Obamacare...

hutch wrote:
when someone refers to health care reform as "Obamacare" you know right then and there they are not serious and have no interest in engaging in a substantial conversation..

+1.

right up there with the folks who insist on calling him Barack HUSSEIN Obama, with emphasis on his middle name as if it means something.

awesome - mr. gallagher and i agree on something, this thread has turned out alright after all!  and i learned that frank is incredibly introspective, self-aware and open to self-criticism.  ain't life just grand?

James wrote:
No, it's your fellow insurance premium payers paying higher rates to support for your crippled ass.

RatBastard wrote:
It is not the governments business to protect me from myself or save me from poor financial decision i may make.

I have insurance.  I pay for the plan I choose to have and get the coverage I have paid for.  I pay the co-pays and deductibles that are my responsibility.  None of that has an impact on any one else.  Everyone has the right to make the same choice.  If someone chooses not to buy insurance then it is not the "gummints" job to force me to cover them.  Far too many folks are foolish enough to think that just because the "gummint" provides something that it means it is free.  TANSTAAFL.

sweetcell wrote:

RatBastard wrote:
It is not the governments business to protect me from myself or save me from poor financial decision i may make.

completely agreed - but health care costs are out of the control of any single person.  it is the government's job to provide social services, especially ones where the private sector is failing. 

you can think within the system, "this is how things work - a family of four should budget thousands per year for health care.  deal with it".  or you can take a step back and ask yourself, "why should anyone have to pay that much for something so necessary, within a system that is so broken?"

my opinions are colored by the fact that i believe that health care is a basic right, not a privilege.  you should contribute towards its cost but those costs should not be allowed to run out of control to the point where health care is unattainable.   

godsshoeshine wrote:
"obamacare" does run the risk of being ineffective due to a convervative government coming in and slashing funding

good point.  makes for great politicking - kill the opposition's plan through lack of funding, then point out what a failure their plan was.  brilliant!

The whole problem starts with the fact that health care in the country is (for most people) tied to where they work.  The FIRST thing we need to do is make it so that employers CANNOT be your source of health care at all period.  I don't get my auto insurance or my homeowners through my employer, why heath insurance?  Makes ZERO sense.  I am not saying that employers cannot provide a benefit of assisting in paying your premium, I am saying they ought not be allowed to be the provider.  It you think about it you will comprehend the sound logic behind it.

As far as health care being a right, I do not agree on that as a carte blanche statement.  We all have decision to make as to where we spend our money.  If someone chooses to buy (what to me are) far less important things than insurance, well that is their choice and they assume the risk.  I am not the one who should assume that risk for you.  The debate that "I can't afford insurance" really means "I choose to make other purchases instead of insurance". 

My insurance for my family of four is $180 a month.  That is less than my Comcast bill.  The company we have insurance with has four plans.  We took the 3rd of four price-wise and pay the related copays etc.  We budget for it and it is money well spent.

James wrote:
No, it's your fellow insurance premium payers paying higher rates to support for your crippled ass.

RatBastard wrote:
It is not the governments business to protect me from myself or save me from poor financial decision i may make.

So who the hell do you think is paying for the uninsured in the gummits health care system?  Oh yeah thats right the easter bunny… 

"Nurse Kitty needs to draw some blood. This shouldn't hurt too much. Just don't fight back"

ggw wrote:
I misread the thread title.  I thought it said "Obamacore," which I figured was just some new East African sub-genre of technically polished but ultimately feckless pop pablum.

lulz

ggw wrote:
I misread the thread title.  I thought it said "Obamacore," which I figured was just some new East African sub-genre of technically polished but ultimately feckless pop pablum.

OBAMACORE

HoyaSaxa03 wrote:

ggw wrote:
I misread the thread title.  I thought it said "Obamacore," which I figured was just some new East African sub-genre of technically polished but ultimately feckless pop pablum.

OBAMACORE

Caption contest.
Obama - "yo whitey…who the fuck are you again?"
Bruce - "I paid for your election victory"
Obama - "say wa mofo?"

I have noticed Obama DOES talk that way. You've got his mannerisms down, guy.

http://blogs.ajc.com/news-to-me/2011/04/08/man-drives-around-with-dead-friend-for-3-days/?cxntlid=thbz_hm

He took his buddy to the polls to vote for Obama..YO!

It's been well documented that the dead are always coming out to vote in Baltimore.

Allen Poe being the pioneer in that regard eh?

I'm just wondering if the public will be dumb enough to re-elect him.  Fool me once and all…

RatBastard wrote:
I'm just wondering if the public will be dumb enough to re-elect him.  Fool me once and all…

dude, this country voted for george w bush twice.  if they were stupid enough to do that, obama is a shoo-in.

sweetcell wrote:

RatBastard wrote:
I'm just wondering if the public will be dumb enough to re-elect him.  Fool me once and all…

dude, this country voted for george w bush twice.  if they were stupid enough to do that, obama is a shoo-in.

…..wait…did manc and sweetcell just agree on something?  :o

sweetcell wrote:

RatBastard wrote:
I'm just wondering if the public will be dumb enough to re-elect him.  Fool me once and all…

dude, this country voted for george w bush twice.  if they were stupid enough to do that, obama is a shoo-in.

I think its arguable whether Bush would have totaled more votes in Florida if they had actually all been counted… I tend to think Gore would have won…

The Republicans played the system better and ultimately used their +1 in the Supreme Court to their advantage in a ridiculous and rather strange decision to overturn a State Supreme Court's decision to actually count the votes…

Think about that one for a second regardless of what side of the fence you may be on (not you Sweetcell.. the lemmings): the US Supreme Court decided- by a very weak 5 to 4 eh- that the constitution did not grant the state of Florida the right and authority to count the votes of its own residents to determine what delegates it would send to the electoral college…

Frank wrote:

sweetcell wrote:

RatBastard wrote:
I'm just wondering if the public will be dumb enough to re-elect him.  Fool me once and all…

dude, this country voted for george w bush twice.  if they were stupid enough to do that, obama is a shoo-in.

…..wait…did manc and sweetcell just agree on something?  :o

Same here!

Without getting into nitpicking the details for either of these psychos, there's still more than enough fools around still defending both of them. Almost clones of each other if you don't get hung up on looks or affiliated parties.

Anyone who did, or does, vote for 2nd terms for either of these owned and controlled traitors fits the definition of insanity. You know, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome. 

Jaguar wrote:

Frank wrote:

sweetcell wrote:

RatBastard wrote:
I'm just wondering if the public will be dumb enough to re-elect him.  Fool me once and all…

dude, this country voted for george w bush twice.  if they were stupid enough to do that, obama is a shoo-in.

…..wait…did manc and sweetcell just agree on something?  :o

Same here!

Without getting into nitpicking the details for either of these psychos, there's still more than enough fools around still defending both of them. Almost clones of each other if you don't get hung up on looks or affiliated parties.

Anyone who did, or does, vote for 2nd terms for either of these owned and controlled traitors fits the definition of insanity. You know, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome. 

So out of curiosity, what are y'all going to do if the opposing candidate is even less desirable. Palin, Trump, Bachmann, Ron Paul, Huckabee, Gingrich, Santorum? Words like 'insanity', 'psychos', and 'stupid' fit with pretty much all the assumed opposing candidates.