After Four Years,We Still Hear,"But It's For The Children"Excuses For Obama-Care.

[TheSeventhTiger]

As popularity keeps declining, we are still hearing some commentators on Cable News still using the same old worn out excuse why we should "Love Obama-Care"!!! Yes, All Children Under The Age Of 27 Are Covered For Free !!!!
Every time we see them still fighting over the great things about Obama-Care, you feel like screaming back at them "YAH? WELL WHO'S GONNA PAY FOR IT YOU Dumbass Dufass ??!!!!.
We all know it's going to collapse by the summer of 2014 and Dem's will have nothing to run on come September/October.

 

[TheSeventhTiger]

I was just watching Hannity, he held one of his group sessions tonight on the declining popularity of the affordable health care act, and sure enough, we had one angry Liberal in the seats who tried to use that excuse. They all laughed at the {Stooopid B*******tch}

 

[TheSeventhTiger]

the left will bitch and bitch and praise of all the good things about Obama-care, yet you never hear them brag about the expense. it's as if they could care less about the working middle class, right?

 

[Londoner]

Whenever Washington wants to raise money and increase its power over the population, it appeals to parent's fear for the children.

Do you remember the famous Reagan war on drugs which was launched by Nancy Reagan? This was one of the most massive and centralizing big government programs in history. It gave Washington more power over state law enforcement than anything to date.

The Reagan war on drugs targeted children with endless propaganda in the 80s. Remember "You can't fly when you're high" ... pumped into every home by the Reagan drug czar. Frankly, we don't need government bureaucrats raising our children. I think moral guidance should be the sole province of parents, but we all know how much Republicans love to transfer moral authority from families to government.

I think each state should decide how it wants to control its law enforcement destiny. Unfortunately, the Republicans, especially under Reagan, believed in a one-size-fits-all solution imposed from Washington.

I'm not saying I don't like the idea of limiting the dangerous impact of drugs, I'm saying I think big government solutions will make things worse - and the only thing we will have to show for it is another bloated federal agency that serves only itself. I just wish I could convince Republicans to stop being so totally obedient to their own party, and to start realizing how much their party grows government. The Republican leadership has the luxury of Fox news and rush Limbaugh, neither of whom report any of this stuff.

We never hear anything on talk radio about how much the war on drugs cost, and how inefficient it is, and how much power it gave over the states, and how much unchecked general surveillance it packed into federal law enforcement.

There is a certain breed of Republican voter who hasn't had much formal or collegiate education. He gets most of his information from a narrow range of pundits with a very specific political agenda. For this reason the Republican voter doesn't know how much the wars on drugs and terrorism have grown the budget and power of Big Government.

When ever big government knocks on a republican door and says "hi I'm from government and I'm here to protect your children" or "hi I'm from government and I'm here to protect you from terrorists", the Republican voter just rolls over. He trusts big government more than any other single person in the universe. He doesn't understand that Big government often makes things worse, despite its best intentions.

When the Reagan administration was questioned about the massive money and power they were giving to big government, they famously responded that they were doing it for the children.

Thirty years later, the war on drugs has devolved into a wasteful, inefficient big government farce. But don't tell Republicans that - they tend to trust in the power of government when their side is the one making it bigger.

 

[rdean]

I keep hearing "let him die". Isn't that the Republican plan?

Seriously, how many Republicans who have no health care cry about how unfair Obamacare is?

 

[Bfgrn]

As popularity keeps declining, we are still hearing some commentators on Cable News still using the same old worn out excuse why we should "Love Obama-Care"!!! Yes, All Children Under The Age Of 27 Are Covered For Free !!!!
Every time we see them still fighting over the great things about Obama-Care, you feel like screaming back at them "YAH? WELL WHO'S GONNA PAY FOR IT YOU Dumbass Dufass ??!!!!.
We all know it's going to collapse by the summer of 2014 and Dem's will have nothing to run on come September/October.

No one is covered for 'free'. You can ADD a child under 27 TO your POLICY.

 

[Geaux4it]

I keep hearing "let him die". Isn't that the Republican plan?

Seriously, how many Republicans who have no health care cry about how unfair Obamacare is?

How many with no health care have

cell phones
Cable TV
eat out
Go to the movies
Buy smokes/alcohol

On and on....

Priorities are not in order for most

-Geaux

 

[Political Junky]

I always associated "For the children" with republicans.

 

[TheSeventhTiger]

who knew that babies/children are now considered anyone under the age of 27?

 

[Bfgrn]

who knew that babies/children are now considered anyone under the age of 27?

"Child" is a term parents use for their offspring. i.e. All my children are married.

Maybe when you grow up and have children it will make sense to you.

 

[Geaux4it]

who knew that babies/children are now considered anyone under the age of 27?

"Child" is a term parents use for their offspring. i.e. All my children are married.

Maybe when you grow up and have children it will make sense to you.

Deadbeat parents with deadbeat 'chiltren'

-Geaux

 

[Bfgrn]

who knew that babies/children are now considered anyone under the age of 27?

"Child" is a term parents use for their offspring. i.e. All my children are married.

Maybe when you grow up and have children it will make sense to you.

Deadbeat parents with deadbeat 'chiltren'

-Geaux

I figured that was your problem. Thanks for confirming it.

 

[Geaux4it]

"Child" is a term parents use for their offspring. i.e. All my children are married.

Maybe when you grow up and have children it will make sense to you.

Deadbeat parents with deadbeat 'chiltren'

-Geaux

I figured that was your problem. Thanks for confirming it.

Actually OUR problem is the 51% that put the inept OSlumbo in office and the 44% that still want him there

-Geaux

 

[healthmyths]

Whenever Washington wants to raise money and increase its power over the population, it appeals to parent's fear for the children.

Do you remember the famous Reagan war on drugs which was launched by Nancy Reagan? This was one of the most massive and centralizing big government programs in history. It gave Washington more power over state law enforcement than anything to date.

The Reagan war on drugs targeted children with endless propaganda in the 80s. Remember "You can't fly when you're high" ... pumped into every home by the Reagan drug czar. Frankly, we don't need government bureaucrats raising our children. I think moral guidance should be the sole province of parents, but we all know how much Republicans love to transfer moral authority from families to government.

I think each state should decide how it wants to control its law enforcement destiny. Unfortunately, the Republicans, especially under Reagan, believed in a one-size-fits-all solution imposed from Washington.

I'm not saying I don't like the idea of limiting the dangerous impact of drugs, I'm saying I think big government solutions will make things worse - and the only thing we will have to show for it is another bloated federal agency that serves only itself. I just wish I could convince Republicans to stop being so totally obedient to their own party, and to start realizing how much their party grows government. The Republican leadership has the luxury of Fox news and rush Limbaugh, neither of whom report any of this stuff.

We never hear anything on talk radio about how much the war on drugs cost, and how inefficient it is, and how much power it gave over the states, and how much unchecked general surveillance it packed into federal law enforcement.

There is a certain breed of Republican voter who hasn't had much formal or collegiate education. He gets most of his information from a narrow range of pundits with a very specific political agenda. For this reason the Republican voter doesn't know how much the wars on drugs and terrorism have grown the budget and power of Big Government.

When ever big government knocks on a republican door and says "hi I'm from government and I'm here to protect your children" or "hi I'm from government and I'm here to protect you from terrorists", the Republican voter just rolls over. He trusts big government more than any other single person in the universe. He doesn't understand that Big government often makes things worse, despite its best intentions.

When the Reagan administration was questioned about the massive money and power they were giving to big government, they famously responded that they were doing it for the children.

Thirty years later, the war on drugs has devolved into a wasteful, inefficient big government farce. But don't tell Republicans that - they tend to trust in the power of government when their side is the one making it bigger.

In June 1971, President Nixon declared a “war on drugs.”
A Brief History of the Drug War | Drug Policy Alliance
FACTS!!! not guesses..
Here we are, four decades after Richard Nixon declared the war on drugs in 1971 and $1 trillion spent since then. What do we have to show for it?
War on drugs a trillion-dollar failure - CNN.com

 

[NightFox]

who knew that babies/children are now considered anyone under the age of 27?

Yes the effort by progressives to set the age of maturity to well into an individuals twenties has been under way for sometime now, after all the longer citizens remain children the longer government has to brainwash them into perpetual dependency.

"Afoot and lighthearted I take to the open road, healthy, free, the world before me." -- Walt Whitman

 

[LoneLaugher]

who knew that babies/children are now considered anyone under the age of 27?

Yes the effort by progressives to set the age of maturity to well into an individuals twenties has been under way for sometime now, after all the longer citizens remain children the longer government has to brainwash them into perpetual dependency.

"Afoot and lighthearted I take to the open road, healthy, free, the world before me." -- Walt Whitman

That is an interesting claim.

 

[healthmyths]

I keep hearing "let him die". Isn't that the Republican plan?

Seriously, how many Republicans who have no health care cry about how unfair Obamacare is?

Less the 4 million people HAVE NO health insurance!
EVERYONE has access to health care!

"About 60 percent of everyone under 65 is covered....a large-group or small-group
About 22 percent of people under 65 are with a government program,
about 7 percent....individual market...."
PolitiFact | AFP ad says premiums will rise under Obamacare

Now that adds up to if my simple arithmetic is correct, 89% of ALL AMERICANS...Right?

Medicare states in the below on Page 8..
"In 2011, Medicare covered 40.4 million aged 65 and older," which is 12.7% of current known USA population below.
http://www.cms.gov/Research-Statist...eports/ReportsTrustFunds/downloads/tr2012.pdf

When you multiple 89% (% of people covered without Medicare...) times 316,295,540 people in the USA
You get 281,503,030 people covered under everything ......
Then add the 12.7% current population
source:Population Clock

• 195,900,000 in Private health insurance Health insurance coverage in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
• 72,600,000 covered by Medicaid: 72,600,000: Record Number on Medicaid in 2012; Outnumbers Populations of France and UK | CNS News
• 59,000,000 covered by their employers plans Number of Americans Obtaining Health Insurance Through an Employer Declines Steadily Since 2000 - Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
• 47,200,000 covered by Medicare
• 8,300,000 covered by Tricare which is the Department of Defenses health insurance for military personal and their families.TriCare Information - Military Health Care
• 383,000,000

 

[Rozman]

I caught a few minutes of the crazy Ed Schultz radio show.
He's still pushing that old gag that before Obama Care 48 million Americans had no health care.

 

[Geaux4it]

CBS News) A new CBS News poll finds more Americans than ever want the Affordable Care Act repealed.

According to the poll, 36 percent of Americans want Congress to expand or keep the health care law while 39 percent want Congress to repeal it - the highest percentage seen in CBS News polls. The poll also found a majority of Americans - 54 percent - disapprove of the health care law, 36 percent of Americans approve of it and 10 percent said they don't know about it.

 

[NightFox]

I caught a few minutes of the crazy Ed Schultz radio show.

Here, have a drink, it'll help dull the headache.