Obama gets taxpayers to fund campaign drive

[Dr.Drock]

You are an idiot. You don't want a "free society".
You want a dog eat dog society.

When are you gonna insert "I Heart Socialism" into your signature?

I certainly "heart" our Federally and locally funded Interstate Highway System brought to us by the REAL GOP. You fake fuckers couldn't organise the paving of my driveway.

I know your programming has made you into a very good parroting Obamabot, but just because I don't like your hero doesn't mean I'm a republican.

Worry not, I hate the rep party as much as I hate your heros.

 

[RDD_1210]

What's personally irresponsible about someone not paying for monthly insurance costs and paying out of pocket for their medical expenses when they come about?

It's called pro-choice, something you dems pretend to stand for.

Because in the real world medical expenses are not affordable for the average person to pay out of pocket. Especially if major illness or injury occurs.

When your choices affect how much I pay for my medical coverage, you don't get to have any choice you want. Sorry.

I'm an average person, it's much easier for me to afford not having insurance and pay medical bills out of pocket. I'm a perfectly healthy 27 year who takes eating good and working out very seriously, but yet you want me to be forced to pay for something I don't need and pay for other people's insurance. Instead you'd rather make a grey situation black and white and force everyone under the same umbrella with fear of gov't penalty. And why should rich people be forced to have insurance if they don't want it?

Liberties>mandates

How would you pay for cancer treatment out of pocket? Say you are diagnosed tomorrow with Leukemia, how will you afford the extensive chemo, hospital visits, medication, follow up testing, doctors visits, etc...

 

[naturegirl]

Because in the real world medical expenses are not affordable for the average person to pay out of pocket. Especially if major illness or injury occurs.

When your choices affect how much I pay for my medical coverage, you don't get to have any choice you want. Sorry.

I'm an average person, it's much easier for me to afford not having insurance and pay medical bills out of pocket. I'm a perfectly healthy 27 year who takes eating good and working out very seriously, but yet you want me to be forced to pay for something I don't need and pay for other people's insurance. Instead you'd rather make a grey situation black and white and force everyone under the same umbrella with fear of gov't penalty. And why should rich people be forced to have insurance if they don't want it?

Liberties>mandates

How would you pay for cancer treatment out of pocket? Say you are diagnosed tomorrow with Leukemia, how will you afford the extensive chemo, hospital visits, medication, follow up testing, doctors visits, etc...

This is not about the ObamaCare debacle per se, it's about using taxpayer money, $20 million, to advertise how "good" it is. How great Obama is for shoving the legislation down the American taxpayers throats. You see nothing strange about why this is happening now??

If he wants to proclaim how good it is, why isn't he running on it yet spending 20 million of taxpayer money??

 

[RDD_1210]

I'm an average person, it's much easier for me to afford not having insurance and pay medical bills out of pocket. I'm a perfectly healthy 27 year who takes eating good and working out very seriously, but yet you want me to be forced to pay for something I don't need and pay for other people's insurance. Instead you'd rather make a grey situation black and white and force everyone under the same umbrella with fear of gov't penalty. And why should rich people be forced to have insurance if they don't want it?

Liberties>mandates

How would you pay for cancer treatment out of pocket? Say you are diagnosed tomorrow with Leukemia, how will you afford the extensive chemo, hospital visits, medication, follow up testing, doctors visits, etc...

This is not about the ObamaCare debacle per se, it's about using taxpayer money, $20 million, to advertise how "good" it is. How great Obama is for shoving the legislation down the American taxpayers throats. You see nothing strange about why this is happening now??

If he wants to proclaim how good it is, why isn't he running on it yet spending 20 million of taxpayer money??

Why are you ignoring the fact that this was a part of the legislation already? The public has a LOT of misconceptions about what this law does and does not do. Just take a look at this site as a perfect example. With such a massive piece of legislation it would be wise to make sure that people understood how it works and how it affects them...without hearing the fox news interpretation that involves death panels, etc...

 

[Dr.Drock]

Because in the real world medical expenses are not affordable for the average person to pay out of pocket. Especially if major illness or injury occurs.

When your choices affect how much I pay for my medical coverage, you don't get to have any choice you want. Sorry.

I'm an average person, it's much easier for me to afford not having insurance and pay medical bills out of pocket. I'm a perfectly healthy 27 year who takes eating good and working out very seriously, but yet you want me to be forced to pay for something I don't need and pay for other people's insurance. Instead you'd rather make a grey situation black and white and force everyone under the same umbrella with fear of gov't penalty. And why should rich people be forced to have insurance if they don't want it?

Liberties>mandates

How would you pay for cancer treatment out of pocket? Say you are diagnosed tomorrow with Leukemia, how will you afford the extensive chemo, hospital visits, medication, follow up testing, doctors visits, etc...

It'd be tough, but it should be a choice I have.

The risk I would take if I didn't have health insurance to me is far less risky than all the people who have the choice to eat 3 Mcdoubles instead of a turkey on wheat.

 

[RDD_1210]

I'm an average person, it's much easier for me to afford not having insurance and pay medical bills out of pocket. I'm a perfectly healthy 27 year who takes eating good and working out very seriously, but yet you want me to be forced to pay for something I don't need and pay for other people's insurance. Instead you'd rather make a grey situation black and white and force everyone under the same umbrella with fear of gov't penalty. And why should rich people be forced to have insurance if they don't want it?

Liberties>mandates

How would you pay for cancer treatment out of pocket? Say you are diagnosed tomorrow with Leukemia, how will you afford the extensive chemo, hospital visits, medication, follow up testing, doctors visits, etc...

It'd be tough, but it should be a choice I have.

The risk I would take if I didn't have health insurance to me is far less risky than all the people who have the choice to eat 3 Mcdoubles instead of a turkey on wheat.

So you don't know how you'd pay? This is not some isolated made up problem I created. Do you even realize how expensive medical care is? And I'm talking about more than just your routine check up.

It should be a choice IF when the time comes that you get sick and can't pay for treatment or don't have insurance by your choosing you are not allowed to receive treatment until you can pay. But that's not going to happen in this country so we need to talk about the reality of the situation and that reality is ensuring as many people who can and should be paying for their medical coverage, are paying, and those who truly can't afford it are helped out by the rest of us. Until then, the "choice" that you so desperately cling to is costing everyone who does have insurance.

 

[Conservative]

Thanks for the good news. Obama is raking the money.(wrong...tax payer money) Perhaps the Kohl brothers will make up the gap.(wrong....Koch brothers)

Once again.....2/3 of a post of your is factually incorrect.

the only part of his posts that is factually correct is that he's Dickless.

 

[Conservative]

I think an equally interesting question si this...

Why are they spending $20 million to advertise a program that may be found unconstitutional and killed by the SCOTUS? Seems a a waste.

 

[Jarhead]

How would you pay for cancer treatment out of pocket? Say you are diagnosed tomorrow with Leukemia, how will you afford the extensive chemo, hospital visits, medication, follow up testing, doctors visits, etc...

It'd be tough, but it should be a choice I have.

The risk I would take if I didn't have health insurance to me is far less risky than all the people who have the choice to eat 3 Mcdoubles instead of a turkey on wheat.

So you don't know how you'd pay? This is not some isolated made up problem I created. Do you even realize how expensive medical care is? And I'm talking about more than just your routine check up.

It should be a choice IF when the time comes that you get sick and can't pay for treatment or don't have insurance by your choosing you are not allowed to receive treatment until you can pay. But that's not going to happen in this country so we need to talk about the reality of the situation and that reality is ensuring as many people who can and should be paying for their medical coverage, are paying, and those who truly can't afford it are helped out by the rest of us. Until then, the "choice" that you so desperately cling to is costing everyone who does have insurance.

yes...and that system has been working for us. Most who can pay, pay. Few who can but dont want to, dont. All who cant payh dont.

And the tax payer has been picking up the tab for all of them.

And we are OK with it.

Why?

Becuase the alternative is a mandate....and NO ONE wants to live with government mandates asserting that you MUST buy something the moment you take your first breath.

 

[Dr.Drock]

How would you pay for cancer treatment out of pocket? Say you are diagnosed tomorrow with Leukemia, how will you afford the extensive chemo, hospital visits, medication, follow up testing, doctors visits, etc...

It'd be tough, but it should be a choice I have.

The risk I would take if I didn't have health insurance to me is far less risky than all the people who have the choice to eat 3 Mcdoubles instead of a turkey on wheat.

So you don't know how you'd pay? This is not some isolated made up problem I created. Do you even realize how expensive medical care is? And I'm talking about more than just your routine check up.

It should be a choice IF when the time comes that you get sick and can't pay for treatment or don't have insurance by your choosing you are not allowed to receive treatment until you can pay. But that's not going to happen in this country so we need to talk about the reality of the situation and that reality is ensuring as many people who can and should be paying for their medical coverage, are paying, and those who truly can't afford it are helped out by the rest of us. Until then, the "choice" that you so desperately cling to is costing everyone who does have insurance.

Well to me getting treated is more important than having insurance, poor people already get treated at the expense of those who pay their medical bills.

Oh and I'm just speaking hypothetically, I do have insurance.

 

[Jarhead]

I think an equally interesting question si this...

Why are they spending $20 million to advertise a program that may be found unconstitutional and killed by the SCOTUS? Seems a a waste.

That is exactly why they are running it. It is 20 million in advertising for Obama...once it is struck down, that 20 million is no longer available.

 

[Clementine]

Thanks for the good news. Obama is raking the money. Perhaps the Kohl brothers will make up the gap.

Sweet Jesus, it's not his money, it's taxpayer money. Are you really that inept or is it all a joke??

I think some really are happy that Obama keeps raking in the tax payers money and blowing it on stupid shit.

 

[RDD_1210]

It'd be tough, but it should be a choice I have.

The risk I would take if I didn't have health insurance to me is far less risky than all the people who have the choice to eat 3 Mcdoubles instead of a turkey on wheat.

So you don't know how you'd pay? This is not some isolated made up problem I created. Do you even realize how expensive medical care is? And I'm talking about more than just your routine check up.

It should be a choice IF when the time comes that you get sick and can't pay for treatment or don't have insurance by your choosing you are not allowed to receive treatment until you can pay. But that's not going to happen in this country so we need to talk about the reality of the situation and that reality is ensuring as many people who can and should be paying for their medical coverage, are paying, and those who truly can't afford it are helped out by the rest of us. Until then, the "choice" that you so desperately cling to is costing everyone who does have insurance.

Well to me getting treated is more important than having insurance, poor people already get treated at the expense of those who pay their medical bills.

Oh and I'm just speaking hypothetically, I do have insurance.

Right, and no sane person would choose to go without it, not when you look at the out of pocket costs of medical care. We have a very real problem with the health care system in this country, that unfortunately will not be fixed by the Affordable Care Act. Despite it's name it ceases to make it affordable. But complaining about a mandate and "taking away of freedom" is ignoring the real issue which any honest person knows that the "mandate" is not the problem with our healthcare system. It's the decreasing customer base and the lack of real competition in the marketplace that is driving costs up.

 

[RDD_1210]

It'd be tough, but it should be a choice I have.

The risk I would take if I didn't have health insurance to me is far less risky than all the people who have the choice to eat 3 Mcdoubles instead of a turkey on wheat.

So you don't know how you'd pay? This is not some isolated made up problem I created. Do you even realize how expensive medical care is? And I'm talking about more than just your routine check up.

It should be a choice IF when the time comes that you get sick and can't pay for treatment or don't have insurance by your choosing you are not allowed to receive treatment until you can pay. But that's not going to happen in this country so we need to talk about the reality of the situation and that reality is ensuring as many people who can and should be paying for their medical coverage, are paying, and those who truly can't afford it are helped out by the rest of us. Until then, the "choice" that you so desperately cling to is costing everyone who does have insurance.

yes...and that system has been working for us. Most who can pay, pay. Few who can but dont want to, dont. All who cant payh dont.

And the tax payer has been picking up the tab for all of them.

And we are OK with it.

Why?

Becuase the alternative is a mandate....and NO ONE wants to live with government mandates asserting that you MUST buy something the moment you take your first breath.

No it hasn't. Everything after that is based on the flawed notion that you think our healthcare system works. It doesn't.

 

[Dr.Drock]

So you don't know how you'd pay? This is not some isolated made up problem I created. Do you even realize how expensive medical care is? And I'm talking about more than just your routine check up.

It should be a choice IF when the time comes that you get sick and can't pay for treatment or don't have insurance by your choosing you are not allowed to receive treatment until you can pay. But that's not going to happen in this country so we need to talk about the reality of the situation and that reality is ensuring as many people who can and should be paying for their medical coverage, are paying, and those who truly can't afford it are helped out by the rest of us. Until then, the "choice" that you so desperately cling to is costing everyone who does have insurance.

Well to me getting treated is more important than having insurance, poor people already get treated at the expense of those who pay their medical bills.

Oh and I'm just speaking hypothetically, I do have insurance.

Right, and no sane person would choose to go without it, not when you look at the out of pocket costs of medical care. We have a very real problem with the health care system in this country, that unfortunately will not be fixed by the Affordable Care Act. Despite it's name it ceases to make it affordable. But complaining about a mandate and "taking away of freedom" is ignoring the real issue which any honest person knows that the "mandate" is not the problem with our healthcare system. It's the decreasing customer base and the lack of real competition in the marketplace that is driving costs up.

So Obamacare won't make healthcare cheaper, and won't change the current state of the rest of us paying for others to get treated, but we should still pass this?

Why, other than it helps the insurance industry that bribes our politicians?

 

[DiamondDave]

Obamacare is for the best.

It is for the best that we have an overbloated program that has contributors not only forced to purchase a service but also pay for the subsidizing or the down-right purchase of the same product for others in a free society??

Hardly

Yup it's called personal responsibility....something you cons pretend to stand for.

It's NOT personal responsibility when it is subsidized or even given to you.. it is not personal responsibility when you are forced to buy a service purely for existing... you have zero choice in the matter (well, at least until you are a big donator to the campaign fund)

Personal responsibility would be paying for it and doing it all on your own, or if you do not do it you take the responsibility of the bill all on your own


Idiot

 

[DiamondDave]

Obamacare is for the best.

It is for the best that we have an overbloated program that has contributors not only forced to purchase a service but also pay for the subsidizing or the down-right purchase of the same product for others in a free society??

Hardly

You are an idiot. You don't want a "free society".
You want a dog eat dog society.

With freedom comes all the positives and negatives that go along with it, buddy boy

 

[RDD_1210]

Well to me getting treated is more important than having insurance, poor people already get treated at the expense of those who pay their medical bills.

Oh and I'm just speaking hypothetically, I do have insurance.

Right, and no sane person would choose to go without it, not when you look at the out of pocket costs of medical care. We have a very real problem with the health care system in this country, that unfortunately will not be fixed by the Affordable Care Act. Despite it's name it ceases to make it affordable. But complaining about a mandate and "taking away of freedom" is ignoring the real issue which any honest person knows that the "mandate" is not the problem with our healthcare system. It's the decreasing customer base and the lack of real competition in the marketplace that is driving costs up.

So Obamacare won't make healthcare cheaper, and won't change the current state of the rest of us paying for others to get treated, but we should still pass this?

Why, other than it helps the insurance industry that bribes our politicians?

Trust me I don't love this legislation but the fact that it at least allows people who were previously being denied due to preexisting conditions to be able to now purchase insurance as well as preventing the ability to cap lifetime limits on essential treatments is plenty enough reason to pass this law.

I wish this law was better...much better and didn't hand over more customers to insurance companies who are the root of the problem. I wish Obama fought harder for a public option, I wish that we had a government that fought for the people rather than against each other. But this is reality and we were forced to put a huge band aid on a gaping wound. It doesn't fix it the problem but its certainly better then not putting on any band aid at all, even if you want to complain about your freedom to use bandaids is being taken away.

 

[RDD_1210]

It is for the best that we have an overbloated program that has contributors not only forced to purchase a service but also pay for the subsidizing or the down-right purchase of the same product for others in a free society??

Hardly

Yup it's called personal responsibility....something you cons pretend to stand for.

It's NOT personal responsibility when it is subsidized or even given to you.. it is not personal responsibility when you are forced to buy a service purely for existing... you have zero choice in the matter (well, at least until you are a big donator to the campaign fund)

Personal responsibility would be paying for it and doing it all on your own, or if you do not do it you take the responsibility of the bill all on your own


Idiot

Newflash, you're already paying for all of those people without insurance. This doesn't change any of that except potentially make it cheaper for you by allowing more people to pay for insurance and thus less people for you to subsidize.

I know you can't think in any terms but black and white but try it for a change.

 

[DiamondDave]

Yup it's called personal responsibility....something you cons pretend to stand for.

It's NOT personal responsibility when it is subsidized or even given to you.. it is not personal responsibility when you are forced to buy a service purely for existing... you have zero choice in the matter (well, at least until you are a big donator to the campaign fund)

Personal responsibility would be paying for it and doing it all on your own, or if you do not do it you take the responsibility of the bill all on your own


Idiot

Newflash, you're already paying for all of those people without insurance. This doesn't change any of that except potentially make it cheaper for you by allowing more people to pay for insurance and thus less people for you to subsidize.

I know you can't think in any terms but black and white but try it for a change.

It is not making it cheaper.... Multu-level bureaucratic bullshit is not cheap at all....

Nor am I forced to participate.... I can go to a private doctor... I can go to a private cancer treatment center, etc....

Hell.. for me over the past 10 years, health insurance is no better than a ripoff or failed gamble... paying wayy more in (especially considering the employer contribution that I would rather have in extra salary) than I ever take out.. even with emergencies on occasion for kidney stones, minor broken bone, etc....

And you are not allowing more people to pay.. you are allowing more people to participate at the expense of others... you are also forcing others to pay who normally don't spend on insurance and pay for many health things cash... you are also forcing companies to participate (unless, as stated, they are somehow big campaign contributors)...

Not to mention what precedent does this start of government forcing you to buy a product or service for simply being alive

schweinhund