Oh My God--DNC is attacking the American Populace in new add regarding health bill

[Lonestar_logic]

You're welcome and you're correct that "after it's enactment insurance companies can't circumvent the legislation by offering new policies except in accordance with the terms of the legislation."

And that's the rub. You will not be able to purchase a plan of your choosing. It has to be in accordance with whatever the govt. terms are. I might also add that if you choose not to have health coverage you will be fined and enrolled in a program whether you want it or not. Bottom line is there is no option public or otherwise.

It's a long read but I urge everyone to read it. Lord knows your representatives ain't. But I must admit it's not written for the average citizen to understand.

Isn't the whole point that the insurance companies have to comply with the provisions of the law?? I'm not sure what the objection is... they'll still offer insurance, it just has to be in keeping with the bill's mandates... like no pre-existing condition exclusions, etc., and the policies have to go into the group so they compete against each other.

These are good things, IMO, not bad.

If you like it then sign up for it, but I'm not willing to saddle my children and grandchildren with trillions more in deficit that they will never be able to reconcile.

Can you name me one social program that has not been a failure? Medicare? Bankrupt. Medicaid? Bankrupt. Social Security? You guessed it.... bankrupt. Cash for Clunkers? Yep... bankrupt.

The govt. doesn't have a very good track record, but you're willing to trust them on this. Why?

Do you currently have health coverage? I don't, I've never had it and don't intend to get it anytime soon, if at all.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

The complaints filed against the Clintons were unfounded, too. The Starr Report mentioned Whitewater once and the blue dress 1,000 times. And I think most sane people know that Vince Foster off'd himself. That's political life. One of my favorite people on the planet, who's unfortunately gone now, used to tell me "politics is a full contact team sport". And her kids were not attacked. If she wants them out of the line of fire, she can't use them for political purpose. I think she forgot that.



you know, I have no problem discussing this stuff, but I really don't have a lot of interest in the OTT stuff like that.

if you want to talk about real issues, always happy to chat with you.

Her kids were not attacked you say??

What rock have you been living under?

BREAKING: ATTACKS ON PALIN'S CHILDREN MAY BRING CRIMINAL CHARGES - Public Advocate of the United States, Eugene Delgaudio, President

Filmmaker John Ziegler Defends Sarah Palin, Denounces Media’s Attacks on Her Children… Heated Interview on ‘The View’ about Media Bias « Frugal Café Blog Zone

American Power: Wonkette Attacks Trig Palin as 'Cheap Prop', Links More Grotesque Photoshops!

you would fair better in this world if you realized most lawyers aren't about truth.

Would it surprise you if I said I was a lawyer?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You guys realize that the government has been in the auto insurance business for decades, right? That auto insurance in mandatory, right? That the government offers auto insurance policies and has for decades? That the government dictates how much coverage you must have?

I haven't noticed that the auto insurance business was decimated when the government got into the insurance business. I haven't noticed that mandatory coverage and fines for not having coverage have been a negative thing.

And the Government was telling banks who they had to lend to in order to maintain their good standing under CRA...again, how'd that work out for us?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Exactly!

And no it's not a quick read by means.

he's an idiot, but you know very well, i was only looking at the paragraph that formed the basis of soggy nola's assertion.... so while it was a quick read, it was a quick read of a couple of paragraphs...

not 1,000 pages.

i suspect you know better.

Yes I do know better. I understood you were focusing on one part of the Bill and not it's entirety. However, he's still correct in that , it's not a quick read.

 

[Sweet Willy]

You guys realize that the government has been in the auto insurance business for decades, right? That auto insurance in mandatory, right? That the government offers auto insurance policies and has for decades? That the government dictates how much coverage you must have?

I haven't noticed that the auto insurance business was decimated when the government got into the insurance business. I haven't noticed that mandatory coverage and fines for not having coverage have been a negative thing.

Have you also noticed that insurance is an artificial business that creates nothing, yet we are all forced into it because of the government?

Do you think that is a good thing, a made up industry that you have no choice and have to be a part of?

Here we see that abomination being expanded into health care, do you believe that is a good thing?

I am not a fan of insurance at all. No kind of insurance. The position of the state forcing me to purchase insurance of any kind doesn't sit well with me. The point is that I don't see ANYONE shouting about madatory auto insurance. Never have. Most people think it's a great idea. Most cringe at the idea of someone driving around without insurance.

 

[Sweet Willy]

You guys realize that the government has been in the auto insurance business for decades, right? That auto insurance in mandatory, right? That the government offers auto insurance policies and has for decades? That the government dictates how much coverage you must have?

I haven't noticed that the auto insurance business was decimated when the government got into the insurance business. I haven't noticed that mandatory coverage and fines for not having coverage have been a negative thing.

And the Government was telling banks who they had to lend to in order to maintain their good standing under CRA...again, how'd that work out for us?

Baloney. Not mandatory. Not even close. No one had to lend to anyone.

 

[WillowTree]

Her kids were not attacked you say??

What rock have you been living under?

BREAKING: ATTACKS ON PALIN'S CHILDREN MAY BRING CRIMINAL CHARGES - Public Advocate of the United States, Eugene Delgaudio, President

Filmmaker John Ziegler Defends Sarah Palin, Denounces Media’s Attacks on Her Children… Heated Interview on ‘The View’ about Media Bias « Frugal Café Blog Zone

American Power: Wonkette Attacks Trig Palin as 'Cheap Prop', Links More Grotesque Photoshops!

you would fair better in this world if you realized most lawyers aren't about truth.

Would it surprise you if I said I was a lawyer?

so you know what I'm talking about then don't you?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

you would fair better in this world if you realized most lawyers aren't about truth.

Would it surprise you if I said I was a lawyer?

so you know what I'm talking about then don't you?

Do you always answer a question with a question?

 

[WillowTree]

Would it surprise you if I said I was a lawyer?

so you know what I'm talking about then don't you?

Do you always answer a question with a question?

yes counselor,, sometimes I do.. so to answer your question,, no it would not surprise me if you said you were a lawyer and then I said,, "So you know what I'm talking about then don't you?"

 

[CrusaderFrank]

When a single sentence like, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" generates countless opinions and court cases decided what it says, what makes you think an 1,018 pages precursor to Nationalized HealthCare won't do the same?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Would it surprise you if I said I was a lawyer?

so you know what I'm talking about then don't you?

Do you always answer a question with a question?

Do you?

 

[Tech_Esq]

So while I'm waiting for that citation...

It appears the legislation first has to accept and provide for what exists (even after modification of the insurance system with the Exchange). This is because if they did not provide for what exists, they would have to provide a working substitute on day one. Even they don't think they can do that.

So, we must have current plans in the Exchange with the new Public plan.

OK. Now we start talking about the future. All private plans must adhere to the requirements of the new law. What this has meant in the states is that plans must provide all of things that the new laws say. So, in some states, all plans must provide for prescription drugs or coverage for obstetrics etc. The new federal law with have a long list that all plans must cover. So, this imposes costs for the private plans that they didn't have before. For instance, in TX a plan didn't have to cover podiatry visits, but under the federal plan, they must.

Simple though, all the plans must cover what is in the law in and in the manner provided by law. So does the public plan.

Potential outcome:

- United Health - family plan - $807
- Blue Cross - family plan - $956
- Public Plan - family plan - $496

By the end of 6 years, no private plans exist. How do we know? Canada did the same thing when they started.

 

[oreo]

RealClearPolitics - Video - DNC Web Ad Attacks Protesters At Dem Town Halls


Theres your ad. oreo which actually makes me laugh when I see it because I wonder if all the old ladies, and the old guys in wheelchairs, retired vets. kids, etc. would consider themselves a mob. This is the most laughable ad I think I have ever seen to be honest.

Thanks--I am e-mailing it everywhere. Here is a direct example where the democrats are trying to RUN over the majority of Americans who do not want this bill--& are not blaming themselves--they are blaming the American public.

I think they have probably just committed political suicide with this add. They have just declared war on the majority of Americans.

 

[WillowTree]

RealClearPolitics - Video - DNC Web Ad Attacks Protesters At Dem Town Halls


Theres your ad. oreo which actually makes me laugh when I see it because I wonder if all the old ladies, and the old guys in wheelchairs, retired vets. kids, etc. would consider themselves a mob. This is the most laughable ad I think I have ever seen to be honest.

Thanks--I am e-mailing it everywhere. Here is a direct example where the democrats are trying to RUN over the majority of Americans who do not want this bill--& are not blaming themselves--they are blaming the American public.

I think they have probably just committed political suicide with this add. They have just declared war on the majority of Americans.

welll, I don't know so much about war, but they sure insulted the hell out of us.

 

[Navy1960]

I thought this a rather intereting addition to this conversation. We all know that President Obama comes from the Saul Alinsky school of thought when it comes to community organization and thought. So given this fact, I thought it would be interesting to see what Saul Alinksy had to say on the subject.

Rule 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.

That comes from Saul Alinsky's rules for radicals, so I don't presonally find it surprising that we should see ad's like the one mentioned comming out that would seek to ridicule those americans speaking out at these townhalls.

 

[Zoom-boing]

republicans have to fear from a government option if americans are free to keep their existing insurance?

The propsed legislation clearly states that "private Insuranec will become illegal" Anyway, Obama has publically stated that this is his desire.

END OF STORY.

I know of it saying no such thing.

Please provide a credible link to such an onorous requirement...

Illegal? No. Gone? Yup.

Breitbart.tv » Uncovered Video: Obama Explains How His Health Care Plan Will ‘Eliminate’ Private Insurance

 

[jillian]

republicans have to fear from a government option if americans are free to keep their existing insurance?

The propsed legislation clearly states that "private Insuranec will become illegal" Anyway, Obama has publically stated that this is his desire.

END OF STORY.

I know of it saying no such thing.

Please provide a credible link to such an onorous requirement...

Illegal? No. Gone? Yup.

Breitbart.tv » Uncovered Video: Obama Explains How His Health Care Plan Will ‘Eliminate’ Private Insurance

Someone else posted the blog link. Thanks. But you might want to take a look at my comments about the actual bill...

you know, given that it doesn't say what the wingers are saying it does and all...

 

[Navy1960]

So while I'm waiting for that citation...

It appears the legislation first has to accept and provide for what exists (even after modification of the insurance system with the Exchange). This is because if they did not provide for what exists, they would have to provide a working substitute on day one. Even they don't think they can do that.

So, we must have current plans in the Exchange with the new Public plan.

OK. Now we start talking about the future. All private plans must adhere to the requirements of the new law. What this has meant in the states is that plans must provide all of things that the new laws say. So, in some states, all plans must provide for prescription drugs or coverage for obstetrics etc. The new federal law with have a long list that all plans must cover. So, this imposes costs for the private plans that they didn't have before. For instance, in TX a plan didn't have to cover podiatry visits, but under the federal plan, they must.

Simple though, all the plans must cover what is in the law in and in the manner provided by law. So does the public plan.

Potential outcome:

- United Health - family plan - $807
- Blue Cross - family plan - $956
- Public Plan - family plan - $496

By the end of 6 years, no private plans exist. How do we know? Canada did the same thing when they started.

(b) GRACE PERIOD FOR CURRENT EMPLOYMENT9
BASED HEALTH PLANS.—
10 (1) GRACE PERIOD.—
11 (A) IN GENERAL.—The Commissioner
12 shall establish a grace period whereby, for plan
13 years beginning after the end of the 5-year pe14
riod beginning with Y1, an employment-based
15 health plan in operation as of the day before
16 the first day of Y1 must meet the same require17
ments as apply to a qualified health benefits
18 plan under section 101, including the essential
19 benefit package requirement under section 121.

http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdf


Taken in conjuntion with previous section you are exactly right.

 

[Zoom-boing]

I know of it saying no such thing.

Please provide a credible link to such an onorous requirement...

Illegal? No. Gone? Yup.

Breitbart.tv » Uncovered Video: Obama Explains How His Health Care Plan Will ‘Eliminate’ Private Insurance

Someone else posted the blog link. Thanks. But you might want to take a look at my comments about the actual bill...

you know, given that it doesn't say what the wingers are saying it does and all...

Yeah, I just saw that.

If government-run health care gets passed it will eventually lead to single-payer coverage and the elimination of private health care. Obama will do his best to ensure that because that is what he believes in.

This is all just an excuse for the government to gain even more control over your life and your personal choices.

 

[rightwinger]

[/QUIf government-run health care is all that and a bag of chips, then those in congress who vote for it should have no problem having it as their insurance. Go here to sign a petition by Congressmen John Fleming asking that they do just that: Congressman John Fleming : Home OTE]

Congress will have the same plan we do