Grandmothers Lie, Too

[dblack]

You wouldn’t be trying to bullshit the troops would you? You would crow from now until doomsday if you could prove me wrong.

This best indicates my level of concern:

Exactly. It's apathetic voters who enable the corporate sellout.

Who said anything about voting? Voting does not require me to buy into every RW poster's slant on reality.

??? We're talking about ACA. Try to focus.

Your focus seems to be on equating my indifference to Flanders' posts with voting.

Feel free to get back to discussing the PPACA instead of his Hillaryphobia.

I haven't mentioned Hillary at all. But PPACA was a corporatist boondoggle. It was passed by granting special favors to special interests and - essentially - bribing members of Congress to vote for it.

 

[Arianrhod]

This best indicates my level of concern:

Exactly. It's apathetic voters who enable the corporate sellout.

Who said anything about voting? Voting does not require me to buy into every RW poster's slant on reality.

??? We're talking about ACA. Try to focus.

Your focus seems to be on equating my indifference to Flanders' posts with voting.

Feel free to get back to discussing the PPACA instead of his Hillaryphobia.

I haven't mentioned Hillary at all. But PPACA was a corporatist boondoggle. It was passed by granting special favors to special interests and - essentially - bribing members of Congress to vote for it.

Who bribes Congress? Well, let's see:

Of course, when the U.S. joins the rest of the civilized world and transitions to single-payer, those Congresscritters will have to get their money from someone else.

I'm sure you and Flanders will be right there protesting that, too.

 

[dblack]

Exactly. It's apathetic voters who enable the corporate sellout.

Who said anything about voting? Voting does not require me to buy into every RW poster's slant on reality.

??? We're talking about ACA. Try to focus.

Your focus seems to be on equating my indifference to Flanders' posts with voting.

Feel free to get back to discussing the PPACA instead of his Hillaryphobia.

I haven't mentioned Hillary at all. But PPACA was a corporatist boondoggle. It was passed by granting special favors to special interests and - essentially - bribing members of Congress to vote for it.

Who bribes Congress? Well, let's see:

Of course, when the U.S. joins the rest of the civilized world and transitions to single-payer, those Congresscritters will have to get their money from someone else.

I'm sure you and Flanders will be right there protesting that, too.

How will that ever happen as long as you keep endorsing sellouts?

 

[Arianrhod]

Who said anything about voting? Voting does not require me to buy into every RW poster's slant on reality.

??? We're talking about ACA. Try to focus.

Your focus seems to be on equating my indifference to Flanders' posts with voting.

Feel free to get back to discussing the PPACA instead of his Hillaryphobia.

I haven't mentioned Hillary at all. But PPACA was a corporatist boondoggle. It was passed by granting special favors to special interests and - essentially - bribing members of Congress to vote for it.

Who bribes Congress? Well, let's see:

Of course, when the U.S. joins the rest of the civilized world and transitions to single-payer, those Congresscritters will have to get their money from someone else.

I'm sure you and Flanders will be right there protesting that, too.

How will that ever happen as long as you keep endorsing sellouts?

I'm not standing in your way. You're doing a great job of whining on a message board about the "sellout" that interests you and ignoring the rest.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

The insurance industry wrote HillaryCare I. That is why everything about then-First Lady Hillary Clinton’s secret task force was kept a secret. The insurance industry also wrote HillaryCare II. I think everybody knows why the details in the ACA remained a secret until after it was passed.

It wasn't a secret. FOXNews just told you it was.

Did you get that from a primary source ?

Moron.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

It was no secret to those of us who were paying attention. But you just keep clinging to your precious sound bite.

To Arianrhod: Every so often I did some research trying to find out who was on Hillary’s secret task force hoping the details would finally be released. I never found anything. Perhaps, I just looked in the wrong places. This article from earlier THIS YEAR is informative, but it does not provide the information I seek:

NLPC was a plaintiff in the successful 1993 lawsuit to open the meetings and records of the task force. A good historical account of the task force, and the fight over its proposals, can be found in a 1996 book titled The First Lady: A Comprehensive View of Hillary Rodham Clinton, that I co-wrote with my brother Timothy. Here is Chapter Nine titled “Health Care:”

XXXXX​

One week later on March 10, Judge Lamberth ruled that the task force had to open its meetings to the plaintiffs and the media. This time, the media took notice and the judge's ruling was front-page news. The New York Times called the ruling a "rebuff to the President." USA Today reported it was "embarrassing." In reality, it was a split decision, and would have little impact on the operation of the task force. Lamberth ruled that the "official" members of the task force, meaning the First Lady and the Cabinet Secretaries who comprised its membership, could not meet in secret because Hillary was not a government employee. But Lamberth also ruled that all the other people working on the plan, who were organized into "sub-groups" could continue to work in secret, because FACA was never meant to apply to staff. Of course, Lamberth was relying on Magaziner's false representation that all the sub-group participants were government employees.​

Heath Care Task Force Showed Hillary's Penchant for Secrecy
Submitted by Peter Flaherty on Wed, 03/18/2015 - 13:17

Heath Care Task Force Showed Hillary's Penchant for Secrecy | National Legal and Policy Center​

I still do not know the names, salaries, and backgrounds, of the people in the “sub-groups”. If you are better at research than I, you can prove me wrong by providing the names, etc. or the links.

(A) This would be a great subject for either the Politics or the Conspiracy forum.

(B) I'm not interested in proving you wrong.

Why would you be? There's little to prove. Apart from relatively unimportant detail of whether it was a secret or not, there's really no disputing the OP. ACA was the epitome of quid-pro-quo government. Obama even bragged about bringing all the "major players to the table" to divvy up the spoils. Big Pharma, Doctors and Hospitals, and of course the major insurance corporations, were all invited to bargain for their favorite carve outs. Apparently, the only major interest group not in on the action was the American voter.

I would be for a reasonable poster. Someone peddling conspiracy theories is of no interest to me.

Then do us all a favor and quit posting.

 

[Arianrhod]

Then do us all a favor and quit posting.

You feel you should be rewarded for bad behavior?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Then do us all a favor and quit posting.

You feel you should be rewarded for bad behavior?

I doubt I can laugh any harder.

You refuse to engage people who are openly challenging you (and owning you).

But need to hang around.....

 

[Arianrhod]

You refuse to engage people who...

...have no facts, only opinions, at their disposal.

You've got that right.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

You refuse to engage people who...

...have no facts, only opinions, at their disposal.

You've got that right.

And yet you keep posting.

If your mission is to look foolish.....you are succeeding.

 

[dblack]

It's only a scratch.

 

[ashleyramirez]

But why she lie?