The secret the Democratic leaders know about Obamacare, but don't want us to know

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2012 10:12 PM GMT
    Added 1/4/2014: The link to the Huffington Post article still works, and it is interesting to see how the subsequent facts were predicted by the article.

    I would modify my introduction by saying that many Democrats thought it would work but some knew it wouldn't.

    .................................

    Simply put, they know it won't work. It will unravel, collapsing the entire health care industry with devastating results on the population. The Government will pick up the pieces and replace the entire industry by a single payer concept, completely controlled by the Government, their goal all along.

    Let's face it. They always wanted a single payer system. But moderates and conservatives opposed it, and it was not possible to ram that through. So Plan B was to come up with this monstrosity, knowing it would not work and lead to their goal all along.

    I posted a link to an article by an Obama supporter, a Democrat, and a liberal describing exactly how the system will unravel. The liberals here did not want to touch it, ignoring it, making non-substantive remarks, or making derogatory remarks. On the Huffington Post, it has generated over two thousand comments. From what I sampled, at this point a small percent of the total comments, none fundamentally disagreed with her thesis.

    The author: Marcia Angell, M.D., Physician, Author, Senior Lecturer, Harvard Medical School

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marcia-angell-md/roberts-romney-health-care_b_1637397.html

    Excerpts:

    Obamacare is simply incapable of doing what it is supposed to do -- provide nearly universal care at an affordable and sustainable cost.
    ...........................................
    Here's how the unraveling will look:

    Many of the uninsured who are subject to the mandate to purchase private insurance will choose to pay the penalty/tax instead. That will lead the insurance companies to raise their premiums, demand that the penalties be greater, or both. Deductibles and co-payments will increase to the point that many people will have insurance they can't afford to use. (This is the case in Massachusetts.) Many employers will simply stop offering health insurance, since our high unemployment means workers no longer have the leverage to demand it, or they will stop insuring dependents (thus avoiding having to cover grown children to age 26). In addition, because insurers have a strong financial incentive to evade the new regulations requiring them to take all comers, it will take a huge bureaucracy to monitor them.

    Next year, states are supposed to set up insurance exchanges to pool risks and offer a menu of approved insurance plans for individuals and small businesses. But they are unlikely to be functioning by 2014, as called for in the law, either because Republican states simply refuse to set them up and hamper federal efforts to step in, or because of the administrative complexities. Some states may also refuse to accept the funds to expand Medicaid, as called for in the law, since the Supreme Court found that they could opt out without losing their existing federal Medicaid funding. Here again, the bureaucracy necessary to aid and monitor state compliance will be huge, diverting resources from health care. In addition, there are likely to be multiple legal challenges to nearly all provisions of the law.

    Obamacare partially offsets the costs of federal subsidies to insurance companies and Medicaid costs by cutting Medicare reimbursement to providers. That means hospitals and other health facilities will take a hit, and many are already struggling.

    So that's how it will unravel. There will be efforts to patch it up as we go along, but because Obamacare leaves our current inflationary system largely in place, they are unlikely to be successful.
    ...........................................
    It's very hard to read, but I think the Democrats would have been better off if the Supreme Court had overturned Obamacare, and I think it would have been better for our health system, as well. The base would be energized, and Democrats would take the offensive. More important, no one would be under the illusion that the health system has been successfully reformed, as many good liberals now are. That mistake will become clear as the system unravels. Democrats will suffer the death of a thousand cuts, rather than a quick blow that could be blamed on our politicized Supreme Court. If the law had been struck down, we could have started right away to work on an effective reform.
    ...........................................
    On July 22, 2009, Obama said in a press conference, "Now, the truth is that unless you have what's called a single-payer system in which everybody is automatically covered, then you're probably not going to reach every single individual." Bingo.


    I think she is correct that the current law won't work, but in my opinion, she is wrong in claiming a single payer system would work, at least without increasing the debt to even greater unsustainable levels. The numbers in the US are different than other countries. Neither Obamacare nor single payer is sustainable without addressing more of the cost drivers that keep health costs so high to the consumer. Examples are tort reform and insurance portability across state lines. Some argue that tort reform is not significant, but there are conflicting studies in this area. Regardless, it would provide some relief, especially when you ask physicians in private practice the percentage of their net revenue after paying other fixed costs go to malpractice insurance.

    Republicans in the brief windows the Democrats had solicited their input had suggested both, but neither was acceptable to the special interest groups the Democrats pander to. Their hands are far from clean. A Romney Administration and Republican Congress will include these as part of a more comprehensive replacement to this unworkable and unsustainable law.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Jul 02, 2012 10:52 PM GMT
    Oh Margaret Give it up ....

    It's going to be implemented
    You're going to get skewered if you try and repeal The Affordable Healthcare plan because the popular provisions as they come into play the people already want and like
    So TRY and tell someone with Cancer that they need to have their rates raised if they want continued care
    Try telling someone with a pre-existing condition of Crohn's disease that they can't find insurance anymore
    Try telling a family with a kid in college that they're gonna have to shell out thousands more a year if they want junior to have healthcare
    Try telling a family with a grandmother in a nursing home that they reached their limit and they'll need to shell out for everything from here on in


    .... Oh BTW? Did you hear your fearless leader Mitch McConnell that the uninsured were irrelevant?

    Oh and Maybe YOU can explain WHAT THE HELL Patient Centered Care IS ?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2012 10:57 PM GMT
    Socal is just delusional. He thinks if enough people believe his fantasies, they will actually come true.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2012 12:01 AM GMT
    This is why I'm not posting as much.

    If I wanted insane, right-wing conspiracy theories, I'd go to Free Republic.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2012 12:21 AM GMT
    image-9.jpg
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Jul 03, 2012 1:24 AM GMT
    480700_405716272799604_1890187809_n.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2012 1:35 AM GMT
    Christian73 saidThis is why I'm not posting as much.

    If I wanted insane, right-wing conspiracy theories, I'd go to Free Republic.

    The bulk of my message is from a blog on Huffington Post that describes a very likely scenario of how Obamacare will unravel. It is very logical, and given the general agreement from the sample of commenters I read, it seems to be a general consensus among the liberals who post there.

    So my "insane" conspiracy was based on common sense. If a group on Huffington Post acknowledges the law will unravel, and they, especially the author, seem to be intelligent, wouldn't one expect the same consensus to hold among the Democratic leadership? If so, then what would they gain from supporting a law that will collapse? Again, the only logical answer is to replace it with what they really want, a single-payer system with maximum government control.

    As far as post quality, look no further than the left-wing posts on RJ, especially in this thread, to note their extremely low quality. I have posted the link to that blog in a couple of other threads, and not one RJ liberal responded with any substance. On the other hand, many of the comments on Huffington Post were substantive and the writers seemed intelligent. Makes you wonder if there is some type of linkage among gayness, being an extreme liberal, and being stupid. Would hate to think so, but compare for yourself. Look at this thread again.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2012 2:07 AM GMT
    The only parts/sections/aspects of Obama Care I see changing are primarily where he caved to big Pharma, Big Ins corps and etc. to get the votes he needed to pass it. The other factor is that there is no Public Option.

    I think Obamacare will be whittled at to improved it as time goes by, what will be done away with are the perks and favors to the Big Pharma and Big Ins Corps. and I believe that there is a strong possibility of a 'public option' being included.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2012 2:15 AM GMT
    CrankySpice said
    socalfitness saidAs far as post quality, look no further than the left-wing posts on RJ, especially in this thread, to note their extremely low quality.

    You do NOT want to go there, John.
    The right-wing posts lately, yours included particularly, are full lately of nothing but spin, blather, half-truths and outright lies.
    It is completely beyond hilarious that you claim that the left has a problem with post quality. You and your friends spam thread after thread of delusional shit from crack-pot sources.

    It's one of the reasons I seldom bother anymore. I'll debate facts with anyone, but I will not accept right-wing crazy talk as a premise for any argument, and that's all there is around here lately. Crazy talk from the right.

    Still no one on RJ has commented with any substance at all on the Huffington Post blog. Again, compare with the threads there. By the way, the only spin I see is from the left because your fundamental position is weak.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2012 2:23 AM GMT
    CrankySpice said
    socalfitness saidAs far as post quality, look no further than the left-wing posts on RJ, especially in this thread, to note their extremely low quality.

    You do NOT want to go there, John.
    The right-wing posts lately, yours included particularly, are full lately of nothing but spin, blather, half-truths and outright lies.
    It is completely beyond hilarious that you claim that the left has a problem with post quality. You and your friends spam thread after thread of delusional shit from crack-pot sources.

    It's one of the reasons I seldom bother anymore. I'll debate facts with anyone, but I will not accept right-wing crazy talk as a premise for any argument, and that's all there is around here lately. Crazy talk from the right.


    +1,000

    Honestly I thought b/c this was a gay site the conservatives on here would not be as crazy and as brain washed as far as debating politics goes on other sites. I thought there would be more common sense moderate Republicans on this site but they are just as bad if not worse then the other right wing nuts on other sites who are straight. They eat the Fox news propaganda up with a spoon.

    Honestly I think the entire party almost has gone off the deep end. Nothing coming from their party leaders is too extreme for them no matter how nuts. Spinning truth, fear and hate mongering, and even down right lying about the facts is way to common.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2012 2:39 AM GMT
    David4985 saidHonestly I think the entire party almost has gone off the deep end. Nothing coming from their party leaders is too extreme for them no matter how nuts. Spinning truth, fear and hate mongering, and even down right lying about the facts is way to common.

    I don't read your posts very closely, but from a quick perusal, I have not seen you make an intelligent, substantive point of your own. Just name calling others, but you do have much company here.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2012 2:57 AM GMT
    socalfitness said
    David4985 saidHonestly I think the entire party almost has gone off the deep end. Nothing coming from their party leaders is too extreme for them no matter how nuts. Spinning truth, fear and hate mongering, and even down right lying about the facts is way to common.

    I don't read your posts very closely, but from a quick perusal, I have not seen you make an intelligent, substantive point of your own. Just name calling others, but you do have much company here.


    Perhaps you missed my thread "The truth about Obamacare" where I laid out many facts that were good about Obamacare.

    I just can't stand it when people spin or down right lie about stuff like you guys do so often when you spam the board with thread after thread of the same stuff you guys hear on Rush Limbaugh's show and then polute the forum with it.

    And you are no angel either. I see you on here daily calling people names you disagree with so please step out of your glass house.icon_rolleyes.gif

    Obamacare would have helped my family when my mother had at a rare young age dementia but was not insured b/c her disease was never going to get better.I also work in the healthcare field and see how it could help so many.So it understandably pisses me off seeing you guys decide to use a very important issue and something that is good for our country and many people and use it for political spin to help your own conservative agenda and b/c some of you just have this irrational hate for anything Obama even when it is the exact same thing your candidate wanted to do.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2012 3:15 AM GMT
    David4985 said
    socalfitness said
    David4985 saidHonestly I think the entire party almost has gone off the deep end. Nothing coming from their party leaders is too extreme for them no matter how nuts. Spinning truth, fear and hate mongering, and even down right lying about the facts is way to common.

    I don't read your posts very closely, but from a quick perusal, I have not seen you make an intelligent, substantive point of your own. Just name calling others, but you do have much company here.


    Perhaps you missed my thread "The truth about Obamacare" where I laid out many facts that were good about Obamacare.

    I just can't stand it when people spin or down right lie about stuff like you guys do so often when you spam the board with thread after thread of the same stuff you guys hear on Rush Limbaugh's show and then polute the forum with it.

    And you are no angel either. I see you on here daily calling people names you disagree with so please step out of your glass house.icon_rolleyes.gif

    Obamacare would have helped my family when my mother had at a rare young age dementia but was not insured b/c her disease was never going to get better.I also work in the healthcare field and see how it could help so many.So it understandably pisses me off seeing you guys decide to use a very important issue and something that is good for our country and many people and use it for political spin to help your own conservative agenda and b/c some of you just have this irrational hate for anything Obama even when it is the exact same thing your candidate wanted to do.

    First of all, I don't usually listen to Limbaugh and I don't parrot him or anyone. I don't deny there are some good features of the law that should be maintained, but implemented differently. Now if you think you have a functional brain, go to the link I post and tell us how the author is mistaken as far as the viability of the overall act. I won't further respond to you until you provide an intelligent answer, if possible.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2012 3:37 AM GMT
    You seem to have missed the point of the article.
    Marcia Angell is a well respected former chief editor of the NEJM. She's well known for decrying health care as a commodity instead of being distributed to those who need it. If you read her editorials on NEJM this is just part of her overall theme that the health system needs to be scrapped and a single payer system like Britain's and Canada's put in place.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcia_AngellMarcia Angell has long spoken frankly of its unhealthy shortcomings. The American healthcare system is in serious crisis, she stated in a PBS special: "If we had set out to design the worst system that we could imagine, we couldn't have imagined one as bad as we have."[5] In the PBS interview, she urges the nation to scrap its failing healthcare system and start over:

    Our health care system is based on the premise that health care is a commodity like VCRs or computers and that it should be distributed according to the ability to pay in the same way that consumer goods are. That's not what health care should be. Health care is a need; it's not a commodity, and it should be distributed according to need. If you're very sick, you should have a lot of it. If you're not sick, you shouldn't have a lot of it. But this should be seen as a personal, individual need, not as a commodity to be distributed like other marketplace commodities. That is a fundamental mistake in the way this country, and only this country, looks at health care. And that market ideology is what has made the health care system so dreadful, so bad at what it does.


    She belongs to those who criticize Obama not for being socialist, but being too capitalist.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2012 3:45 AM GMT
    With all due respect to the author's medical credentials, she has it wrong in suggesting that the tax aspect of the SCOTUS health care decision constitutes a gift to Mitt Romney. If his campaign insists as a result on making the non-participant tax a major issue, then it will have to contend with counter-campaign attention on tax inequality, and that's an argument the Republicans lose, particularly in the current economic environment.

    Secondly, the unraveling that is mentioned has already occurred. Premiums go up, deductibles go up, co-pays go up. Health care reform didn't do that.

    The best thing about this entire process is that it shows that Republicans in Congress have zero concern about Americans. It shows that Republicans in Congress do nothing unless it benefits Big Oil, Wall Street, etc.

    The picture that has been painted shows that Obama at least gave it a shot. Bush had his chance when Republicans controlled both the House and Senate for 6 years and did nothing for Americans but burden us with a massive war debt.

    "More important, no one would be under the illusion that the health system has been successfully reformed, as many good liberals now are."

    I think I get it. Dr. Angell lives in that ideological world where great (or even very good) policy can clear a Republican obstructionist congress. Her blog post offers nothing new. In fact, I've yet to hear a single person say the health system has been "successfully reformed." But what this administration achieved sure beats standing back and doing nothing while millions of families lose their homes and savings.

    You have a choice. You can take the money and buy yourself an insurance policy with it. Look at it this way...it's a "personal irresponsibility tax". If you won't be pro-active in providing health insurance for yourself, because you expect your fellow Americans to pay your medical bills for you when you get sick, you will be taxed.

    I thought that's what Conservatives live for- punishing people for being irresponsible.....I thought they LOVED that kind of thing!

    On the policy side the bill didn't do enough, but it did do something. Obama chose something over nothing, there was no third way despite this blogger's fantasy that Obama could have wielded his silver tongue and rope-a-doped the GOP into a single payer scheme. That he didn't tilt at windmill's is vapid criticism and anyone who suggests that Obama should have has no credibility.

    On the politics side this tax argument is equally ill conceived. When Romney brings it up he's exposing his flank. In an op-ed in USA Today in 2009 Romney advised the president thusly, " Our experience also demonstrates that getting every citizen insured doesn't have to break the bank. First, we established incentives for those who were uninsured to buy insurance. Using tax penalties, as we did, or tax credits, as others have proposed, encourages "free riders" to take responsibility for themselves rather than pass their medical costs on to others." He can play stupid right up until he has to stand on a stage with the president and explain why he considered his own advice unconstitutional. Independent voters are not conservative sycophants who would vote for Satan to defeat Obama.
    .
    You are getting into the weeds here the truth is very simple. The Democrats win because it was never their purpose to have a really good bill. All they wanted was a foot in the door because they know that once these reforms are instituted they will be immensely popular and then they will be able to improve the system and maybe wind medicaid and medicare into one single payer program.

    The Republicans aren't idiots. They also know what the outcome is going to be once the health care bill goes into full effect. They have to kill it now while their propaganda over how bad the bill is gives them an advantage with the public. Once the people see and feel the advantages of the program, the Repubs will be out of power for another 30 years. There is a lot at stake here and both sides see their future hopes in the balance.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2012 3:47 AM GMT
    q1w2e3 saidYou seem to have missed the point of the article.
    Marcia Angell is a well respected former chief editor of the NEJM. She's well known for decrying health care as a commodity instead of being distributed to those who need it. If you read her editorials on NEJM this is just part of her overall theme that the health system needs to be scrapped and a single payer system like Britain's and Canada's put in place.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcia_AngellMarcia Angell has long spoken frankly of its unhealthy shortcomings. The American healthcare system is in serious crisis, she stated in a PBS special: "If we had set out to design the worst system that we could imagine, we couldn't have imagined one as bad as we have."[5] In the PBS interview, she urges the nation to scrap its failing healthcare system and start over:

    Our health care system is based on the premise that health care is a commodity like VCRs or computers and that it should be distributed according to the ability to pay in the same way that consumer goods are. That's not what health care should be. Health care is a need; it's not a commodity, and it should be distributed according to need. If you're very sick, you should have a lot of it. If you're not sick, you shouldn't have a lot of it. But this should be seen as a personal, individual need, not as a commodity to be distributed like other marketplace commodities. That is a fundamental mistake in the way this country, and only this country, looks at health care. And that market ideology is what has made the health care system so dreadful, so bad at what it does.


    She belongs to those who criticize Obama not for being socialist, but being too capitalist.

    No you completely missed the point of my comments. I mentioned her background and her desire that a single payer should have been in place. I explicitly stated that I disagreed with that position even though I agreed with her comments on Obamacare. Now, given that you have provided the most substantive information on her and her background, do you specifically agree with her assertion that Obamacare will fail?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2012 4:16 AM GMT
    q1w2e3 saidYou seem to have missed the point of the article.
    Marcia Angell is a well respected former chief editor of the NEJM. She's well known for decrying health care as a commodity instead of being distributed to those who need it. If you read her editorials on NEJM this is just part of her overall theme that the health system needs to be scrapped and a single payer system like Britain's and Canada's put in place.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcia_AngellMarcia Angell has long spoken frankly of its unhealthy shortcomings. The American healthcare system is in serious crisis, she stated in a PBS special: "If we had set out to design the worst system that we could imagine, we couldn't have imagined one as bad as we have."[5] In the PBS interview, she urges the nation to scrap its failing healthcare system and start over:

    Our health care system is based on the premise that health care is a commodity like VCRs or computers and that it should be distributed according to the ability to pay in the same way that consumer goods are. That's not what health care should be. Health care is a need; it's not a commodity, and it should be distributed according to need. If you're very sick, you should have a lot of it. If you're not sick, you shouldn't have a lot of it. But this should be seen as a personal, individual need, not as a commodity to be distributed like other marketplace commodities. That is a fundamental mistake in the way this country, and only this country, looks at health care. And that market ideology is what has made the health care system so dreadful, so bad at what it does.


    She belongs to those who criticize Obama not for being socialist, but being too capitalist.


    This is so misunderstood by the right. They see the polls showing Obamnycare is unpopular but they miss the fact that only about 30% want no reform at all. Many on the left feel it doesn't go far enough. Let's be real he lifted Romney care almost verbatim to get the right to cooperate but instead they had a pissy fit. Frankly I think a single pay system makes more sense, so if we have to get there through Obamnycare fine with me. We pay twice as much per capita for our health insurance as other western countries and we have the highest rate of uninsured. The current system is not working no matter how much money the right spends trying to destroy Obamnycare. And Romney running against his greatest accomplishment is, well, kind of dumb.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 03, 2012 4:16 AM GMT
    It's not a secret. If it were, it wouldn't be online.

    It's open (online) to debate, by both Dems and Prudes...oops I meant Repubs, so it can be later modified to be more efficient.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 04, 2012 2:40 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    q1w2e3 saidYou seem to have missed the point of the article.
    Marcia Angell is a well respected former chief editor of the NEJM. She's well known for decrying health care as a commodity instead of being distributed to those who need it. If you read her editorials on NEJM this is just part of her overall theme that the health system needs to be scrapped and a single payer system like Britain's and Canada's put in place.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcia_AngellMarcia Angell has long spoken frankly of its unhealthy shortcomings. The American healthcare system is in serious crisis, she stated in a PBS special: "If we had set out to design the worst system that we could imagine, we couldn't have imagined one as bad as we have."[5] In the PBS interview, she urges the nation to scrap its failing healthcare system and start over:

    Our health care system is based on the premise that health care is a commodity like VCRs or computers and that it should be distributed according to the ability to pay in the same way that consumer goods are. That's not what health care should be. Health care is a need; it's not a commodity, and it should be distributed according to need. If you're very sick, you should have a lot of it. If you're not sick, you shouldn't have a lot of it. But this should be seen as a personal, individual need, not as a commodity to be distributed like other marketplace commodities. That is a fundamental mistake in the way this country, and only this country, looks at health care. And that market ideology is what has made the health care system so dreadful, so bad at what it does.


    She belongs to those who criticize Obama not for being socialist, but being too capitalist.

    No you completely missed the point of my comments. I mentioned her background and her desire that a single payer should have been in place. I explicitly stated that I disagreed with that position even though I agreed with her comments on Obamacare. Now, given that you have provided the most substantive information on her and her background, do you specifically agree with her assertion that Obamacare will fail?

    To ask a different way - You know her reputation and knowledge of the health care situation. She has written a logical argument that Obamacare will unravel. Although I disagree with her recommended alternative, single-payer, and I have a completely different political view, I agree that her logic on Obamacare is on the mark. Again, from reading a small sample of over 2,100 comments as of a day ago, most agreed or at least did not substantively refute her point. I could not find a counter-argument based on anything substantive.

    Doesn't this support my original point in the OP that the Democratic leadership and leading thinkers on the liberal side have to know the impact? It's clear that if such an assessment were widely known, the result would be extremely damaging to Obama's reelection. To me it's clear that their campaign is based on a lie, denying that which they know to be true.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 04, 2012 3:18 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 saidThis is why I'm not posting as much.

    If I wanted insane, right-wing conspiracy theories, I'd go to Free Republic.

    The bulk of my message is from a blog on Huffington Post that describes a very likely scenario of how Obamacare will unravel. It is very logical, and given the general agreement from the sample of commenters I read, it seems to be a general consensus among the liberals who post there.

    So my "insane" conspiracy was based on common sense. If a group on Huffington Post acknowledges the law will unravel, and they, especially the author, seem to be intelligent, wouldn't one expect the same consensus to hold among the Democratic leadership? If so, then what would they gain from supporting a law that will collapse? Again, the only logical answer is to replace it with what they really want, a single-payer system with maximum government control.

    As far as post quality, look no further than the left-wing posts on RJ, especially in this thread, to note their extremely low quality. I have posted the link to that blog in a couple of other threads, and not one RJ liberal responded with any substance. On the other hand, many of the comments on Huffington Post were substantive and the writers seemed intelligent. Makes you wonder if there is some type of linkage among gayness, being an extreme liberal, and being stupid. Would hate to think so, but compare for yourself. Look at this thread again.


    John - You're the one promulgating insane, right-wing conspiracy theories, such as that the Democratic leadership knows that Obamacare will fail. Angell, while a respected physician and thinker, is creating a series of suppositions of what may happen in a hypothetical future. You may also note that she points to Republican governors refusal to implement contributing to the unraveling of the system.

    As others have pointed out, you're taking a left-wing critique of the system and using it to suggest that the administration has gone through all this to have the policy fail so we can then establish single payer.

    You also subscribe to the completely unhinged theory that Fast & Furious' goal was to eventually lead to the suspension of the 2nd Amendment (which Obama hasn't even mentioned in 3 1/2 years). icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 04, 2012 3:29 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 saidThis is why I'm not posting as much.

    If I wanted insane, right-wing conspiracy theories, I'd go to Free Republic.

    The bulk of my message is from a blog on Huffington Post that describes a very likely scenario of how Obamacare will unravel. It is very logical, and given the general agreement from the sample of commenters I read, it seems to be a general consensus among the liberals who post there.

    So my "insane" conspiracy was based on common sense. If a group on Huffington Post acknowledges the law will unravel, and they, especially the author, seem to be intelligent, wouldn't one expect the same consensus to hold among the Democratic leadership? If so, then what would they gain from supporting a law that will collapse? Again, the only logical answer is to replace it with what they really want, a single-payer system with maximum government control.

    As far as post quality, look no further than the left-wing posts on RJ, especially in this thread, to note their extremely low quality. I have posted the link to that blog in a couple of other threads, and not one RJ liberal responded with any substance. On the other hand, many of the comments on Huffington Post were substantive and the writers seemed intelligent. Makes you wonder if there is some type of linkage among gayness, being an extreme liberal, and being stupid. Would hate to think so, but compare for yourself. Look at this thread again.


    John - You're the one promulgating insane, right-wing conspiracy theories, such as that the Democratic leadership knows that Obamacare will fail. Angell, while a respected physician and thinker, is creating a series of suppositions of what may happen in a hypothetical future. You may also note that she points to Republican governors refusal to implement contributing to the unraveling of the system.

    As others have pointed out, you're taking a left-wing critique of the system and using it to suggest that the administration has gone through all this to have the policy fail so we can then establish single payer.

    You also subscribe to the completely unhinged theory that Fast & Furious' goal was to eventually lead to the suspension of the 2nd Amendment (which Obama hasn't even mentioned in 3 1/2 years). icon_rolleyes.gif

    Nice try at spinning. Angell is not suggesting what could happen in some "hypothetical future". She is stating very clearly and unambiguously what she believes will happen and presents a logical rationale to back that up. And I didn't find any disagreement among the commenters. Given that, my so-called "insane conspiracy theory" is common sense, a highly inconvenient truth that the left hopes to remain hidden until after November.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 04, 2012 4:54 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Nice try at spinning. Angell is not suggesting what could happen in some "hypothetical future". She is stating very clearly and unambiguously what she believes will happen and presents a logical rationale to back that up. And I didn't find any disagreement among the commenters. Given that, my so-called "insane conspiracy theory" is common sense, a highly inconvenient truth that the left hopes to remain hidden until after November.


    It's not spin. Even an educated guess is just that.

    And your insane conspiracy theory is not what Angell is saying but your supposition that it's part of a huge conspiracy theory on the part of the administration. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3270

    Jul 10, 2012 2:00 AM GMT
    David4985 said
    socalfitness said
    David4985 saidHonestly I think the entire party almost has gone off the deep end. Nothing coming from their party leaders is too extreme for them no matter how nuts. Spinning truth, fear and hate mongering, and even down right lying about the facts is way to common.

    I don't read your posts very closely, but from a quick perusal, I have not seen you make an intelligent, substantive point of your own. Just name calling others, but you do have much company here.


    Perhaps you missed my thread "The truth about Obamacare" where I laid out many facts that were good about Obamacare.

    I just can't stand it when people spin or down right lie about stuff like you guys do so often when you spam the board with thread after thread of the same stuff you guys hear on Rush Limbaugh's show and then polute the forum with it.

    And you are no angel either. I see you on here daily calling people names you disagree with so please step out of your glass house.icon_rolleyes.gif

    Obamacare would have helped my family when my mother had at a rare young age dementia but was not insured b/c her disease was never going to get better.I also work in the healthcare field and see how it could help so many.So it understandably pisses me off seeing you guys decide to use a very important issue and something that is good for our country and many people and use it for political spin to help your own conservative agenda and b/c some of you just have this irrational hate for anything Obama even when it is the exact same thing your candidate wanted to do.


    I read this kind of late. But you never refute points you just whine about peoples opinions.

    There are people in health care who have been administration care for decades who disagree with the law.

    Your post does little to convince anyone.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Jul 10, 2012 2:46 AM GMT
    Dear Chicken Little,
    If this was a secret, how did you find out about it ?
    Fool.

    2eauqkz.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2012 3:07 AM GMT
    Webster666 saidDear Chicken Little,
    If this was a secret, how did you find out about it ?
    Fool.

    Takes only a bit of digging, but the media will cover it up and present spin. Why don't you go through the article and point out where she is mistaken, or are you unable, and easier to call others names, dumbass.