Is obamacare fascist, socialist, communist or other?

[Pogo]

The Obamacare fraud and the case for socialized medicine
1 October 2013

After years of promotion, lobbying and political wrangling, health insurance exchanges are opening for business today across the country as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). Under the health care overhaul, people without health insurance are mandated to purchase coverage from private insurers or face a penalty. Coverage for enrollees is set to begin January 1, 2014.

The insurance exchange launch is a milestone in a process that, in the guise of “reform,” has been aimed at funneling billions of dollars into the coffers of the private health insurers and slashing costs for the government and corporations. In the end, it will leave tens of millions uninsured and others with vastly deteriorated medical services.

In his bid for the presidency, Barack Obama pledged to implement a sweeping social reform in the provision of health care in the United States. He claimed that under his plan no insurer would be allowed to deny coverage to a sick child, or an individual with a preexisting condition; no family would go bankrupt or hungry due to health care costs; and that the insurance companies would be held to account.

The process now underway demonstrates that a colossal fraud has been perpetrated against the American population in the name of Obamacare, and that all of these promises were lies.

Read More: The Obamacare fraud and the case for socialized medicine - World Socialist Web Site

All very credible except for one thing....

Why would the Republicans be against this kind of operation? Kind of a sudden about-face, isn't it?

 

[Pogo]

Why is it so important for Americans to call their presidents names? We elect the president and then start the name calling. Is that a sign that many Americans are juvenile or what?

It is called freedom of speech. It was this amendment to the Constitution that people once held dear.

You've never heard of it?

Well -- no. Freedom of Speech explains how we CAN start the name calling. The poster's question is about WHY we do it.

 

[Pogo]

Why is it so important for Americans to call their presidents names? We elect the president and then start the name calling. Is that a sign that many Americans are juvenile or what?

It means we watch way too much TV.

You drink way too much koolaid

uhh.... that's what TV is. Hello?

 

[regent]

Why is it so important for Americans to call their presidents names? We elect the president and then start the name calling. Is that a sign that many Americans are juvenile or what?

It is called freedom of speech. It was this amendment to the Constitution that people once held dear.

You've never heard of it?

The point is not freedom of speech but the question of the juvenile name calling? I hope the framers had a little more mature type of criticism in mind when they added the Bill of Rights. But then again maybe Hamilton called Jefferson a twinkie, who knows?

 

[Billo_Really]

Well, that explains it
thread closed

That'll be $4.50 (+tax).

 

[JakeStarkey]

it is totalitarian. and therefore can be named ANY of those

So totalitarian means the bill was passed and opined by constitutional, electoral, and judicial process.

There is help for you if you but ask for it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The program is statist with corporate involvement. It's not fascist because the will of We the People, not Dear Leader as a Newt or a Rick would rule. Thus, it is a form of social democracy, I would suggest.

 

[MACAULAY]

Why is it so important for Americans to call their presidents names? We elect the president and then start the name calling. Is that a sign that many Americans are juvenile or what?

It is called freedom of speech. It was this amendment to the Constitution that people once held dear.

You've never heard of it?

The point is not freedom of speech but the question of the juvenile name calling? I hope the framers had a little more mature type of criticism in mind when they added the Bill of Rights. But then again maybe Hamilton called Jefferson a twinkie, who knows?

........................................................................

Actually, Hamilton didn't call Jefferson a twinkie; he called Aaron Burr a twinkie, or the 1800 equivalent of a twinkie...and Burr killed him for it...in a duel.

The elimination of duels is about the only real progress we have made in the debates on how this country should be governed since that time....and the principal issue has not dramatically changed since that time---it is the role government should play in people's lives.

Both sides agree that the people who cannot take care of themselves, should be taken care of by society...meaning their fellow citizens...that is, the government.

The argument TODAY is over whether, and how much, society should take care of the people who DO NOT take care of themselves.

While America was a rich society, very rich in fact, gotten rich operating on the principals of the meritocracy envisioned by Thomas Jefferson, we reached out too far, perhaps, and tried to take care of the these people who don't take care of themselves...because, for example they are LAZY.... and that has continued....and increased since at least Johnson's Great Society... ever accelerating...from whence we have come from worrying about (or claiming to worry about) people not having enough to eat....too worrying about a morbid obesity problem in the country.

Most of humanity, through its existence, has had as its essential goal----a thing called "Subsistence". Most around the world today still worry about it. And if you achieve it, you survive...and it is in our genes to be content with surviving...at least for the major portion of humanity for all of the time we have been human.

It is in our genes to subsist.

And if the Government, as in under Obama gives out SUBSISTANCE in exchange for VOTES, (subsistence now days including, not just housing, clothes and food, but transportation, cell phones, cable TV, cigarette and beer money).....then it is conclusive that most humans WILL JUST SIT ON THE PORCH.

Its in our genes.

If the Government guaranties us a SUBSISTANCE, most of us will sit on the porch and enjoy life...no stress...ALSO we will PROCREATE in great numbers and raise our offspring to sit on the porch too. And more and more will need government assistance and they will vote for DEMOCRATS who guaranty that subsistence.

UNTIL WE RUN OUT OF THE MONEY FROM THE PRODUCTIVE PEOPLE FROM WHICH THE SUBISITANCE COMES.

Obama, a pure Socialist, understands everything about this....the only disagreement being that he doesn't expect us to run out of other people's money while he is in power.

And, if we do, he'll blame it on BUSH. This is the world we live in. Call it Socialism, Communism, or just the Twilight Zone.

It won't last.

You people who have children better raise Hell....if you love and care for them.

 

[TNHarley]

The program is statist with corporate involvement. It's not fascist because the will of We the People, not Dear Leader as a Newt or a Rick would rule. Thus, it is a form of social democracy, I would suggest.

Good one!
I have to disagree, though. Wouldn't it make it statist if it relied upon the naturalization? That would be a form of social socialism. I would suggest

 

[TNHarley]

I went with fascism because, now, the gov't is controlling the system. They do not own it. Which, if they did, imo, it would be socialism.

 

[Billo_Really]

I went with fascism because, now, the gov't is controlling the system. They do not own it. Which, if they did, imo, it would be socialism.

The government does not control the system.

The "system", is the corporate oligarchy that controls the government and sets its agenda. That's why we have a President who ran on an anti-war platform, is now expanding the wars to other country's.

That's why we have a President who promised a transparent government, is now the most secretive government in history.

That's why we started out with a ACA bill that had a "public option" (which would've forced prices down) and wound up with no PO, but a mandate that made it illegal not to have insurance.

That's why we had an economic meltdown in 2008 and no one responsible for that in the financial industry has gone to jail.

And that's why republicans have shut down the government in the hopes of defunding the ACA, because their corporate benefactors in the healthcare industry have told them to.​

Government does not control the agenda, it administers it. Elected officials are nothing more than corporate bitches doing what they're told like good little whores.

And that is true on both sides of the aisle.

 

[TNHarley]

The gov't IS controlling the system. The healthcare system. That whole post is irrelevant to this thread

 

[Billo_Really]

The gov't IS controlling the system. The healthcare system. That whole post is irrelevant to this thread

They're not controlling the healthcare system. If they were, we'd have the public option. That was public enemy no.1 to the healthcare industry and they had over 900 closed door meetings with government officials (including the WH) to get that out of the ACA bill.

There are over 39,000 lobbyiests in Washington and they are not there for their health.

 

[TNHarley]

YES it is
The BUCK STOPS at the WH
Na but the gov't is controlling it. I am sorry if you cant understand that. You are talking about the people that helped make it. It is being CONTROLLED by the gov't

 

[Pogo]

The gov't IS controlling the system. The healthcare system. That whole post is irrelevant to this thread

You two both make good points. But Billo's wins as it acknowledges who's in control of who.

I have to say it's entirely relevant to the thread.

 

[Pogo]

YES it is
The BUCK STOPS at the WH
Na but the gov't is controlling it. I am sorry if you cant understand that. You are talking about the people that helped make it. It is being CONTROLLED by the gov't

But the buck doesn't stop there --- who controls the gummint?
Hint: it ain't us.

 

[Billo_Really]

YES it is
The BUCK STOPS at the WH
Na but the gov't is controlling it. I am sorry if you cant understand that. You are talking about the people that helped make it. It is being CONTROLLED by the gov't

I'm sorry it doesn't.

It doesn't matter whether a democrat or a republican is in the WH, it's still business as usual. Nothing changes. There's a reason for that. You are refusing to see it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Corporate $$$ have to be limited in controlling the system through elections and lobbys.

One, a McCain-Feingold has to be reinstituted; two, corporations can't be "people" for purposes of elections (think it through, you will have unions and then governments doing it, then we are all fucked); and three, presidential line veto.

 

[Billo_Really]

But the buck doesn't stop there --- who controls the gummint?
Hint: it ain't us.

Follow the money.

 

[S.J.]

Anyone who read his books knows he's a Marxist. That means he's a ******* communist.