expected to raise rates by double digits this coming year. Some rates will be 26% to 30% in some areas. Gee, I thought this law of unintended consequences was going to keep healthcare costs down. Looks to me to be a serious implosion. Stay tuned for more bad news on this Progressive solution to Healthcare costs.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Ron, you will never see me endorse Universal Healthcare. Let’s get rid of Obamacare and go back to the drawing board with Conservative solutions. If you want Universal Care like Great Britain, I suggest you get a transfer. They put people on the Pathway to Death over there rather than treat them.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Ron, I have tried to reason with you for about 4 years now to no avail. I am tired of your diatribe and your demanding loaded questions. How about I leave you with a quote from a famous author.
There is no difference between Communism and Socialism, except in the means of achieving the same ultimate end: Communism proposes to enslave men by force, Socialism- by vote. It is merely the difference between Murder and Suicide. Ayn Rand
Put that in your Socialist pipe and smoke it.