Honest question here…Compared to the total population, is 9.1 million enough people to justify the trouble its caused business owners? Not that any one person is not important, but to an outsider it seems like that number would be statistically insignificant.
That number doesn’t include the millions that already had insurance, either through a group plan or individually. These are only the people that placed coverage through the exchange. There also millions covered under medicare and medicaid that aren’t included in this number. The fact that 47% of the 9.5M are new enrolles, that means 4.47M of Americans now have coverage that did not previously. I think that’s awesome, but look forward to the day when ALL Americans have coveage.
Compared to other first world nations, the fact that people are still going without medical coverage is more harmful to Americans as a whole. There are hidden costs passed along to all of us since those without medical coverage will need to seek medical assistance sooner or later in the form of emergency room visits and catastrophic medical issues.
Your last comment disproves the first. There is medical coverage.
If this increases costs, that they go in anyway, then the other countries would be equal that you speak of, in passed on costs due to visits.
If your aim is to say that health insurance increases the cost of medical care, your last point isn’t even a point you should have a problem with. It eliminates the for profit health insurance companies, a point you should like. The law that forces low income people to receive care even if they can’t pay, is a form of universal care that is passed on without a for profit intermediary.
That is not what is causing the high costs of insurance in America, or the high cost of care.
Now on to the other guy:
I would agree that the 9.1 million number should be questioned but not on the same basis. As a matter of the percent of the population isn’t as important as how much did we pay, and how much would we have paid to do so without the law, and taking other avenues that were on the table. People like Celtica pretend there were no other options, which is bluntly not true. The answer to that is the law is probably fairly inefficient.
KY – There are two major things affecting the cost of healthcare and insurance.
1) Lack of competition in the private sector. Current healthcare insurance laws restrict carriers from providing coverage on an interstate basis. As a result, competition is limited which escalates the cost.
2) Medical malpractice laws favor the lawyers. As a result, medical malpractice insurance coverage is very costly. Additionally, doctors employ a risk management method to test and rule out a variety of potential diseases or causes of illness to thoroughly protect themselves from a lawsuit. All of these tests cost money which the insurance companies pay for, driving up the cost of healthcare insurance.
Tort reform and amending the commerce laws for healthcare and insurance are the two biggest areas that could drive down these costs. Unfortunately, the lobbyists for the lawyers have our lawmakers in their back pocket.
1.) Companies CAN sell in multiple states. What you are calling for is federal regulation (interstate commerce)of insurance. This has been proven an unmitigated disaster in the past with P&C. Do you really want to move insurance regulations from the states to the federal government?
2.)Please quabntify the savings tort reform would have on health insurance premiums and cite your source.
January 30, 2015 at 12:56 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Those weren’t talking points Ron. They were things you disagree with.
January 30, 2015 at 2:47 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
bob,
They are talking points because no one has ever quantified the impact selling across state lines and tort reform would actually have on health care costs. They sound like solutions, but each will either cause more problems (federal regulation of insurance, thus allowing companies to sell across state lines) or will have little no impact on heakth care premiums.
I disagree that they are the drivers of higher health care costs. Can you answer the questions I posed on my post?
January 30, 2015 at 2:49 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
bob,
Please disreagrd my most recent post. I just read your other post where you addressed my points.
January 30, 2015 at 4:01 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Again,
He put forward his opinions. They are incorrect from my opinion but they are not merely talking points. Saying it is a talking point implies it had no consideration other than to be a talking point. Those were simply things you disagreed with, and that I disagreed with.
Also:
I didn’t post it before and didn’t want to post it in our old debates, but here is something you should read regarding our conversation regarding capital punishment, the Church, and the voting guidelines. I simply told you that the Church agrees with and has stated what I told you. This is actually one of many voting guides, which is approved by the Vatican.
Some of the cost issue is something you’re not going to like:
Medical treatment costs money.
There isn’t a lot we can do to reduce the cost of medical treatment. As much as conservatives comment about tort reform, it isn’t going to help much. Ron is correct.
If we start mucking up health insurance we may very well increase the cost of health insurance though, Ron is also correct there in a way (when he mentioned different problems with federal regulation) but fails to see federal regulation seems to always have an adverse affect (current federal health law included)
To your likely reply in questioning why our health costs are rising faster than other countries: Other countries take measures to cut costs that basically lower the quality of care. While countless studies do their best to say that it doesn’t, it does. Why else would our life expectancy (adjusted for our high violent deaths and vehicular deaths) be very close to equal to say Switzerland, who has a proven much better lifestyle than us? (10% obesity, meet 35%). It shows our treatment is resulting in our poor life choices to not affect our life expectancy, which is really phenomenal.
From there, as I have said many times: Really this comes to a few items:
How to pay for care and get the best quality. (We already had that, whether people want to admit it or not)
How to ensure everyone gets coverage. (We didn’t have that completely, though mostly, whether people like it or not. Americans tend to complain when there is not an issue).
There is only one aspect to do on this then, as the second is the only one that needs major changing, and is the only one we can do a good job of affecting: Give subsidies.
The republican plan was going to give subsidies, and would have decreased premiums by 9%. It isn’t much, but as I said we can’t do much. The democrat plan is supposed to increase it by 9%. Both CBO rated.
Not as many people would have had insurance, but the subsidies would have certainly helped the poor from going bankrupt. So would making insurance premiums tax deductible. So would giving them up to $5,000 on a debit card to pay for either insurance or health costs, depending on income. Maybe part of the people not getting insurance, would take care of the costs through the credits, perhaps? And perhaps the study then needed to study the amount of people filing for bankruptcy, because again, not having insurance is not the same as not having care.
In this country if you don’t have insurance, you get care. You also get a bill. But you get care.
You don’t “get” care if you don’t “seek” care. And you may not “seek” care if you know you are going to get a bill that you cannot pay. Use your head, bob.
January 28, 2015 at 2:02 pm
integrity matters says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Dan, The short answer is “no”. This implementation of Obamacare has been a major disruption to the current healthcare system, employment and the financial welfare of others whose premium has gone up, not down, as promised by the emperor himself.
This article makes it sound like Obamacare is succeeding, when in fact, if you breakdown the various percentages, it is still a fraction of those that were aleegedly without health insurance. Additionally, there are still several unknowns such as, how many of these people actually had health insurance previously and how many have actually paid their premiums. Another great fact is that 85% have received subsidies (aka…paid by all the other tax payers). We were doing the same thing through Medicare before Obamacare.
Ho hum…different day, same old s**t and propaganda.
FFA, I had one of the cancellations who had to go to Obamacare because he had no choice. He really appreciated the Maternity benefits and those other mandates imposed. He and wife are both in their late 50’s. It was still $400 higher per month even with much larger deductibles and out of pocket expenses.
Integrity, does the 9.1 million include the 6 million who had the policy they liked cancelled and had to apply for this travesty because of no other choice? How many enrollees were moved over to Medicaid instead of Obamacare? Do we still trust the Government to tell us the truth on anything? Jonathon Gruber, where are you?
what amazes me about the ACA is the complete lack of any explanation to the public about the finances involved. here we are in to it a couple of years and there are no numbers presented to us as far as the costs/debt/taxes involved with it.
Bob, we are not supposed to know. We are too stupid to know how to manage our finances, tax implications, healthcare decisions ie Gruber. The government knows what is best for us. Nancy said we would like it once we saw what was in it. Isn’t that good enough for you?
Bob — I bet you weren’t amazed by the complete lack of accounting and explanation for the Iraq war finances — let alone as to the cost/debt/taxes involved.
So much for the Iraq oil financing the war. Now, about that nation building cost of Iraq…
Celtica: War is never budgeted. How much has Obama budgeted for Afganistan? Isn’t it time you stop using the same old drone response by trying to push it on Bush or comparing it to him. It’s been six+ years.
In those wonderful words from Frozen…”Let it goooo, Let it go”!
Another fine example of how you try to instigate an argument and take the first stab at others, Agent.
January 30, 2015 at 2:49 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Troll: In Internet slang…a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,[1] by posting inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[4]
January 29, 2015 at 2:57 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Celtica,
You just replied to the wrong Bob. That wasn’t me. But I will take the debate.
Regarding the lack of accounting and explanation for the Iraq war, and the cost/debt/taxes involved:
A: Rebuilding a nation is always worth the cost. You just don’t care about people. It is a moral issue you have. It is always amazing to me how people like you preach moral high ground, and about racism, and then complain about how much it costs to help “other” countries. Due you not view that as ethnic superiority? Do you view it as moral to question the cost to help other people so long as they are not American?
B: The “taxes” involved? I’m sorry, including the Iraq war we had standard deficits, and the DOD budget remained about normal. There were years in the $400 billion rang, with a deficit of $100-$200 billion several years, inclusive of Iraq. We had years inclusive of new Libya intervention that included $800 billion in DOD. The Iraq war was explained. It was included in the DOD. There is no Iraq spending that is not included in the DOD. Contrary, to your belief.
C: If we want to cost about the lack of accounting and cost of war, sending bombers to Iraq costs a lot more than sending troops. However, cost is not the only factor is it Celtica? It is about the result. We had accounting and cost included in Iraq, that included the Iraqi people. You just don’t like that. We currently have a lack of accounting for ISIS. Our current path is not preferable. People are dying, and we are letting them. Rebuilding Iraq, whenever it fully is done, would benefit the whole world, and the people of Iraq. It won’t take 3 years, the amount of time you people got impatient and thought we should leave. It won’t take 10. It may even take 50 years. But it is worth it.
I wonder what the true cost will be (in lives and dollars) to clean up the ISIS mess caused by Obama announcing our departure from Irag (and soon to be Afganistan).
In truth I can’t blame Obama for Iraq falling apart in full. Yes we left before it was done, but it couldn’t have fallen apart that fast solely due to us leaving.
But I certainly am mad he keeps getting in the way of staying there and getting the job done, he’s blocking any potential progress we might make, as opposed to making chaos exist. I wonder how long this will ultimately take, and if we will ever see a peaceful Iraq and middle east.
It might simply not happen, it might not be meant to happen. Biblical aspects kind of imply that evil will surround Israel after all. I believe biblical aspects say that 5 nations surrounding Israel are supposed to try and destroy Israel after all, and mostly succeed until God assists, and Iran could be one of the 5.
I guess I’m naive in thinking we can actually help the Middle Eastern nations, but I still think we should try.
January 29, 2015 at 3:21 pm
Celtica says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
You expected the U.S. to remain in Iraq forever?
Guess you never heard Poppy Bush tell junior not to enter Iraq without an exit plan. Junior invaded anyway. Cheney made him. Cheney even blessed the new President of Iraq who reverted right back to Saddam’s vengeance against the other Muslim branch, causing even more upheaval in a chaotic society.
The resulting vacuum was a foreseeable event. Let’s send Bush back to fix it. It’s not like he ever completed his military service in the first place.
January 29, 2015 at 3:35 pm
integrity matters says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Celtica:
How long have we been in Germany and the rest of Europe? Do you think we will be there forever?
Remaining in Iraq does not necessarily equate to being at war the entire time. We could have remained mostly as a “police force” to prevent uprisings. Unfortunately, Obama did not even allow our troops to do that while they were there. Orders were given that we could not fight back against the insurgents. Our troops had to “call” the Iraqi army when they were attacked. Commander in Chief Obama…hardly!
Funny how you continue to pick on Bush. Now his military record. Tell me, what is Obama’s military record? Hypocrite!
At least Bush had experience running a state, compared to that fraudulent community organizer.
January 29, 2015 at 3:46 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Celtica,
There is no such thing as an “exit plan” first of all. You can’t plan on when you will be finished with a country that is incredibly unstable. You can plan to leave when it is, but that plan won’t have a time table. We had a time table: When it is rebuilt. Bush W mentioned it several times.
Second of all: Planning to leave by a date, is the worst type of exit plan and is in fact not an exit plan The exit should be when the place is stable. In this regard when you say we should always have an exit plan, the fact that democrats always have a date requirement and not a requirement based on tangible goals met in rebuilding a nation, would show it is in fact Obama who never has an exit plan, nor democrats.
Third of all: Did I say indefinitely? I said it would take the better part of 50 years, but it is worth it.
Fourth of all: When trying to get a party into power that will rebuild the nation, and not do it yourself (which is corrupt) you occasionally put trust into the wrong people. Obama does this as well.
Fifth of all: Stop questioning Bush’s military record and stay on point. Character assaults are only done when one cannot argue a point. It isn’t on topic.
Sixth of all: You act like Bush HW leaving makes it worse that Bush W went in. As if finishing something your father started makes you less of a man, or a fool because HW couldn’t finish it. HW couldn’t finish it for the same reason his son couldn’t: Democrats wouldn’t let him, and insisted on time table exit plans, instead of actual exit plans. It reflects more on democrats that we have to keep going back, and leaving, than it does that republicans say we should stay until it is done. Quite literally, the democrats aren’t using exit plans, since we keep having to go back (and they support it each time.). Watch the videos. Al Gore said HW had every reason to go into Iraq. Then he said he had no reason. Then when Clinton was president, Clinton said Saddam will not deny the will of the world, and had used weapons of mass destruction and would use them again (wasn’t a lie when he said it, was it?) Al Gore did a speech talking about the gravity of Iraq. Then Bush W decided to go into Iraq, while Al Gore literally wove documents saying every piece of intelligence said we had to act. Then he said every piece said we needed to leave and the job was done.
If we aim to say going back to finish unfinished business is worse for the people who go back to finish it, than the people who forced it to remain unfinished, I would say that is quite an untrue statement.
January 29, 2015 at 3:55 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Also Celtica,
The best way of knowing if a conservative poster is me, is by the content.
For example, contrary to all of your opinions, I don’t say conservative one liners, or typical conservative statements.
So for example: If someone says “this healthcare bill is XXXX pages that no one bothered to read and was rammed down our throats!”
Or:
“After all, Pelosi said you had to pass it before you know what is in it.”
Or: “All democrats want to do is tax and spend!”
You should know off the bat that it isn’t me. My posts are almost always more complicated than that, and go over the “why” the taxing or spending is bad, or the “why” the healthcare plan is bad, or an aspect of the XXXX page bill I don’t like, or the inefficiency of the bill in tangible terms, trying to weigh what is important (like my first actual post here, when I answered that this should be weighed based on how well it helped costs and it’s efficiency with helping people in general in comparison to the alternate options we had on the table). Etc.
My posts always include some sort of depth of thought included with the general concept and go into explanation.
January 29, 2015 at 4:00 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Celtica,
One more thing:
I will say your demeanor is appreciated. You’re of course making passionate comments, but nothing of insulting nature.
January 30, 2015 at 11:53 am
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob, the Gruber lie machine said the cost would be in the $900 billion range for 10 years. Reality has it pegged at right at $2.7 Trillion and rising.
…and the Republican lie machine said the cost of the Iraq war would be in the $50 to $60 billion range – lower than Mr Lindsey’s $100 to $200 billion estimate, who Bush fired.
My sole point is simple: both Repub’s & Dem’s have grossly underestimated the cost of their actions.
Is this a common thing of left leaning folks and fake moderates? (This is my phrase mocking all the times you have said this about republicans and right leaning folks)
“Lie” is not the same as “grossly underestimating”
Do you get the point? Also, both parties are not equal.
This is called false equivalency Roenblatt, and it is your weakness. As much as you don’t like someone being affiliated with a party, lacking a party affiliation at any point at time while ignoring party trends is unwise. The parties don’t work together. This means you have to flip one side or the other completely, and entirely, on occasion in order to get agenda changes. 1964, would have been a good time to vote democrat with Kennedy and the anti tax democrats. Current day, we need to vote republican.
Every time someone brings up an issue you do this false equivalency. It is just as immature as republicans and democrats you debate against. First: The parties are not the same.
Second: If they are both the same we may as well just do nothing right?
That’s your “moderate” slogan: They are the same so do nothing!
Sound like an accusation you may have given as a label to a particular party?
Stop trying to play the false equivalency game. It ensures things won’t get done.
Please explain how Gruber underestimating the cost of Obamacare is any different than when the Republicans underestimated cost of the Iraq war.
Both parties said “this will likely cost $x” and it really cost more than their estimates. What am I missing? How are they different?
Just as I’ve asked Agent, I will now ask you: please do not put words in my mouth. “That’s your “moderate” slogan: They are the same so do nothing!”
I’ve never said that and I never implied it. That’s just what you THINK “my” slogan would be. It’s not – that “do nothing” attitude is far from my mindset. You want to know my slogan? Ask me and I’ll tell you – don’t presume you know.
January 30, 2015 at 2:47 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“This is my phrase mocking all the times you have said this about republicans and right leaning folks”
ALL THE TIMES? I’ve done that MAYBE 6 times. You’re making it seem like I consistently mock Republicans by making sweeping generalizations all the time. That’s inaccurate.
“As much as you don’t like someone being affiliated with a party”
WRONG. I never said this and you’re putting words in my mouth again. I don’t care which party anyone affiliates with. Repub, Dem, Green, Libertarian, none of the above – I really couldn’t care any less about that!
Would you like a statistical breakdown of my friends and their party affiliations to support my argument, or can you admit you assumed incorrectly that I don’t like people who affiliate with any political party?
January 28, 2015 at 6:10 pm
Celtica says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Integrity matters: So in other words, spending on war is good, spending on American health care, bad, bad, bad.
Does Integrity really matter? Clearly, it does not.
Celtica: First of all, you are trying to compare, from a budgeting standpoint, apples to watermelons. I never implied either was good or bad. You libs always try to point the finger and distract from the real issue when you cannot defend Obama’s ineptness and failed policies and decisions. BLAME IT ON BUSH. HE DID IT WORSE! I was always taught that if someone does something stupid or wrong, it does not give me the right to do the same thing or something stupid.
Second, integrity does matter. Obama has NONE. He lies continually and never takes responsibility for anything. The most recent example is when he did not show up for the solidarity march against terrorism in France. Why did he not send someone of importance to participate if he was too busy? Instead, one of his staff members “fell on the sword” a couple of days later.
Why don’t you show some integrity and admit when he is wrong and lying? Baaaa, said the sheep!
Obama’s “ineptness and failed policies and decisions” steered us though the financial debacle that Bush left. Stock market high, unemployment much lower, gas prices even lower. Seriously.
I wish Obama would have marched in Paris but didn’t.
On the other hand, Bush could have stopped in New Orleans after Katrina on his way home from a birthday party in Arizona — but didn’t.
All of the “positives” that you mentioned took place “IN SPITE” of Obama’s failed policies. Please explain what Obama and his administration did “proactively” that created this outcome for each.
Please don’t tell me to look at the lower deficit because (1) it’s still a deficit and (2) look at the overall national debt. Obama has created more debt than ALL of the previous presidents COMBINED.
The reality is that the people have tightened their own fiscal belts, giving them the ability to spend money and affect Wall St. Employment numbers appear lower but that is because (1) there are less people on the rolls, not necessarily because they obtained jobs (2) people are being forced to get jobs (any job) because their 99 weeks of collecting unemployment ran out. Lastly, try to get it through your head that OPEC is driving the gas prices down, not Obama.
There you go about Bush again…Let it go!
P.S. I left out fast and furious, the IRS scandal and several others, too. Too tired and too busy.
Well naturally you’re too tired and too busy. Finding positive things about the Bush Administration would do that to anyone.
IN SPITE is a good word, although the proper would usage would have been DESPITE. However, there does exist the possibility that you “misunderestimated” the impact of Obama’s policies on the economy. And, no, I don’t care to illustrate how Obama’s policies — the fact is, the stock market is high, unemployment dropping and so are the gas prices — these speak for themselves. That is illustration enough.
Just think if Mitt had become president, you could have taken credit for all of this. If only…
January 29, 2015 at 1:01 pm
integrity matters says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Celtica: Are you delusional?
Thanks for proving my point that when you have no substantive answer, you go off into left field an invoke a Bush response or something else nonsensical.
Guess what despite means??? “in spite of”. Misunderestimated, on the other hand is not even a word. The proper use, as you put it, is underestimated.
Of course you cannot illustrate Obama’s policies, because there are none. Obama’s lies speak for themselves, too, but apparently, you are deaf to that.
If Mitt was president, he would have not lead from behind. If he did, I would be calling him out, too!
January 29, 2015 at 1:20 pm
Celtica says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Yo, Integrity, are you even aware that “misunderestmated” is a Bushism?
Yes, Flipflop Mitt would be leading from the front, and then the behind and then from side to side — being a Flipflopper and all.
January 29, 2015 at 1:20 pm
Connie says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Integrity, “misunderestimated” is a word that I believe was used in a Saturday Night Live skit with Will Ferrell playing Pres. Bush. They used that word to make fun of him and the way he sometimes stumbles over words. Liberals use things like that now to continue to make fun of Bush. (At least Bush never said we have 57 states….)
January 29, 2015 at 1:23 pm
Connie says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
And actually, Bush did say it too, but SNL really took it and ran with it to make fun of him, as though none of us have ever tripped over our tongue before.
January 29, 2015 at 1:30 pm
integrity matters says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Yo, Celtica. Like I said before, just because someone else does or says something stupid, it doesn’t give you the right to do the same thing.
Bush did and said many stupid things and probably still does. So does Obama. I make up my own mind based on the available facts and try to weave my way through the BS propaganda that the media feeds us. All of them do it, including Fox. At least Fox tries periodically to provide an honest opposing view.
As far as Mitt is concerned, he was not my 1st or even 2nd choice. That said, he still would have been better than Obama.
January 29, 2015 at 4:24 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Integrity, our budget deficit increases by $500 million each day. Total debt is over $18 Trillion, and close to $8 Trillion created by Obama in just 6 years. These numbers have no meaning to Progressives, but it is a fact and some day, we, our children, grand children, great great grandchildren will have to pay the piper.
January 29, 2015 at 3:00 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
It is not about spending at all on healthcare.
It is about what system of healthcare works. While this program is a spending program, which is an issue, the issue that makes the spending program an issue is specifically that it is “inefficient” spending also done to woo people like you, and buy votes.
The worst kind of spending.
Regardless of even that:
Spending on wars that could stop famine, and death, and dictators torturing their people takes priority over making sure that Americans don’t file bankruptcy for medical bills. Get your priorities straight. Are you this much of an ethnic purist?
When I ask questions like this, it is not to say you are.
It is to make you think. People aren’t an ethnic purist unless they intend to be. My point here is that because you aren’t thinking, you are accidentally holding opinions that appear to be ethnic purist in nature.
That is also why I said people like you who are against racism, who are for people, can’t be against this concept that all nations deserve a good life.
Extrapolate your feelings, alleviate your allegiances, and you might find that what you’re saying doesn’t match what you strive to be and the good you want to do.
I have an issue with prioritizing famine, death and dictators over Americans. I guess I’m an ethnic purist because I think the money should be spent here. If there is any left after taking care of America, then we can go out and save the world.
I agree, KY. I relate it to what we are instructed to do in an airplane if the cabin loses pressure. Put your own oxygen mask on first, then assist others, if necessary.
If America is strong financially, both from a governmental and personal perspective, we can do significantly more than what we currently do. I think individual Americans give significantly abroad, more than any other country, through ministry and relief organizations.
I’m going to go with making sure that couples here don’t go bankrupt (as our health system has that as it’s only flaw) is not as important as helping other people to not be murdered, die going hungry, etc.
And if you truly believe that, you are an ethnic purist.
America is fine. If you’re going to strive for us to have a perfect life before we can help others, you have a moral issue.
If you believe we should have a phone, internet, eat like kings (in comparison to the third world countries dying and starving) have birth control paid for, etc, before we fund the life of human beings across the world, it is heartless.
Every, single, penny, that you have (and America has) outside of the most basic funding should go to other countries.
Also: Integrity I like your oxygen mask comment. If we were all fighting for oxygen masks, that would change things a little. Though as a side comment: I wouldn’t like it, and it would be terrible, but if I had to give my oxygen mask to a child who an ISIS was trying to take it away, I would do so. By what JW is saying, she would not.
We aren’t even talking about an America which can’t take care of itself as is. We are one of the richest countries in the world. If we can’t take care of countries NO ONE can JW. And if you’re saying NO ONE should help other countries, and leave these HUMAN BEINGS to their fate, I can’t ever think of you as a good person. In fact, it disgusts me to the point of thinking of you as my enemy.
I did not interpret KYjw’s comments as not wanting to help other countries, just that we should look to help our own first, and then others (hence, my oxygen mask comment). Another analogy…you only have enough food for YOUR 3 kids, but there are 10 kids at the door that are hungry. Are you going to take the food from your kids and give it to the others?
Another question pertaining to your comment “Every, single, penny, that you have (and America has) outside of the most basic funding should go to other countries”.
Where do you draw the line at basic needs? Have you given up your car so that you can send the money you have for those expenses to other countries? In theory, that is not a necessity. Unless you are living on beans and rice and water; walking to work and using candles for light, your comment is a little hypocritical.
If everyone did that, we would be going backwards as a society. In essence, trying to make the US become like a third world country.
No one wants to see anyone starve. We, as a nation, prop up third world countries around the globe. But for us to be able to do that, we have to be strong economically. If we are not, we can’t.
January 30, 2015 at 1:15 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
You’re debating the definition of basic needs through your car comment. Besides which, I over exaggerate certain aspects depending on need. JW needs to learn that she isn’t giving enough, clearly. I certainly did take her comment as not wanting to help the poor at all. Again: We are the wealthiest nation in the world. If we can’t afford to take care of other countries, no one can. If she is trying to make a philosophical argument that we should take care of ourselves first to side step my point that was correct, then we have a problem with her being a smart ass, as that isn’t productive debate.
January 29, 2015 at 10:43 am
FFA says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Well, the numbers are coming in. 40 visits to the PT @ $50.00 – an additional $2000, 7 PCP visits @ 30.00 = 210 and more to come on top of the premiums. That’s on top of premiums and on top of the Co Insurance.
Hi FFA. Despite what the libs say about how wonderful Obamacare is, you are feeling the reality of it as well as a lot of others who signed up.
By the way, what is your prediction for the Superbowl? Odds makers are favoring Seattle. I don’t know about that. If they play like they did last game and give up 4 interceptions and a fumble, I don’t think they will have much success. Brady & Company will eat them up even without deflated balls. It should be a close game we hope and it will come down to execution and who wins in the trenches.
So I guess those 9.5 million people who now have health insurance should just go pound sand because “small business?”
Give me a break. This policy has been an unmitigated success, helping nearly 15% of the entire population. With any luck, well have single payer within a decade and finally be done with this charade.
PS really looking forward to another 400 comment thread of respectful and constructive debate, you guys.
Stan: I see you went to the Obama school of math and economics, too. Maybe that is why you think it is an “unmitigated success”.
“Nearly 15%” of the population is about 47 million people. Even if the 9.5 million cited included only those which never had insurance (which it doesn’t), that is only 20% of the population. And by the way, I think the 9.5 million includes those that signed up for Medicare (I could be wrong about that).
20% is barely reaching the “Mendoza” line for you baseball fans out there.
Regarding the 9.5 million and their coverage, no, they should not go pound sand. We are too far down the road so any kind of meaningful reform should include coverage for them. 87% are already getting subsidies, so they could probably come back under the Medicare umbrella.
I think you’re “misunderestimating” the GOP, Celtica. (Sorry, I couldn’t resist.)
Actually, the money spent overseas (if you are referring to the war dollars), is actually spent on the Americans and for the Americans. Would you rather spend the money rebuilding this great country when the terrorists blow us up?
Integrity — In your book, war is good, doesn’t need a budget and bombs away. For the record, the terrorist did blow up the World Trade Center. Money spent.
My book, let’s spend money on Americans in America. Hello health care. Hello healthy America. Hello healthy veterans without battle fatigue. Hello America.
War is never good. But, it is sometimes necessary. Especially if it means keeping this country safe.
My book, I think we should spend our tax money on the things that the people cannot do, like infrastructure and security of our borders. We can also provide for those that truly cannot help themselves and help others to raise their standard of living by helping themselves. We should not spend our tax dollars on people who simply want to live off the govt. Welfare fraud is rampant.
Explain to me why the govt had to provide cell phones to the “needy”? Cell phones are not a necessity. We have become a nanny state in which people want everything without having to do the work for it.
Please try to admit that the existing govt leaders (Dems and Reps) are simply trying to expand the govt and increase taxes so they can perpetuate the problem. Sooner or later, the money will run out and the taxes will be so high that no one will be able to afford anything. All of these entitlements, including healthcare, is leading us to bankruptcy.
January 29, 2015 at 4:36 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Hey Integrity, I am sure glad Netanyahu is coming to address a joint session to tell the American People what is going on over there and the threat we are facing from Radical Islam. The White House is throwing a fit over this and practically foaming at the mouth since they don’t want the truth coming out and it will impact their non-policy with Iran. Iran has been playing four corners for years with no intention of stopping their nuke bomb deployment. Once they get it, they have promised to wipe Israel off the map. I think they are crazy enough to do it. Israel could easily take pre-emptive action if they believe they will be wiped out and then we are in for it.
January 29, 2015 at 4:54 pm
integrity matters says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Agent – I’m glad he is coming here, too. Did you hear that Iran put a hit order out on Netanyahu’s children today?
Apparently, they are concerned with him speaking to Congress, too. Hmmm, I wonder why??
Also, isn’t it amazing how the Prog’s go silent when you throw facts at them? They run out of Bush responses.
Also, there is another scandal brewing with Hillary and her drive to get Qaddafi ousted. Apparently, they fabricated some of the reasons to back the Eqyptian insurgents.
January 29, 2015 at 4:25 pm
Trust me I am not a liberal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Someone please call Tom Brady to let some of the air out of Celtica’s head. It is apparently pressing too hard on her brain.
Yes Inegrity, I saw both stories. I am sure the left doesn’t even know it yet since they don’t stay up with the news and MSNBC will never report it. Yep, “old” Hillary was not much of a Secretary of State, was she? She talked Obama into bombing Qaddafi and get him ousted. He did that “unilaterally” without Congress approval. They called Bush a “Cowboy” ready to bomb at a minutes notice. Barack had no problem bombing. Look what happened in the aftermath. Libya is in chaos due to the Arab Spring, Muslim Brotherhood. Then, we had Benghazi and four Americans slaughtered including our Ambassador. I still think he was running weapons to those Syrian fighters against the Syrian dictator or why would he be there and the CIA having an annex there? Something went horribly wrong and the Ambassador paid the ultimate price. I wonder what these tapes will uncover. As bad as the libs want this to go away, it is gradually coming out. Hopefully, it will be a big campaign issue and Hillary will have to withdraw from running.
Why watch Fox News when you can read it and opine verbatim here?
As for Netanyahu, he is here simply as a campaign event. It was the GOP who thoughtfully invited a foreign leader to speak when all he was here to do was cash in prior to the election. And you fell for it hook, line and sinker.
Unlike Obama, Netanyahu cares about his people and country. Obama has been campaigning for over 7 years at this point. He is out right now trying to convince the people why taxes should be raised so they can spend more money.
Integrity, the thing that American Progressives don’t understand is that Israel is fighting for its very existence as a country. They are surrounded by Muslim countries, many bent on destroying them. They are our only ally in the region and they are being treated shabbily by the Obama administration. Once, they made Netanyahu leave the White House by the rear exit. How insulting!
January 30, 2015 at 12:12 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Hey Celtica, here is a verse from the bible that sums it all up, short and sweet.
A wise man’s heart inclines to the right, but a fool’s heart to the left. Ecclesiastes 10:2.
Integrity, did you see the Washington Times article that Mitt has decided not to run? I say good, because he wasn’t near hard enough on Obama and snatched defeat out of the jaws of victory. He thought he good just present a good image, say he would fix the economy and people would elect him and the nasty insulting Obama lovers had a field day.
Last week, he met with Jeb Bush in Utah, which was interesting. Perhaps Jeb said it was time he move over and let the younger guys run, but probably promised him Secretary of Commerce if Jeb wins.
I did not see that. I hope he stays home. He probably would be good for a cabinet post, though.
January 30, 2015 at 3:47 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Agent,
That is good news for the Republicans. The only Republican “candidates” that intrigue me right now are Governors Walker and Christie. I would also be interested in Paul Ryan. The rest are too gosh darn goofy for me to tajke seriously.
There are no Democrats that I can support. But thebn again, we only hear about Hillary Clinton and VP Biden. I do not like either.
January 30, 2015 at 4:07 pm
FFA says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Ron, have you heard that Walker is considering a run?
He spoke at the recent gathering of Conservatives in Iowa and mentioned he is considering a run. He would definitely be a significant upgrade from the last 2 Republican candidates. I could see myself voting for him.
Ron, perhaps you should check our Pence from Indiana. He is a Governor doing great things there. You conveniently left off Dr. Ben Carson. Does he make too much sense for you? Forget Christie and Bush. Far too Rinoish and liberal and we don’t need any more liberals in office. Look at what a mess liberals have made in the past 6 years.
I have heard some good things about Gov Pence, but nothing about him running in 2016 yet. He does intrigue me.
Until someone tells me more about Ben Carson’s qualifications, based on actual experience, to be the president, he is just a Conservative/Republican version of President Obama. Based on much of your criticisms of President Obama being inexperienced for the job, I would think you would not want to go down that road again.
I would tend to agree with Ron on Carson. Don’t know enough about his ability to do that job. Walker and Ryan absolutely make sense. Only issue I would have is the White House decorated in Paker Garb…
Congrats to Mr Brady and the entire NE team. A rookie making the play of the year. Of course, made possible by the stupid play called. Lynch in the backfield on the one to win the game and he throws???? Then, whatever slim chance they had left taken away by an off sides call. Then, a classless display of sportsmanship.
February 2, 2015 at 2:40 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Ron, Dr. Ben has more smarts in his little finger than the Community Organizer has in his whole body plus Common sense which is sorely lacking with politicians. I also think he would get some good advisors to assist him instead of political hacks who know nothing about how to manage a diverse economy. If Carson can’t raise enough money, he won’t make it to the big stage, but he could be great in a cabinet post like HHS. That rat’s nest should be cleaned out, the VA should be cleaned out and he is just the guy who could do it with his background in medicine.
February 2, 2015 at 2:50 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
FFA, decorating the White House in Packer colors is better than the current Muslim colors we see in every news conference. Check out the drapes sometime.
Did you see the look on Sherman’s face when that pass was intercepted on the goal line? Utter disbelief that a coach could be that stupid. The media was interviewing Brady after the game and they asked him if he would have killed that play. He dodged the question and merely replied that he was glad they tried it. A great quarterback would have been yelling Kill, Kill, Kill at the top of his lungs and either run Lynch or faked it to him and rolled out and either flipped it to the tight end or run it in himself.
February 2, 2015 at 3:01 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Agent,
Did you even read my post? I did not say anything about intelligence or common sense. What experience does he have that makes him qualified to be the President of the United States? President Obama tried the ole advisors bit to make up for his lack of experience. Where did that get us?
Dr. Carson will not be able to accomplish anything without experience in how the system works and he will not be able to change the system either.
Even FFA agreed with me reagrding Ben Carson’s lack of experience.
I’m sorry, but he is just not electable, period. If he gets the nomination, say hello to another 4-8 years of a Democrat being in the White House.
February 2, 2015 at 3:17 pm
FFA says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I am in complete dis belief that all plays called were anything but run Lynch. Run Lynch and then run Lynch again. Dumbest thing I ever saw in a Super Bowl. One of the best backs in the game. A Beast. A Battering Ram. He alone moves piles of bodies. I think anyone with any common sense would have killed that play.
February 2, 2015 at 5:33 pm
FFA says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Walker is a been there done that type of a guy. He stopped Wi from becoming just another Illinois.
You are right FFA. Walker has stood up to the unions and beat their butt. He has a backbone and has the right values. He showed very well in Iowa. If he starts supplanting Bush as the front runner, look for the hate machine on the left to try to find the skeletons in the closet. Some will probably come from the Bush camp. I have no doubt that Walker can handle himself in debates.
Honest question here…Compared to the total population, is 9.1 million enough people to justify the trouble its caused business owners? Not that any one person is not important, but to an outsider it seems like that number would be statistically insignificant.
That number doesn’t include the millions that already had insurance, either through a group plan or individually. These are only the people that placed coverage through the exchange. There also millions covered under medicare and medicaid that aren’t included in this number. The fact that 47% of the 9.5M are new enrolles, that means 4.47M of Americans now have coverage that did not previously. I think that’s awesome, but look forward to the day when ALL Americans have coveage.
Compared to other first world nations, the fact that people are still going without medical coverage is more harmful to Americans as a whole. There are hidden costs passed along to all of us since those without medical coverage will need to seek medical assistance sooner or later in the form of emergency room visits and catastrophic medical issues.
Your last comment disproves the first. There is medical coverage.
If this increases costs, that they go in anyway, then the other countries would be equal that you speak of, in passed on costs due to visits.
If your aim is to say that health insurance increases the cost of medical care, your last point isn’t even a point you should have a problem with. It eliminates the for profit health insurance companies, a point you should like. The law that forces low income people to receive care even if they can’t pay, is a form of universal care that is passed on without a for profit intermediary.
That is not what is causing the high costs of insurance in America, or the high cost of care.
Now on to the other guy:
I would agree that the 9.1 million number should be questioned but not on the same basis. As a matter of the percent of the population isn’t as important as how much did we pay, and how much would we have paid to do so without the law, and taking other avenues that were on the table. People like Celtica pretend there were no other options, which is bluntly not true. The answer to that is the law is probably fairly inefficient.
What is causing the high cost of insurance and health care?
KY – There are two major things affecting the cost of healthcare and insurance.
1) Lack of competition in the private sector. Current healthcare insurance laws restrict carriers from providing coverage on an interstate basis. As a result, competition is limited which escalates the cost.
2) Medical malpractice laws favor the lawyers. As a result, medical malpractice insurance coverage is very costly. Additionally, doctors employ a risk management method to test and rule out a variety of potential diseases or causes of illness to thoroughly protect themselves from a lawsuit. All of these tests cost money which the insurance companies pay for, driving up the cost of healthcare insurance.
Tort reform and amending the commerce laws for healthcare and insurance are the two biggest areas that could drive down these costs. Unfortunately, the lobbyists for the lawyers have our lawmakers in their back pocket.
integrity matters,
Way to post more talking points.
1.) Companies CAN sell in multiple states. What you are calling for is federal regulation (interstate commerce)of insurance. This has been proven an unmitigated disaster in the past with P&C. Do you really want to move insurance regulations from the states to the federal government?
2.)Please quabntify the savings tort reform would have on health insurance premiums and cite your source.
Those weren’t talking points Ron. They were things you disagree with.
bob,
They are talking points because no one has ever quantified the impact selling across state lines and tort reform would actually have on health care costs. They sound like solutions, but each will either cause more problems (federal regulation of insurance, thus allowing companies to sell across state lines) or will have little no impact on heakth care premiums.
I disagree that they are the drivers of higher health care costs. Can you answer the questions I posed on my post?
bob,
Please disreagrd my most recent post. I just read your other post where you addressed my points.
Again,
He put forward his opinions. They are incorrect from my opinion but they are not merely talking points. Saying it is a talking point implies it had no consideration other than to be a talking point. Those were simply things you disagreed with, and that I disagreed with.
Also:
I didn’t post it before and didn’t want to post it in our old debates, but here is something you should read regarding our conversation regarding capital punishment, the Church, and the voting guidelines. I simply told you that the Church agrees with and has stated what I told you. This is actually one of many voting guides, which is approved by the Vatican.
https://www.ewtn.com/vote/brief_catechism.htm
KY jw:
Some of the cost issue is something you’re not going to like:
Medical treatment costs money.
There isn’t a lot we can do to reduce the cost of medical treatment. As much as conservatives comment about tort reform, it isn’t going to help much. Ron is correct.
If we start mucking up health insurance we may very well increase the cost of health insurance though, Ron is also correct there in a way (when he mentioned different problems with federal regulation) but fails to see federal regulation seems to always have an adverse affect (current federal health law included)
To your likely reply in questioning why our health costs are rising faster than other countries: Other countries take measures to cut costs that basically lower the quality of care. While countless studies do their best to say that it doesn’t, it does. Why else would our life expectancy (adjusted for our high violent deaths and vehicular deaths) be very close to equal to say Switzerland, who has a proven much better lifestyle than us? (10% obesity, meet 35%). It shows our treatment is resulting in our poor life choices to not affect our life expectancy, which is really phenomenal.
From there, as I have said many times: Really this comes to a few items:
How to pay for care and get the best quality. (We already had that, whether people want to admit it or not)
How to ensure everyone gets coverage. (We didn’t have that completely, though mostly, whether people like it or not. Americans tend to complain when there is not an issue).
There is only one aspect to do on this then, as the second is the only one that needs major changing, and is the only one we can do a good job of affecting: Give subsidies.
The republican plan was going to give subsidies, and would have decreased premiums by 9%. It isn’t much, but as I said we can’t do much. The democrat plan is supposed to increase it by 9%. Both CBO rated.
Not as many people would have had insurance, but the subsidies would have certainly helped the poor from going bankrupt. So would making insurance premiums tax deductible. So would giving them up to $5,000 on a debit card to pay for either insurance or health costs, depending on income. Maybe part of the people not getting insurance, would take care of the costs through the credits, perhaps? And perhaps the study then needed to study the amount of people filing for bankruptcy, because again, not having insurance is not the same as not having care.
In this country if you don’t have insurance, you get care. You also get a bill. But you get care.
You don’t “get” care if you don’t “seek” care. And you may not “seek” care if you know you are going to get a bill that you cannot pay. Use your head, bob.
Dan, The short answer is “no”. This implementation of Obamacare has been a major disruption to the current healthcare system, employment and the financial welfare of others whose premium has gone up, not down, as promised by the emperor himself.
This article makes it sound like Obamacare is succeeding, when in fact, if you breakdown the various percentages, it is still a fraction of those that were aleegedly without health insurance. Additionally, there are still several unknowns such as, how many of these people actually had health insurance previously and how many have actually paid their premiums. Another great fact is that 85% have received subsidies (aka…paid by all the other tax payers). We were doing the same thing through Medicare before Obamacare.
Ho hum…different day, same old s**t and propaganda.
Agreed Integrity. If the Supreme Ct kicks the subsidy, get ready for yet another die.
Submitted one in early December that kicked out for Medicaid Determination. Still don’t have the final word from them.
sorry…. another round of s$#@.
FFA, I had one of the cancellations who had to go to Obamacare because he had no choice. He really appreciated the Maternity benefits and those other mandates imposed. He and wife are both in their late 50’s. It was still $400 higher per month even with much larger deductibles and out of pocket expenses.
Integrity, does the 9.1 million include the 6 million who had the policy they liked cancelled and had to apply for this travesty because of no other choice? How many enrollees were moved over to Medicaid instead of Obamacare? Do we still trust the Government to tell us the truth on anything? Jonathon Gruber, where are you?
Agent…All great questions. Unfortunately, I (nor the govt) know the answers. With regards to trusting what they tell us, absolutely not.
I think Gruber is “lying” low (pun intended), trying to create another scheme to fool the stupid American people.
oops..**allegedly
what amazes me about the ACA is the complete lack of any explanation to the public about the finances involved. here we are in to it a couple of years and there are no numbers presented to us as far as the costs/debt/taxes involved with it.
Bob, we are not supposed to know. We are too stupid to know how to manage our finances, tax implications, healthcare decisions ie Gruber. The government knows what is best for us. Nancy said we would like it once we saw what was in it. Isn’t that good enough for you?
Bob — I bet you weren’t amazed by the complete lack of accounting and explanation for the Iraq war finances — let alone as to the cost/debt/taxes involved.
So much for the Iraq oil financing the war. Now, about that nation building cost of Iraq…
Celtica: War is never budgeted. How much has Obama budgeted for Afganistan? Isn’t it time you stop using the same old drone response by trying to push it on Bush or comparing it to him. It’s been six+ years.
In those wonderful words from Frozen…”Let it goooo, Let it go”!
Integrity, Celtica and Libby will still be blaming Bush 20 years after he dies. When will they criticize their Messiah on anything?
Another fine example of how you try to instigate an argument and take the first stab at others, Agent.
Troll: In Internet slang…a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,[1] by posting inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[4]
Celtica,
You just replied to the wrong Bob. That wasn’t me. But I will take the debate.
Regarding the lack of accounting and explanation for the Iraq war, and the cost/debt/taxes involved:
A: Rebuilding a nation is always worth the cost. You just don’t care about people. It is a moral issue you have. It is always amazing to me how people like you preach moral high ground, and about racism, and then complain about how much it costs to help “other” countries. Due you not view that as ethnic superiority? Do you view it as moral to question the cost to help other people so long as they are not American?
B: The “taxes” involved? I’m sorry, including the Iraq war we had standard deficits, and the DOD budget remained about normal. There were years in the $400 billion rang, with a deficit of $100-$200 billion several years, inclusive of Iraq. We had years inclusive of new Libya intervention that included $800 billion in DOD. The Iraq war was explained. It was included in the DOD. There is no Iraq spending that is not included in the DOD. Contrary, to your belief.
C: If we want to cost about the lack of accounting and cost of war, sending bombers to Iraq costs a lot more than sending troops. However, cost is not the only factor is it Celtica? It is about the result. We had accounting and cost included in Iraq, that included the Iraqi people. You just don’t like that. We currently have a lack of accounting for ISIS. Our current path is not preferable. People are dying, and we are letting them. Rebuilding Iraq, whenever it fully is done, would benefit the whole world, and the people of Iraq. It won’t take 3 years, the amount of time you people got impatient and thought we should leave. It won’t take 10. It may even take 50 years. But it is worth it.
Well said, Bob.
I wonder what the true cost will be (in lives and dollars) to clean up the ISIS mess caused by Obama announcing our departure from Irag (and soon to be Afganistan).
In truth I can’t blame Obama for Iraq falling apart in full. Yes we left before it was done, but it couldn’t have fallen apart that fast solely due to us leaving.
But I certainly am mad he keeps getting in the way of staying there and getting the job done, he’s blocking any potential progress we might make, as opposed to making chaos exist. I wonder how long this will ultimately take, and if we will ever see a peaceful Iraq and middle east.
It might simply not happen, it might not be meant to happen. Biblical aspects kind of imply that evil will surround Israel after all. I believe biblical aspects say that 5 nations surrounding Israel are supposed to try and destroy Israel after all, and mostly succeed until God assists, and Iran could be one of the 5.
I guess I’m naive in thinking we can actually help the Middle Eastern nations, but I still think we should try.
You expected the U.S. to remain in Iraq forever?
Guess you never heard Poppy Bush tell junior not to enter Iraq without an exit plan. Junior invaded anyway. Cheney made him. Cheney even blessed the new President of Iraq who reverted right back to Saddam’s vengeance against the other Muslim branch, causing even more upheaval in a chaotic society.
The resulting vacuum was a foreseeable event. Let’s send Bush back to fix it. It’s not like he ever completed his military service in the first place.
Celtica:
How long have we been in Germany and the rest of Europe? Do you think we will be there forever?
Remaining in Iraq does not necessarily equate to being at war the entire time. We could have remained mostly as a “police force” to prevent uprisings. Unfortunately, Obama did not even allow our troops to do that while they were there. Orders were given that we could not fight back against the insurgents. Our troops had to “call” the Iraqi army when they were attacked. Commander in Chief Obama…hardly!
Funny how you continue to pick on Bush. Now his military record. Tell me, what is Obama’s military record? Hypocrite!
At least Bush had experience running a state, compared to that fraudulent community organizer.
Celtica,
There is no such thing as an “exit plan” first of all. You can’t plan on when you will be finished with a country that is incredibly unstable. You can plan to leave when it is, but that plan won’t have a time table. We had a time table: When it is rebuilt. Bush W mentioned it several times.
Second of all: Planning to leave by a date, is the worst type of exit plan and is in fact not an exit plan The exit should be when the place is stable. In this regard when you say we should always have an exit plan, the fact that democrats always have a date requirement and not a requirement based on tangible goals met in rebuilding a nation, would show it is in fact Obama who never has an exit plan, nor democrats.
Third of all: Did I say indefinitely? I said it would take the better part of 50 years, but it is worth it.
Fourth of all: When trying to get a party into power that will rebuild the nation, and not do it yourself (which is corrupt) you occasionally put trust into the wrong people. Obama does this as well.
Fifth of all: Stop questioning Bush’s military record and stay on point. Character assaults are only done when one cannot argue a point. It isn’t on topic.
Sixth of all: You act like Bush HW leaving makes it worse that Bush W went in. As if finishing something your father started makes you less of a man, or a fool because HW couldn’t finish it. HW couldn’t finish it for the same reason his son couldn’t: Democrats wouldn’t let him, and insisted on time table exit plans, instead of actual exit plans. It reflects more on democrats that we have to keep going back, and leaving, than it does that republicans say we should stay until it is done. Quite literally, the democrats aren’t using exit plans, since we keep having to go back (and they support it each time.). Watch the videos. Al Gore said HW had every reason to go into Iraq. Then he said he had no reason. Then when Clinton was president, Clinton said Saddam will not deny the will of the world, and had used weapons of mass destruction and would use them again (wasn’t a lie when he said it, was it?) Al Gore did a speech talking about the gravity of Iraq. Then Bush W decided to go into Iraq, while Al Gore literally wove documents saying every piece of intelligence said we had to act. Then he said every piece said we needed to leave and the job was done.
If we aim to say going back to finish unfinished business is worse for the people who go back to finish it, than the people who forced it to remain unfinished, I would say that is quite an untrue statement.
Also Celtica,
The best way of knowing if a conservative poster is me, is by the content.
For example, contrary to all of your opinions, I don’t say conservative one liners, or typical conservative statements.
So for example: If someone says “this healthcare bill is XXXX pages that no one bothered to read and was rammed down our throats!”
Or:
“After all, Pelosi said you had to pass it before you know what is in it.”
Or: “All democrats want to do is tax and spend!”
You should know off the bat that it isn’t me. My posts are almost always more complicated than that, and go over the “why” the taxing or spending is bad, or the “why” the healthcare plan is bad, or an aspect of the XXXX page bill I don’t like, or the inefficiency of the bill in tangible terms, trying to weigh what is important (like my first actual post here, when I answered that this should be weighed based on how well it helped costs and it’s efficiency with helping people in general in comparison to the alternate options we had on the table). Etc.
My posts always include some sort of depth of thought included with the general concept and go into explanation.
Celtica,
One more thing:
I will say your demeanor is appreciated. You’re of course making passionate comments, but nothing of insulting nature.
Bob, the Gruber lie machine said the cost would be in the $900 billion range for 10 years. Reality has it pegged at right at $2.7 Trillion and rising.
…and the Republican lie machine said the cost of the Iraq war would be in the $50 to $60 billion range – lower than Mr Lindsey’s $100 to $200 billion estimate, who Bush fired.
My sole point is simple: both Repub’s & Dem’s have grossly underestimated the cost of their actions.
I agree, Rosanblatt. So why give any of them the pen and checkbook to continue this insanity?
Your first sentence contradicts your last.
Is this a common thing of left leaning folks and fake moderates? (This is my phrase mocking all the times you have said this about republicans and right leaning folks)
“Lie” is not the same as “grossly underestimating”
Do you get the point? Also, both parties are not equal.
This is called false equivalency Roenblatt, and it is your weakness. As much as you don’t like someone being affiliated with a party, lacking a party affiliation at any point at time while ignoring party trends is unwise. The parties don’t work together. This means you have to flip one side or the other completely, and entirely, on occasion in order to get agenda changes. 1964, would have been a good time to vote democrat with Kennedy and the anti tax democrats. Current day, we need to vote republican.
Every time someone brings up an issue you do this false equivalency. It is just as immature as republicans and democrats you debate against. First: The parties are not the same.
Second: If they are both the same we may as well just do nothing right?
That’s your “moderate” slogan: They are the same so do nothing!
Sound like an accusation you may have given as a label to a particular party?
Stop trying to play the false equivalency game. It ensures things won’t get done.
Please explain how Gruber underestimating the cost of Obamacare is any different than when the Republicans underestimated cost of the Iraq war.
Both parties said “this will likely cost $x” and it really cost more than their estimates. What am I missing? How are they different?
Just as I’ve asked Agent, I will now ask you: please do not put words in my mouth. “That’s your “moderate” slogan: They are the same so do nothing!”
I’ve never said that and I never implied it. That’s just what you THINK “my” slogan would be. It’s not – that “do nothing” attitude is far from my mindset. You want to know my slogan? Ask me and I’ll tell you – don’t presume you know.
“This is my phrase mocking all the times you have said this about republicans and right leaning folks”
ALL THE TIMES? I’ve done that MAYBE 6 times. You’re making it seem like I consistently mock Republicans by making sweeping generalizations all the time. That’s inaccurate.
“As much as you don’t like someone being affiliated with a party”
WRONG. I never said this and you’re putting words in my mouth again. I don’t care which party anyone affiliates with. Repub, Dem, Green, Libertarian, none of the above – I really couldn’t care any less about that!
Would you like a statistical breakdown of my friends and their party affiliations to support my argument, or can you admit you assumed incorrectly that I don’t like people who affiliate with any political party?
Integrity matters: So in other words, spending on war is good, spending on American health care, bad, bad, bad.
Does Integrity really matter? Clearly, it does not.
Celtica: First of all, you are trying to compare, from a budgeting standpoint, apples to watermelons. I never implied either was good or bad. You libs always try to point the finger and distract from the real issue when you cannot defend Obama’s ineptness and failed policies and decisions. BLAME IT ON BUSH. HE DID IT WORSE! I was always taught that if someone does something stupid or wrong, it does not give me the right to do the same thing or something stupid.
Second, integrity does matter. Obama has NONE. He lies continually and never takes responsibility for anything. The most recent example is when he did not show up for the solidarity march against terrorism in France. Why did he not send someone of importance to participate if he was too busy? Instead, one of his staff members “fell on the sword” a couple of days later.
Why don’t you show some integrity and admit when he is wrong and lying? Baaaa, said the sheep!
Dear Integrity,
Obama’s “ineptness and failed policies and decisions” steered us though the financial debacle that Bush left. Stock market high, unemployment much lower, gas prices even lower. Seriously.
I wish Obama would have marched in Paris but didn’t.
On the other hand, Bush could have stopped in New Orleans after Katrina on his way home from a birthday party in Arizona — but didn’t.
PS: You left out Benghazi.
Dear Celtica:
All of the “positives” that you mentioned took place “IN SPITE” of Obama’s failed policies. Please explain what Obama and his administration did “proactively” that created this outcome for each.
Please don’t tell me to look at the lower deficit because (1) it’s still a deficit and (2) look at the overall national debt. Obama has created more debt than ALL of the previous presidents COMBINED.
The reality is that the people have tightened their own fiscal belts, giving them the ability to spend money and affect Wall St. Employment numbers appear lower but that is because (1) there are less people on the rolls, not necessarily because they obtained jobs (2) people are being forced to get jobs (any job) because their 99 weeks of collecting unemployment ran out. Lastly, try to get it through your head that OPEC is driving the gas prices down, not Obama.
There you go about Bush again…Let it go!
P.S. I left out fast and furious, the IRS scandal and several others, too. Too tired and too busy.
Well naturally you’re too tired and too busy. Finding positive things about the Bush Administration would do that to anyone.
IN SPITE is a good word, although the proper would usage would have been DESPITE. However, there does exist the possibility that you “misunderestimated” the impact of Obama’s policies on the economy. And, no, I don’t care to illustrate how Obama’s policies — the fact is, the stock market is high, unemployment dropping and so are the gas prices — these speak for themselves. That is illustration enough.
Just think if Mitt had become president, you could have taken credit for all of this. If only…
Celtica: Are you delusional?
Thanks for proving my point that when you have no substantive answer, you go off into left field an invoke a Bush response or something else nonsensical.
Guess what despite means??? “in spite of”. Misunderestimated, on the other hand is not even a word. The proper use, as you put it, is underestimated.
Of course you cannot illustrate Obama’s policies, because there are none. Obama’s lies speak for themselves, too, but apparently, you are deaf to that.
If Mitt was president, he would have not lead from behind. If he did, I would be calling him out, too!
Yo, Integrity, are you even aware that “misunderestmated” is a Bushism?
Yes, Flipflop Mitt would be leading from the front, and then the behind and then from side to side — being a Flipflopper and all.
Integrity, “misunderestimated” is a word that I believe was used in a Saturday Night Live skit with Will Ferrell playing Pres. Bush. They used that word to make fun of him and the way he sometimes stumbles over words. Liberals use things like that now to continue to make fun of Bush. (At least Bush never said we have 57 states….)
And actually, Bush did say it too, but SNL really took it and ran with it to make fun of him, as though none of us have ever tripped over our tongue before.
Yo, Celtica. Like I said before, just because someone else does or says something stupid, it doesn’t give you the right to do the same thing.
Bush did and said many stupid things and probably still does. So does Obama. I make up my own mind based on the available facts and try to weave my way through the BS propaganda that the media feeds us. All of them do it, including Fox. At least Fox tries periodically to provide an honest opposing view.
As far as Mitt is concerned, he was not my 1st or even 2nd choice. That said, he still would have been better than Obama.
Integrity, our budget deficit increases by $500 million each day. Total debt is over $18 Trillion, and close to $8 Trillion created by Obama in just 6 years. These numbers have no meaning to Progressives, but it is a fact and some day, we, our children, grand children, great great grandchildren will have to pay the piper.
It is not about spending at all on healthcare.
It is about what system of healthcare works. While this program is a spending program, which is an issue, the issue that makes the spending program an issue is specifically that it is “inefficient” spending also done to woo people like you, and buy votes.
The worst kind of spending.
Regardless of even that:
Spending on wars that could stop famine, and death, and dictators torturing their people takes priority over making sure that Americans don’t file bankruptcy for medical bills. Get your priorities straight. Are you this much of an ethnic purist?
Side Comment:
When I ask questions like this, it is not to say you are.
It is to make you think. People aren’t an ethnic purist unless they intend to be. My point here is that because you aren’t thinking, you are accidentally holding opinions that appear to be ethnic purist in nature.
That is also why I said people like you who are against racism, who are for people, can’t be against this concept that all nations deserve a good life.
Extrapolate your feelings, alleviate your allegiances, and you might find that what you’re saying doesn’t match what you strive to be and the good you want to do.
I have an issue with prioritizing famine, death and dictators over Americans. I guess I’m an ethnic purist because I think the money should be spent here. If there is any left after taking care of America, then we can go out and save the world.
I agree, KY. I relate it to what we are instructed to do in an airplane if the cabin loses pressure. Put your own oxygen mask on first, then assist others, if necessary.
If America is strong financially, both from a governmental and personal perspective, we can do significantly more than what we currently do. I think individual Americans give significantly abroad, more than any other country, through ministry and relief organizations.
I’m going to go with making sure that couples here don’t go bankrupt (as our health system has that as it’s only flaw) is not as important as helping other people to not be murdered, die going hungry, etc.
And if you truly believe that, you are an ethnic purist.
America is fine. If you’re going to strive for us to have a perfect life before we can help others, you have a moral issue.
That should be taken a step further:
If you believe we should have a phone, internet, eat like kings (in comparison to the third world countries dying and starving) have birth control paid for, etc, before we fund the life of human beings across the world, it is heartless.
Every, single, penny, that you have (and America has) outside of the most basic funding should go to other countries.
Also: Integrity I like your oxygen mask comment. If we were all fighting for oxygen masks, that would change things a little. Though as a side comment: I wouldn’t like it, and it would be terrible, but if I had to give my oxygen mask to a child who an ISIS was trying to take it away, I would do so. By what JW is saying, she would not.
We aren’t even talking about an America which can’t take care of itself as is. We are one of the richest countries in the world. If we can’t take care of countries NO ONE can JW. And if you’re saying NO ONE should help other countries, and leave these HUMAN BEINGS to their fate, I can’t ever think of you as a good person. In fact, it disgusts me to the point of thinking of you as my enemy.
Bob,
I did not interpret KYjw’s comments as not wanting to help other countries, just that we should look to help our own first, and then others (hence, my oxygen mask comment). Another analogy…you only have enough food for YOUR 3 kids, but there are 10 kids at the door that are hungry. Are you going to take the food from your kids and give it to the others?
Another question pertaining to your comment “Every, single, penny, that you have (and America has) outside of the most basic funding should go to other countries”.
Where do you draw the line at basic needs? Have you given up your car so that you can send the money you have for those expenses to other countries? In theory, that is not a necessity. Unless you are living on beans and rice and water; walking to work and using candles for light, your comment is a little hypocritical.
If everyone did that, we would be going backwards as a society. In essence, trying to make the US become like a third world country.
No one wants to see anyone starve. We, as a nation, prop up third world countries around the globe. But for us to be able to do that, we have to be strong economically. If we are not, we can’t.
You’re debating the definition of basic needs through your car comment. Besides which, I over exaggerate certain aspects depending on need. JW needs to learn that she isn’t giving enough, clearly. I certainly did take her comment as not wanting to help the poor at all. Again: We are the wealthiest nation in the world. If we can’t afford to take care of other countries, no one can. If she is trying to make a philosophical argument that we should take care of ourselves first to side step my point that was correct, then we have a problem with her being a smart ass, as that isn’t productive debate.
Well, the numbers are coming in. 40 visits to the PT @ $50.00 – an additional $2000, 7 PCP visits @ 30.00 = 210 and more to come on top of the premiums. That’s on top of premiums and on top of the Co Insurance.
Hi FFA. Despite what the libs say about how wonderful Obamacare is, you are feeling the reality of it as well as a lot of others who signed up.
By the way, what is your prediction for the Superbowl? Odds makers are favoring Seattle. I don’t know about that. If they play like they did last game and give up 4 interceptions and a fumble, I don’t think they will have much success. Brady & Company will eat them up even without deflated balls. It should be a close game we hope and it will come down to execution and who wins in the trenches.
I am pulling for the aged Vet… NE by 14. Wilson has plenty of time for more SB victories. Brady cant keep going like he has been.
So I guess those 9.5 million people who now have health insurance should just go pound sand because “small business?”
Give me a break. This policy has been an unmitigated success, helping nearly 15% of the entire population. With any luck, well have single payer within a decade and finally be done with this charade.
PS really looking forward to another 400 comment thread of respectful and constructive debate, you guys.
Stan: I see you went to the Obama school of math and economics, too. Maybe that is why you think it is an “unmitigated success”.
“Nearly 15%” of the population is about 47 million people. Even if the 9.5 million cited included only those which never had insurance (which it doesn’t), that is only 20% of the population. And by the way, I think the 9.5 million includes those that signed up for Medicare (I could be wrong about that).
20% is barely reaching the “Mendoza” line for you baseball fans out there.
Regarding the 9.5 million and their coverage, no, they should not go pound sand. We are too far down the road so any kind of meaningful reform should include coverage for them. 87% are already getting subsidies, so they could probably come back under the Medicare umbrella.
Apparently, all you progressive, Obama lovers don’t like to hear the truth. Can’t respond to the facts, can you?
What’s the matter, cat got your tongue (or pen, in this instance)?
I think you might have a math error or typo.
Nearly 15% of the population is about 47 million people….
Even if the 9.5 million cited included only those which never had insurance (which it doesn’t), that is only 20% of the population….
Last I heard, 20% is more than 15%, but 9.5 million is less than 47 million.
Sorry KY, I was not clear in my explanation.
15% of the US Population is about 47 million people.
Of those 47 million people, only 9.5 million (approx 20%)have coverage under Obamacare.
Achieving only 20% in not “unmitigated success” as Stan purports.
Thanks for pointing that out.
Dear Stan: Good on ya. For a xenophobic GOP, they sure do like spending money overseas instead of on Americans…
I think you’re “misunderestimating” the GOP, Celtica. (Sorry, I couldn’t resist.)
Actually, the money spent overseas (if you are referring to the war dollars), is actually spent on the Americans and for the Americans. Would you rather spend the money rebuilding this great country when the terrorists blow us up?
You could probably consider it…”insurance”.
Integrity — In your book, war is good, doesn’t need a budget and bombs away. For the record, the terrorist did blow up the World Trade Center. Money spent.
My book, let’s spend money on Americans in America. Hello health care. Hello healthy America. Hello healthy veterans without battle fatigue. Hello America.
Sorry, Celtica. You picked up the wrong book.
War is never good. But, it is sometimes necessary. Especially if it means keeping this country safe.
My book, I think we should spend our tax money on the things that the people cannot do, like infrastructure and security of our borders. We can also provide for those that truly cannot help themselves and help others to raise their standard of living by helping themselves. We should not spend our tax dollars on people who simply want to live off the govt. Welfare fraud is rampant.
Explain to me why the govt had to provide cell phones to the “needy”? Cell phones are not a necessity. We have become a nanny state in which people want everything without having to do the work for it.
Please try to admit that the existing govt leaders (Dems and Reps) are simply trying to expand the govt and increase taxes so they can perpetuate the problem. Sooner or later, the money will run out and the taxes will be so high that no one will be able to afford anything. All of these entitlements, including healthcare, is leading us to bankruptcy.
Hey Integrity, I am sure glad Netanyahu is coming to address a joint session to tell the American People what is going on over there and the threat we are facing from Radical Islam. The White House is throwing a fit over this and practically foaming at the mouth since they don’t want the truth coming out and it will impact their non-policy with Iran. Iran has been playing four corners for years with no intention of stopping their nuke bomb deployment. Once they get it, they have promised to wipe Israel off the map. I think they are crazy enough to do it. Israel could easily take pre-emptive action if they believe they will be wiped out and then we are in for it.
Agent – I’m glad he is coming here, too. Did you hear that Iran put a hit order out on Netanyahu’s children today?
Apparently, they are concerned with him speaking to Congress, too. Hmmm, I wonder why??
Also, isn’t it amazing how the Prog’s go silent when you throw facts at them? They run out of Bush responses.
Also, there is another scandal brewing with Hillary and her drive to get Qaddafi ousted. Apparently, they fabricated some of the reasons to back the Eqyptian insurgents.
Someone please call Tom Brady to let some of the air out of Celtica’s head. It is apparently pressing too hard on her brain.
Good one Trust me. I believe all there is left between her ears is air or is it a vacuum?
Dear Trust Me: Does your mommy know you are playing with her keyboard?
Yes Inegrity, I saw both stories. I am sure the left doesn’t even know it yet since they don’t stay up with the news and MSNBC will never report it. Yep, “old” Hillary was not much of a Secretary of State, was she? She talked Obama into bombing Qaddafi and get him ousted. He did that “unilaterally” without Congress approval. They called Bush a “Cowboy” ready to bomb at a minutes notice. Barack had no problem bombing. Look what happened in the aftermath. Libya is in chaos due to the Arab Spring, Muslim Brotherhood. Then, we had Benghazi and four Americans slaughtered including our Ambassador. I still think he was running weapons to those Syrian fighters against the Syrian dictator or why would he be there and the CIA having an annex there? Something went horribly wrong and the Ambassador paid the ultimate price. I wonder what these tapes will uncover. As bad as the libs want this to go away, it is gradually coming out. Hopefully, it will be a big campaign issue and Hillary will have to withdraw from running.
Why watch Fox News when you can read it and opine verbatim here?
As for Netanyahu, he is here simply as a campaign event. It was the GOP who thoughtfully invited a foreign leader to speak when all he was here to do was cash in prior to the election. And you fell for it hook, line and sinker.
Celtica –
Unlike Obama, Netanyahu cares about his people and country. Obama has been campaigning for over 7 years at this point. He is out right now trying to convince the people why taxes should be raised so they can spend more money.
Integrity, the thing that American Progressives don’t understand is that Israel is fighting for its very existence as a country. They are surrounded by Muslim countries, many bent on destroying them. They are our only ally in the region and they are being treated shabbily by the Obama administration. Once, they made Netanyahu leave the White House by the rear exit. How insulting!
Hey Celtica, here is a verse from the bible that sums it all up, short and sweet.
A wise man’s heart inclines to the right, but a fool’s heart to the left. Ecclesiastes 10:2.
I agree, Agent. Hopefully, the truth will come out about this administration and those involved will get what they deserve.
Integrity, did you see the Washington Times article that Mitt has decided not to run? I say good, because he wasn’t near hard enough on Obama and snatched defeat out of the jaws of victory. He thought he good just present a good image, say he would fix the economy and people would elect him and the nasty insulting Obama lovers had a field day.
Last week, he met with Jeb Bush in Utah, which was interesting. Perhaps Jeb said it was time he move over and let the younger guys run, but probably promised him Secretary of Commerce if Jeb wins.
I did not see that. I hope he stays home. He probably would be good for a cabinet post, though.
Agent,
That is good news for the Republicans. The only Republican “candidates” that intrigue me right now are Governors Walker and Christie. I would also be interested in Paul Ryan. The rest are too gosh darn goofy for me to tajke seriously.
There are no Democrats that I can support. But thebn again, we only hear about Hillary Clinton and VP Biden. I do not like either.
Ron, have you heard that Walker is considering a run?
FFA,
He spoke at the recent gathering of Conservatives in Iowa and mentioned he is considering a run. He would definitely be a significant upgrade from the last 2 Republican candidates. I could see myself voting for him.
Ron, perhaps you should check our Pence from Indiana. He is a Governor doing great things there. You conveniently left off Dr. Ben Carson. Does he make too much sense for you? Forget Christie and Bush. Far too Rinoish and liberal and we don’t need any more liberals in office. Look at what a mess liberals have made in the past 6 years.
Agent,
I have heard some good things about Gov Pence, but nothing about him running in 2016 yet. He does intrigue me.
Until someone tells me more about Ben Carson’s qualifications, based on actual experience, to be the president, he is just a Conservative/Republican version of President Obama. Based on much of your criticisms of President Obama being inexperienced for the job, I would think you would not want to go down that road again.
I would tend to agree with Ron on Carson. Don’t know enough about his ability to do that job. Walker and Ryan absolutely make sense. Only issue I would have is the White House decorated in Paker Garb…
Congrats to Mr Brady and the entire NE team. A rookie making the play of the year. Of course, made possible by the stupid play called. Lynch in the backfield on the one to win the game and he throws???? Then, whatever slim chance they had left taken away by an off sides call. Then, a classless display of sportsmanship.
Ron, Dr. Ben has more smarts in his little finger than the Community Organizer has in his whole body plus Common sense which is sorely lacking with politicians. I also think he would get some good advisors to assist him instead of political hacks who know nothing about how to manage a diverse economy. If Carson can’t raise enough money, he won’t make it to the big stage, but he could be great in a cabinet post like HHS. That rat’s nest should be cleaned out, the VA should be cleaned out and he is just the guy who could do it with his background in medicine.
FFA, decorating the White House in Packer colors is better than the current Muslim colors we see in every news conference. Check out the drapes sometime.
Did you see the look on Sherman’s face when that pass was intercepted on the goal line? Utter disbelief that a coach could be that stupid. The media was interviewing Brady after the game and they asked him if he would have killed that play. He dodged the question and merely replied that he was glad they tried it. A great quarterback would have been yelling Kill, Kill, Kill at the top of his lungs and either run Lynch or faked it to him and rolled out and either flipped it to the tight end or run it in himself.
Agent,
Did you even read my post? I did not say anything about intelligence or common sense. What experience does he have that makes him qualified to be the President of the United States? President Obama tried the ole advisors bit to make up for his lack of experience. Where did that get us?
Dr. Carson will not be able to accomplish anything without experience in how the system works and he will not be able to change the system either.
Even FFA agreed with me reagrding Ben Carson’s lack of experience.
I’m sorry, but he is just not electable, period. If he gets the nomination, say hello to another 4-8 years of a Democrat being in the White House.
I am in complete dis belief that all plays called were anything but run Lynch. Run Lynch and then run Lynch again. Dumbest thing I ever saw in a Super Bowl. One of the best backs in the game. A Beast. A Battering Ram. He alone moves piles of bodies. I think anyone with any common sense would have killed that play.
Walker is a been there done that type of a guy. He stopped Wi from becoming just another Illinois.
You are right FFA. Walker has stood up to the unions and beat their butt. He has a backbone and has the right values. He showed very well in Iowa. If he starts supplanting Bush as the front runner, look for the hate machine on the left to try to find the skeletons in the closet. Some will probably come from the Bush camp. I have no doubt that Walker can handle himself in debates.