The law is called ObamaCare for a reason. The Dems and Obama OWN this law and everything about it.
Just as a point of interest you may want to read up on all the changes made to Obama Care over the last several years and investigate the reasons why those changes happened. This version of Obama Care we see today is quite far away from his original plan. You may get a better picture of why so many people feel Republicans share at least some of the blame for this disaster we are witness to. There’s no question the Obama administration has to shoulder a lot of the blame here because this has been quite a debacle. However, it’s a little ignorant to actually believe it’s 100% on the President. That would imply they don’t understand how politics in Washington works.
People who try to imply it’s all on the President sort of sound like they just started following Obama Care last month. I mean, did they not see this develop over the years? Just weren’t interested until shit hit the fan? This didn’t start in October of 2013. There is a long history of concessions and infighting in Washington that led up to this point. BOTH parties let the country down. Americans deserve better healthcare and all they got was obstructionism in Washington.
See my next post…
[quote=“BrentGolf”]
Just as a point of interest you may want to read up on all the changes made to Obama Care over the last several years and investigate the reasons why those changes happened. This version of Obama Care we see today is quite far away from his original plan. You may get a better picture of why so many people feel Republicans share at least some of the blame for this disaster we are witness to. [/quote]
Perhaps you might like to refresh our memory.
My recollection is the Republicans represented 0 votes in both the senate and house of representatives, common sense should tell you this is not good ground for making concessions, in fact only those who needed to vote yes, the Democrats, are in any position to push for changes for their vote.
But it is worse than that, because Democrats needed 60 votes in congress to avoid a filibuster, the bill came in the form of a rehashed other bill that had come from the house. Two weeks later, the bill would never have been passed as they lost their super majority. The original The Affordable Health Care for America Act (or HR 3962, that was originally proposed was dropped.
However, the house democrats now couldn’t change anything without needing it to get Congress approval again, all they could do was changes limited to the budget, but wanting changes and knowing that changes would require Congress to approve, which they knew they wouldn’t get, they did a technical maneuver to use the the reconciliation process to pass the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 as that wouldn’t be subject to a filibuster.
That is why the final bill was very different to the original proposed by the house. The democrats didn’t have the time to properly work out the details, they weren’t able to make the changes they wanted to in the house. Because every single Republican was in opposition. But, please, I would like to hear how all these changes put in were for the benefit of Republicans, not one of which voted for it.
So, all of these posts are made by people enjoying a healthcare system in Taiwan that they don’t want Americans to join something similar … just because they don’t really like Obama?
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4
If the US had spent all the time, energy and money fixing its health care problems that it’s spent being world policeman the last ten years it would probably have a functioning health care system by now. Granted, Iraq wouldn’t be a smoldering hell hole in a perpetual state of low intensity warfare but you can’t have everything.
[quote=“Belgian Pie”]So, all of these posts are made by people enjoying a healthcare system in Taiwan that they don’t want Americans to join something similar … just because they don’t really like Obama?
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4[/quote]
I’m for universal healthcare, Ive said as much before. In the UK its pretty simple, everyone who works pays something like 17% towards healthcare, and everyone can receive healthcare, working or not. I support that.
The ACA is incredibly complex. Who gets subsidy and who doesn’t, whats included for what plan, rules linked to how many hours you work (full time vs part time), rules on number of employees.
My guess is the opposite of what was promised, that was, the average family will see a reduction of 2500 dollars, that it will be better healthcare, and we already know the “if you want to keep your plan” promise was false. I doubt it is going anywhere soon, so we can see what happens, I suspect people in some cases will be made part time, loose coverage, pay more, perhaps some inflation.
I think the average family will be worse of, special interest groups are lining up for favors, the unions were in the white house recently, unhappy their members now have to pay more. Obama it looks like he will exempt them. Then insurance companies yesterday, who it looks like will get a little something something because Obama just drove over them in a bus, and backed up over them. I think the worst is yet to come, but we’ll see.
Ignorant, is it?
:roflmao:
Here’s [color=#FF0000]you[/color] agreeing with me just about a month ago:
[quote=“BrentGolf, on 19 October 2013”][color=#FF0000]
As for Obama care, this is clearly the Obama administrations baby. If it’s successful Obama will rightfully get the credit.
[/color][/quote]
Changing your tune, now, eh?
Anyway, here’s what some others on the left, and you, recently stated about credit and blame:
Yinz look kinda silly, now!
The law is called ObamaCare for a reason. Obama and the Dems own it.
Its cute, though, when you come here and lecture us about everything…
Maybe now that the Dems and Obama are talking about changing ObamaCare again, and even discussing legislation that will affect the implementation of ObamaCare, you can come here and lecture us again about SETTLED LAW and the democratic constitutional legislative process and how the US Supreme Court already upheld this SETTLED LAW… DO YOU KNOW WHAT A LAW IS?
:roflmao:
Huh? I didn’t come to Taiwan for the healthcare. There was no national healthcare in Taiwan when I came here. Moreover, I maintain insurance in the US.
I know it sort of spoils your gotcha moment, but it’s about context and reading comprehension. I said Obama will get credit or blame for how this turns out. And? Isn’t that what’s happened? I never said Obama Care represents what Obama wanted in 2010. I’ve stated probably a dozen times that concessions were made all along and the current form of Obama Care is a watered down version of what it originally was. Go ahead, quote mine me. It won’t be hard to find me talking about this specifically. But accurately representing someone’s opinion wouldn’t be nearly as fun for you I know…
Its your comprehension that is in question, here. You keep trying to blame the GOP for a bad law pushed through by the Dems and Obama.
The GOP is not looking bad in connection with the ObamaCare debacle. Obama and the Dems are looking slimey, though.
Now that Republicans have won a decisive victory in the blame game they can go back to doing what they do best - nothing. At least Democrats tried. You’ve got to give them that.
No it’s not, you should have read the quote that you quoted. I stated in plain English that Obama will either get credit or blame for this, which as it happens is exactly how it turned out. I was hoping it worked out well and he gets credit, but that didn’t happen. But I never stated that Obama Care is exactly how the Dems wanted it to be. Quite the contrary, I stated many times this isn’t what was originally intended and it’s going to be a long process of amendments and changes that go well into Hillary’s term.
And aren’t I the one that’s been calling this a disaster, a debacle, a clusterfuck, an embarrassment to the administration? 
Sometimes doing nothing is the lesser evil. So… no. I won’t give them that. If they don’t have the good sense to leave bad enough alone when they don’t know what they’re doing then they can’t be trusted with power.
But that’s the way he wanted it.
Back-peddling!
You are trying to have your cake and eat it, too. Yes, in one statement you say Obama gets all the credit, and in the next statement, you claim that the GOP is to blame for some of the failure.
Here’s a clue (which you so badly need): In politics, if the opposition party absolutely opposes a particular bill to the extent that not a single member of the opposition party votes for the bill, but, that bill gets shoved through the legislature by the ruling party via dubious means and is then signed by the president, who is also a member of the ruling party, then the ruling party that shoved the bill through by dubious means and the president who signed the bill into law gets all the credit if the law works and all the blame if it fails.
That ruling party, which wanted the law, does not then, in good faith, get to come back and complain that the opposition party harmed the bill as it was shoved down the throats of the opposition party and was passed into law.
Christ. Do you really not get this? 
Meanwhile, Mark Steyn skewers Queen Barry Antoinette:
[quote=“Mark Steyn”]Still, as historian Michael Beschloss pronounced the day after his election, he’s “probably the smartest guy ever to become president.” Naturally, Obama shares this assessment. As he assured us five years ago, “I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors.” Well, apart from his signature health-care policy. That’s a mystery to him. “I was not informed directly that the website would not be working,” he told us. The buck stops with something called “the executive branch,” which is apparently nothing to do with him. As evidence that he was entirely out of the loop, he offered this:
Ooooo-kay. So, if I follow correctly, the smartest president ever is not smart enough to ensure that his website works; he’s not smart enough to inquire of others as to whether his website works; he’s not smart enough to check that his website works before he goes out and tells people what a great website experience they’re in for. But he is smart enough to know that he’s not stupid enough to go around bragging about how well it works if he’d already been informed that it doesn’t work. So he’s smart enough to know that if he’d known what he didn’t know he’d know enough not to let it be known that he knew nothing. The country’s in the very best of hands.[/quote]
Ouch! That’s gotta hurt the first Ego in the Office!
Oh, I almost forgot, Brent! Maybe now that the Dems and Obama are talking about changing ObamaCare again, and even discussing legislation that will affect the implementation of ObamaCare, are you going to lecture us again about SETTLED LAW and the democratic constitutional legislative process and how the US Supreme Court already upheld this SETTLED LAW and thus it cannot be changed… DO YOU KNOW WHAT A LAW IS?
It’s going to require some time and effort to clean this mess up. Personally I think that if the website was fully functional from day 1 there wouldn’t be nearly the outrage there currently is. Obama Care itself could still work as intended if that website wasn’t so useless. It’ll be more expensive for some, less expensive for others, it will provide healthcare to those that couldn’t previously get it, and it will eliminate the pre-existing condition bullshit. Plans will get cancelled for being sub-par, and if the website worked people could just go on there and purchase a new plan. It’s really the website issues that put an ugly red circle around what isn’t really that bad. It’s not great, and it’s not nearly as good as the original plan was before all the concessions were made along the way to ensure that it could even pass through this obstructionist government, but if the website gets fixed it could still improve the current #37 ranked healthcare system.
The only reason I’m even speaking to you now is because you misquoted me. My point has been consistent from the beginning, and instead of writing a novel and throwing insults where they don’t belong you could simply say you were mistaken in your quote mining and should have read it more carefully.
I agree Brent, but I suspect the outrage would be more. The problems extend way beyond the website, but I guess I’ll have to wait before some acknowledgment of that is made by some.
You can correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think anybody has said they think Obama Care is perfect. It’s clearly flawed and a far cry from it’s original intention. However as with nearly everything, analysis means nothing without comparing it to something else. So what we’ve got is the richest nation in the world with the 37th ranked healthcare system.
Now assuming the website worked perfectly, and I know that’s a huge assumption because in reality it has to be among the worst sites ever launched, but work with me here. If the website was flawless, can you make a strong argument that Obama Care is WORSE then the current #37 ranked healthcare system? I know full well you can make many arguments for why Obama Care is inadequate and not what you were hoping for, but again, compare it to what’s already there.
Do you honestly think it’s worse then what the US currently has? If so, why?
[quote=“BrentGolf”]You can correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think anybody has said they think Obama Care is perfect. It’s clearly flawed and a far cry from it’s original intention. However as with nearly everything, analysis means nothing without comparing it to something else. So what we’ve got is the richest nation in the world with the 37th ranked healthcare system.
[/quote]
The only relevant basis of comparison is the system it replaced. They made things worse. It would have been better to do nothing.