Alternative to Obamacare getting results

[P@triot]

If you want the opposite of unaffordable, unconstitutional, and unsustainable, just do the opposite of Obamacare. That's exactly what this conservative alternative provides. Zero tax dollars. Zero coercion. Zero control over the masses. All provided by a church and some good people. While Obamacare is forcing people out of their coverage and away from their doctor, this alternative is doing the exact opposite - providing people with a doctor that is completely affordable (this entire thing is like a liberals worst nightmare).

How a Free Clinic Is Saving Health Care in America

 

[JakeStarkey]

The exception (yours, Rott) proves the rule.

 

[doni90]

sorry, I do not agree

 

[theDoctorisIn]

How are doctors working for free an "alternative" to Obamacare?

 

[idb]

So, why wasn't this clinic taking care of the other 15 million Americans that didn't have healthcare cover before the ACA?

 

[hipeter924]

How are doctors working for free an "alternative" to Obamacare?

It isn't, at least if you take into account that the low level ACA plans can provide some access to specialists and hospital care.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Well this is a fun thread

 

[JakeStarkey]

Rottweiler, like EconChick, Elektra, and others has run away from his own thread.

 

[P@triot]

How are doctors working for free an "alternative" to Obamacare?

Because they are VOLUNTEERING their time at their own FREE WILL. Just like Bill Gates donates billions of dollars of his own FREE WILL.

That's what America was built on. Freedom. Free will. Not having a gun stuck to your temple by an idiot communist liberal in Washington and forcing you to labor for the "good of the cause".

Unlike Obamacare (which is indisputably 1,000% unconstitutional), everything that clinic is doing is constitutional.

The fact that you needed this explained to you greatly concerns me.

 

[P@triot]

So, why wasn't this clinic taking care of the other 15 million Americans that didn't have healthcare cover before the ACA?

Well that's the problem. Unfortunately, liberal policy has forced 15 million Americans into being uninsured (not to mention poverty). It has also forced millions of physicians into either barely being able to survive (thus no time to volunteer) or into closing their doors.

When the day comes that we return to Consitutional government and the freedom that the founders built this great nation on, all of these problems will go away. But as long as the government continues to impose millions of costly, devastating regulations on society while taking 60% of what everybody earns, jobs will continue to be scarce, charity and donations will continue to suffer, and poverty & misry will continue to abound (it always does with communism).

 

[JakeStarkey]

The uncovered are the result of failed market forces, period.

The ACA is not unconstitutional, period.

Until you can't courts to agree with you, Rott, your argument is fail.

 

[emilynghiem]

The uncovered are the result of failed market forces, period.

The ACA is not unconstitutional, period.

Until you can't courts to agree with you, Rott, your argument is fail.

Hi JakeStarkey I will give you this much: if by YOUR interpretation of Constitutional and traditional adherence to laws as being passed by Congress and approved through the Supreme Court, you consider that "Constitutional" of course you are right.

Rottweiler and I are like the people who said SLAVERY was unconstitutional BEFORE it was officially abolished,
and that is what we are saying now, with ACA, but IN ADVANCE of this being "formally recognized."

This is like people arguing DOMA was "unconstitutional" even though it passed legally.
Even Clinton admitted later that it should not have been passed.

So you and others like me are using "unconstitutional" to mean violating principles in the Constitution
BEFORE this is established publicly by legal due process.

As I said previously, the first step is to form a consensus among the people that
something is INCONSISTENT WITH THE CONSTITUTION
be it Slavery, ACA mandates, or certain marriage laws,
and then once we establish an agreement there, it can be taken through the proper process to correct it legally through govt.

So JakeStarkey I will back you and Dante and others who are saying it is not LITERALLY
declared unconstitutional yet, because the LITERAL law was interpreted to allow the ACA.

But I wholly AGREE with Rottweiler that the ACA mandates are "inconsistent with the Constitution"
and should be made OPTIONAL in order not to impose this on people whose beliefs are violated by its enforcement.

If people VOLUNTEER to be under the mandates, it must remain a free choice.
So JakeStarkey here is where I PLEAD with you not to teach just your view that it is constitutional
but also include the belief that it is not, and to explain the reasons,
so people have a free choice, based on being fully informed.

I am happy to explain to people why it is considered law, equally as why it is considered unconstitutional.
And give people the CHOICE whether to protest or to comply with it. This is still being contested as unlawful.
And I believe people have the RIGHT to know the laws and know why it is seen as a VIOLATION
of states' rights, right to vote, and citizens' rights to due process before being deprived of liberties.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yes, you and Rott can have your unofficial opinions, which will remain only that, until you can gain enough power to change it.

 

[emilynghiem]

Yes, you and Rott can have your unofficial opinions, which will remain only that, until you can gain enough power to change it.

JakeStarkey
the Atheist does not need to prove their beliefs in Court or pass laws to protect that.
I wish you would recognize the same for the beliefs of Constitutionalists.

What I would ask of you and Rottweiler is to consider setting up conditions for
a possible lawsuit after this is settled. And start taking names of people willing to
pay the damages if it turns out this ACA is unconstituitonal, and all the supporters
who kept pushing it insisting it was lawful were in part guilty of "conspiring to violate civil rights"
by deliberately misrepresenting to people what their rights were under the Constitution that could have been argued.

So if the citizens and taxpayers were misled as to what was in the ACA,
what were their rights in contesting it, then such citizens could potentially SUE the proponents of this bill for FRAUD.

So I will ask Rottweiler for help to form a legal team, lay out the conditions we contest to,
and start taking names of people who either feel defrauded or victimized by misrepresentation.

and we'll see who really take responsibility for "their beliefs in ACA as constitutional and the law of the land"
And who is just following a cult, and if so who is the leader responsible for this if nobody else claims that.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Emily, the belief itself is not empowerment in law.

ACA has been ruled constitutional. The current suit is over procedural, not constitutional, issues, and if ruled procedurally unfeasible, the court will give guidance on how Congress should fix it.

 

[emilynghiem]

Emily, the belief itself is not empowerment in law.

ACA has been ruled constitutional. The current suit is over procedural, not constitutional, issues, and if ruled procedurally unfeasible, the court will give guidance on how Congress should fix it.

JakeStarkey
And people who justified slavery by law technically owed restitution.

JP Morgan Chase was one bank that offered $5 million investment in education
as reparations for slavery that the company acknowledged was part of their history in building their capital.
From J.P. Morgan Chase an Apology And 5 Million in Slavery Reparations - The New York Sun

Here, we have a chance to hold all the people claiming they endorse this to document their willingness
to accept the legal and financial responsibility for this law they claim is enforceable by govt.

So if you agree to be held responsible, Jake, go ahead.
I am happy to take names, and also ask Obama, Pelosi, members of the Supreme Court, and both Parties for help to document who is willing to accept legal responsibility or who will admit they are not sure, or they don't agree.

I know where I stand, and have already agreed to go on a hunger strike by the end of the year if this whole ACA mandate isn't declared voluntary in order to make it constitutional.

I was hoping to live to work with my fellow Democrats who argue that collateral damage to civilians in Iraq at taxpayer expense was also unlawful, and want to see that credited back to the public as well. Looks like they gave up fighting that battle, so maybe my offer to go on strike for this one might spark more courage to go after all cases of govt waste that is contested.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

So, why wasn't this clinic taking care of the other 15 million Americans that didn't have healthcare cover before the ACA?

They have been in practice for 12 years dumbass.
It took me all but 5 or 6 seconds to look it up.
Two doctors and several nursing staff donate theit time, and medicines etc. come from donations. But of course a shit for brains sheep like you are immediately against it because apparent conservatives started it.
Go back to your Obama shrine and stop looking like an idiot.

 

[idb]

So, why wasn't this clinic taking care of the other 15 million Americans that didn't have healthcare cover before the ACA?

They have been in practice for 12 years dumbass.
It took me all but 5 or 6 seconds to look it up.
Two doctors and several nursing staff donate theit time, and medicines etc. come from donations. But of course a shit for brains sheep like you are immediately against it because apparent conservatives started it.
Go back to your Obama shrine and stop looking like an idiot.

Wow...you take yourself pretty seriously don't you?
The OP suggested that this is the alternative to the ACA.
I was pointing out that it hasn't done as good a job giving people access to healthcare in 12 years as the ACA has in, what, three years or so?

For all that - I applaud them but, as far as being a viable alternative...I don't think so.

How do you know they are all conservatives at the clinic anyway?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Emily, the belief itself is not empowerment in law.

ACA has been ruled constitutional. The current suit is over procedural, not constitutional, issues, and if ruled procedurally unfeasible, the court will give guidance on how Congress should fix it.

JakeStarkey
And people who justified slavery by law technically owed restitution.

JP Morgan Chase was one bank that offered $5 million investment in education
as reparations for slavery that the company acknowledged was part of their history in building their capital.
From J.P. Morgan Chase an Apology And 5 Million in Slavery Reparations - The New York Sun

Here, we have a chance to hold all the people claiming they endorse this to document their willingness
to accept the legal and financial responsibility for this law they claim is enforceable by govt.

So if you agree to be held responsible, Jake, go ahead.
I am happy to take names, and also ask Obama, Pelosi, members of the Supreme Court, and both Parties for help to document who is willing to accept legal responsibility or who will admit they are not sure, or they don't agree.

I know where I stand, and have already agreed to go on a hunger strike by the end of the year if this whole ACA mandate isn't declared voluntary in order to make it constitutional.

I was hoping to live to work with my fellow Democrats who argue that collateral damage to civilians in Iraq at taxpayer expense was also unlawful, and want to see that credited back to the public as well. Looks like they gave up fighting that battle, so maybe my offer to go on strike for this one might spark more courage to go after all cases of govt waste that is contested.

Restitution for slavery by JP Morgan was a private business decision, not government.

The government will hold no one responsible for reparations because of ACA.

I hope you do not die or suffer irreparable harm from an ill-advised hunger strike.

I do admire your courage.

 

[JakeStarkey]

So, why wasn't this clinic taking care of the other 15 million Americans that didn't have healthcare cover before the ACA?

They have been in practice for 12 years dumbass.
It took me all but 5 or 6 seconds to look it up.
Two doctors and several nursing staff donate theit time, and medicines etc. come from donations. But of course a shit for brains sheep like you are immediately against it because apparent conservatives started it.
Go back to your Obama shrine and stop looking like an idiot.

Stop judging folks by your lack of intelligence and morality. Good for the conservatives. Such donated service will never be enough, not nearly enough, to fill the gap. The fact is that market forces failed the American people as a whole. If you have a better remedy, let's hear it.