Ina LANDSLIDE, House repeals Obamacare

[mammastevens]

The current effort to repeal "Obamacare" is actually aimed at broader restrictions on

abortion, not Obama’s health care law.

 

[Ozmar]

This really becomes a battle of wills. There's no way in hell Obama is going to give in on this repeal issue. If the house decides to draw this out, it will become them stalling government funding over one issue. Given the attention span of the American people, they will notice that government is shutting down over a gridlock based on one issue, and start blaming Republicans for their pettiness.

 

[HUGGY]

No, 'statism' is your word du jour. You will live it, and I can ignore it as all mainstream folks do. All the rest is unimportant, so I can ignore that. Keep mooing with the other fringe right herd animals.

Since you really have said nothing new

This is all the work you "deserve"

-----------------------------------------------------------

No one said gov't per se, is the only factor that creates statisim..

So statism does not exist anywhere in the world?
Is that your final answer?


Red herring, not at all. It was presented as proof to some of the weakness in your "arguments"

Red herring would be- In over 15,000 posts you have never started an original post
See the difference- good
lesson over


It is posted in the original. However, due to your generous editing, you only took the one line.
Of course, it is odd how you feel your rebuttal of claiming falseness requires "no backup" only name calling
Funny how that works.



To be fair, you have not pull out the big gun yet, where you imply you won in some manner. So you are getting better at it....

Here is the rest of the post enjoy

Oh where, oh where could have Maggie Mae gone?
----------------------------------------------------------------


Since it is the weekend and I am feeling generous,
I will add this for you. No need to thank me



Ignoring the truth does not make it go away

In fact for some, it can be come painful

In over 15,000 posts you have never started an original post

Wow! That is impressive indeed! You have been here for about twenty minutes and can make THAT statement. You are clearly the smartest and fastest reader on USMB. I look forward to more displays of your super human powers.

 

[Neotrotsky]

No, 'statism' is your word du jour. You will live it, and I can ignore it as all mainstream folks do. All the rest is unimportant, so I can ignore that. Keep mooing with the other fringe right herd animals.

Since you really have said nothing new

This is all the work you "deserve"

-----------------------------------------------------------

No one said gov't per se, is the only factor that creates statisim..

So statism does not exist anywhere in the world?
Is that your final answer?


Red herring, not at all. It was presented as proof to some of the weakness in your "arguments"

Red herring would be- In over 15,000 posts you have never started an original post
See the difference- good
lesson over


It is posted in the original. However, due to your generous editing, you only took the one line.
Of course, it is odd how you feel your rebuttal of claiming falseness requires "no backup" only name calling
Funny how that works.



To be fair, you have not pull out the big gun yet, where you imply you won in some manner. So you are getting better at it....

Here is the rest of the post enjoy

Oh where, oh where could have Maggie Mae gone?
----------------------------------------------------------------


Since it is the weekend and I am feeling generous,
I will add this for you. No need to thank me



Ignoring the truth does not make it go away

In fact for some, it can be come painful

In over 15,000 posts you have never started an original post

Wow! That is impressive indeed! You have been here for about twenty minutes and can make THAT statement. You are clearly the smartest and fastest reader on USMB. I look forward to more displays of your super human powers.

I see your understanding of the functions on this board are as good as your understanding of the US Constitution

Normally, it is best for people like you to do their own work; you would learn so much more and appreciate it better.
However, we don't have all night here so... (you can just view it like a wasteful tax on my valuable time to make you feel better about it)

1) Click on Jake's name above
2) Go to Public View
3) Go to Statistics see 16,272 Total Posts (sorry Jake I underestimated your number)
4) Click on Find all threads started by JakeStarkey total zero


I look forward as well to more displays of your super human powers

 

[JakeStarkey]

Statism is a made up word without realistic application by folks who want to redefine terms. The 3% simply can talk all they want but still have no impact. Such is the case here by the far right reactionaries. Be anti-statist all you want. Go for it.

 

[The T]

Statism is a made up word without realistic application by folks who want to redefine terms. The 3% simply can talk all they want but still have no impact. Such is the case here by the far right reactionaries. Be anti-statist all you want. Go for it.

The political expression of altruism is collectivism or statism, which holds that man’s life and work belong to the state—to society, to the group, the gang, the race, the nation—and that the state may dispose of him in any way it pleases for the sake of whatever it deems to be its own tribal, collective good.


What's wrong Fakey? Can't stand to be told what YOU really are at heart?

 

[Foxfyre]

The current effort to repeal "Obamacare" is actually aimed at broader restrictions on

abortion, not Obama’s health care law.

Not so. I certainly don't even think about abortion pro or con when I say I want Obamacare to go away and for Congress to come up with something that will actually help.

I thnk I'm pretty typical of the average American out there.

 

[HUGGY]

Since you really have said nothing new

This is all the work you "deserve"

-----------------------------------------------------------

No one said gov't per se, is the only factor that creates statisim..

So statism does not exist anywhere in the world?
Is that your final answer?


Red herring, not at all. It was presented as proof to some of the weakness in your "arguments"

Red herring would be- In over 15,000 posts you have never started an original post
See the difference- good
lesson over


It is posted in the original. However, due to your generous editing, you only took the one line.
Of course, it is odd how you feel your rebuttal of claiming falseness requires "no backup" only name calling
Funny how that works.



To be fair, you have not pull out the big gun yet, where you imply you won in some manner. So you are getting better at it....

Here is the rest of the post enjoy

Oh where, oh where could have Maggie Mae gone?
----------------------------------------------------------------


Since it is the weekend and I am feeling generous,
I will add this for you. No need to thank me



Ignoring the truth does not make it go away

In fact for some, it can be come painful

In over 15,000 posts you have never started an original post

Wow! That is impressive indeed! You have been here for about twenty minutes and can make THAT statement. You are clearly the smartest and fastest reader on USMB. I look forward to more displays of your super human powers.

I see your understanding of the functions on this board are as good as your understanding of the US Constitution

Normally, it is best for people like you to do their own work; you would learn so much more and appreciate it better.
However, we don't have all night here so... (you can just view it like a wasteful tax on my valuable time to make you feel better about it)

1) Click on Jake's name above
2) Go to Public View
3) Go to Statistics see 16,272 Total Posts (sorry Jake I underestimated your number)
4) Click on Find all threads started by JakeStarkey total zero


I look forward as well to more displays of your super human powers

More super human powers...Mind reading... If the U S Constitution was self evident we wouldn't need a Supreme Court..would we...

Got me on all the functions .... not even curious. I use the ones I need. Surprised Starkey has not started even one thread. Good work Dick Tracy. And THAT means what exactly?

 

[Neotrotsky]

In over 15,000 posts you have never started an original post

Wow! That is impressive indeed! You have been here for about twenty minutes and can make THAT statement. You are clearly the smartest and fastest reader on USMB. I look forward to more displays of your super human powers.

I see your understanding of the functions on this board are as good as your understanding of the US Constitution

Normally, it is best for people like you to do their own work; you would learn so much more and appreciate it better.
However, we don't have all night here so... (you can just view it like a wasteful tax on my valuable time to make you feel better about it)

1) Click on Jake's name above
2) Go to Public View
3) Go to Statistics see 16,272 Total Posts (sorry Jake I underestimated your number)
4) Click on Find all threads started by JakeStarkey total zero


I look forward as well to more displays of your super human powers

More super human powers...Mind reading... If the U S Constitution was self evident we wouldn't need a Supreme Court..would we...

Got me on all the functions .... not even curious. I use the ones I need. Surprised Starkey has not started even one thread. Good work Dick Tracy. And THAT means what exactly?

Don't be defensive because you don't know how to use the board functions and you appear to be lacking in reading comprehension .
You may feel embarrassed because "everybody" knows now you don't know what you are talking about. But, we already did, so don't feel ashamed
of limitations- work with them!


We were speaking on "red herrings", so totally appropriate.
If you don't understand this one then sorry you will have to do the work yourself.
You will appreciate it more and it will make you feel better about yourself. Something you seem to need.....

Glad to see you understand "Pruneface"

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No, 'statism' is your word du jour. You will live it, and I can ignore it as all mainstream folks do. All the rest is unimportant, so I can ignore that. Keep mooing with the other fringe right herd animals.

You are mainstream like nancy pelosi is.

 

[editec]

A majority of people do not like Obama care.

But a huge percentage of those who dislike it dislike it because they don't think it goes FAR ENOUGH.

I'm one of those people, actually.

I think it will be repealed, we'll go back to exactly what we had before (or maybe worse) and this problem will be something our KIDS will still be dealing with.

 

[Mini 14]

A majority of people do not like Obama care.

But a huge percentage of those who dislike it dislike it because they don't think it goes FAR ENOUGH.

I'm one of those people, actually.

I think it will be repealed, we'll go back to exactly what we had before (or maybe worse) and this problem will be something our KIDS will still be dealing with.

editec, I rarely agree with you, but I think you're spot-on here.

That said, I'd rather be heading "back there" than going down the road this bill would have put us on.

I'm still holding on to hope that 2012 will bring better change. There were some decent IDEAS in the bill, but the framework to support those ideas simply wasn't there. Maybe 2012 will bring a chance for a clean start.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

To those who supported obamacare I have a quetion for you.

Did you also support the patriot act?
After all it was created to protect us and was supposed to be for our benifit.

 

[JakeStarkey]

'Statism' as a word apparently appeared in 1946. Merriam-Webster defines it as stat·ism noun \ˈstā-ˌti-zəm\ Definition of STATISM : concentration of economic controls and planning in the hands of a highly centralized government often extending to government ownership of industry"

So the negative use of the word means that certain folks want to provide their own police protection, their own fire protection, generate their own electricity, their own water, their own sanitation, and so forth and so on.

The use of the word by some is indiscriminate and not worth arguing, because no reasonable point is made here by the fringers like Neo or CrusaderFrank.

 

[Neotrotsky]

'Statism' as a word apparently appeared in 1946. Merriam-Webster defines it as stat·ism noun \ˈstā-ˌti-zəm\ Definition of STATISM : concentration of economic controls and planning in the hands of a highly centralized government often extending to government ownership of industry"

So the negative use of the word means that certain folks want to provide their own police protection, their own fire protection, generate their own electricity, their own water, their own sanitation, and so forth and so on.

The use of the word by some is indiscriminate and not worth arguing, because no reasonable point is made here by the fringers like Neo or CrusaderFrank.

Oh yes name calling, so "Alinsky" of you
Next you can tell us "you won" in some fashion that should show us good



So now the most common, accepted and complete definitions are part of some evil, right wing "cabal"
Who knew....


Jake I would tell you to stick with what you know
but that would not leave too much

Let's just leave it for the record again
Your final answer

Statism does not exist anywhere in the world
(Hey, it is your story and you can tell it anyway you want)


Perhaps your "fear" of the word is your "willingness" to accept and assume any form of a centrally planned economy will be OK
with no erosion of individual rights, what so ever.

The biggest problem with any centrally planned economy is the means not necessary the goals or ends.
If ones describes the "ends" as everyone having what they need to survive. All politicians try to claim that is what they are doing for the masses.

There are many in the US who claim to be socialists, progressives etc or claim to want the same ends with little understanding or care of the means on how to achieve those goals. They just know we must achieve those goals, at any cost. Which is where the problems come in....





Jake,
you may have to pull in Maggie on this one

 

[Neotrotsky]

Statism is a made up word without realistic application by folks who want to redefine terms. The 3% simply can talk all they want but still have no impact. Such is the case here by the far right reactionaries. Be anti-statist all you want. Go for it.

The political expression of altruism is collectivism or statism, which holds that man’s life and work belong to the state—to society, to the group, the gang, the race, the nation—and that the state may dispose of him in any way it pleases for the sake of whatever it deems to be its own tribal, collective good.


What's wrong Fakey? Can't stand to be told what YOU really are at heart?

Yes indeed,

In fact, it is based on the Rousseauian vision (Jean Rousseau) holds that the collective comes before the individual, our rights come from the group not from God, that the tribe is the source of all morality, and the general will is the ultimate religious construct and so therefore the needs — and aims — of the group come before those of the individual.




Fascism, Communism, Socialism, Progressivism and all the other collectivist groups are all based and have their "roots" in the Rousseauian vision.

Our Founding Fathers based our society on Locke's political philosophy of the individual and individual property rights and that any "social contract" with a gov't is created by the transfer of some these rights by the people.

Of course, for the "great" social planners of our society this has proven inconvenient at times. Thus, you see for many, the attempt to pretend such choices do not exist. Therefore, things like "Statism does not exist" is a common defense or attempts to equate the most banal of gov't functions (eg postal service) with the larger and more intrusive gov't functions that they so desire. There is even the naive belief by some that somehow they will be able to "control" the gov't to stop the erosion of individual rights...

Good luck with that one

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Statism is a made up word without realistic application by folks who want to redefine terms. The 3% simply can talk all they want but still have no impact. Such is the case here by the far right reactionaries. Be anti-statist all you want. Go for it.

The political expression of altruism is collectivism or statism, which holds that man’s life and work belong to the state—to society, to the group, the gang, the race, the nation—and that the state may dispose of him in any way it pleases for the sake of whatever it deems to be its own tribal, collective good.


What's wrong Fakey? Can't stand to be told what YOU really are at heart?

Yes indeed,

In fact, it is based on the Rousseauian vision (Jean Rousseau) holds that the collective comes before the individual, our rights come from the group not from God, that the tribe is the source of all morality, and the general will is the ultimate religious construct and so therefore the needs — and aims — of the group come before those of the individual.




Fascism, Communism, Socialism, Progressivism and all the other collectivist groups are all based and have their "roots" in the Rousseauian vision.

I see you know jake very well. Nice post.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Statism is a made up word without realistic application by folks who want to redefine terms. The 3% simply can talk all they want but still have no impact. Such is the case here by the far right reactionaries. Be anti-statist all you want. Go for it.

The political expression of altruism is collectivism or statism, which holds that man’s life and work belong to the state—to society, to the group, the gang, the race, the nation—and that the state may dispose of him in any way it pleases for the sake of whatever it deems to be its own tribal, collective good.


What's wrong Fakey? Can't stand to be told what YOU really are at heart?

Watch out he will use that self taught bullshit of I win on you.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Statism is a made up word without realistic application by folks who want to redefine terms. The 3% simply can talk all they want but still have no impact. Such is the case here by the far right reactionaries. Be anti-statist all you want. Go for it.

The political expression of altruism is collectivism or statism, which holds that man’s life and work belong to the state—to society, to the group, the gang, the race, the nation—and that the state may dispose of him in any way it pleases for the sake of whatever it deems to be its own tribal, collective good.


What's wrong Fakey? Can't stand to be told what YOU really are at heart?

Watch out he will use that self taught bullshit of I win on you.

I hear you
The next best one is sometimes his "compatriot", Maggie, comes out of the woodwork to "help" him

I really am surprised he has not pulled out his other big gun the "unsubscribe threat"

 

[thereisnospoon]

No, 15 states do have high risk pools. Also the coverage available differs widely from state to state. Annual deductibles vary. It can be as high as $25,000 in some states. Waiting periods for preexisting conditions are 6 or 12 months or more. Sometimes the pools are prohibitively expensive, sometimes they are full and taking no new members, sometimes their coverage is hardly worth it. Most of the time getting coverage through a high risk pool will take many months before you actually get coverage and if you are very sick, you'll have to wait many more months before they pay any of your bills.

So how about we all turn over our entire paycheck to the US government and just let them give us what food, shelter, healthcare etc. we need? That hasn't worked well in any country it has been tried, but what the hey. Let's dont' let empirical evidence bother us.

I still say the U.S. healthcare system was working well until the federal government got invovled. I say get the government out of it and it will work well again.

No system works if it focuses on the small minority of special needs. All systems need to embrace the whole in the most economical, efficient, and effective way that is reasonably possible. Then if society wishes to address the special needs that would be its option to do. But let that be done by the states or local communities and not by the one-size-fits-all federal government.

After several of your posts addressing the disparity in systems and between states, you seem to be obsessed that somebody might achieve or have more than somebody else. What's wrong with that? If you afford a bigger house and a more expensive car than I can afford, I don't begrudge you that. I sure don't want anybody forcibly requiring you to provide me with everything you worked to achieve just because I have less.

That is true of all people.
That is true of local communities.
That is true of states.
That is true of nations.

Correct. The system started on a downward path the second government got involved with mandates and other nonsense that just gummed up the system and made it monstrously complicated. Before HMO's PPO's and all the other "O's" we had a simple pay as you go system for doctor visits and regular medical needs. Insurance was for large losses....Anyone over the age of 40 must remember "major medical"....That was for surgeries, serious ailments and the like.
My first full time job....My insurance cost me $5 per week through my employer. 80% coverage after my $500 deductible was exhausted. Simple.
When I was a child we had a family physician. He made.........HOUSE CALLS....holy macaroni!!!!!!
Once the government got involved and sent health care down the path of catering to the lowest common denominator, the thing exploded into the pile of shit that exists today.
Obamacare makes it ten times worse.
As I predicted, an entire new bureaucracy would be created, thousands of new government hack employees needed huge administrative costs and of course government regulation of reimbursements( as government is the primary insurer) and the inevitable rationing of care. It's all in the Obamacare law...All of it.
Unfortunately and this is typical, people have become accustomed to first dollar health insurance coverage. This is the result of government handouts that gave people the notion that their medical care should be available free of out of pocket expense in any amount.