Shock jocks Opie and Anthony explode over Obamacare, call for a ‘revolution’

opie_anthonyIt is safe to say that Gregg “Opie” Hughes and Anthony Cumia, hosts of the Sirius/XM radio show “Opie & Anthony Show,” are no fans of Obamacare.

Not even remotely.

Hughes announced on Thursday’s show that he had received a cancellation letter from his insurance company, and he and Cumia, who had already gotten his notice, discussed just how burdensome President Obama‘s signature healthcare law is.

Video: Tense moments when two men chase down,
take US flag from ‘disrespectful’ protesters

“So, like everyone else, I have to pick all new plans because what I had wasn’t good enough,” Hughes told his cohort.

“Where you happy with your other insurance?” Cumia asked?

“There was no issue!” he answered.

“Well then, you can keep it,” Cumia replied, pausing for effect before adding, “Oh, that’s right, you can’t.”

“I don’t know why we’re not having a revolution at this point, it’s ridiculous,” Hughes added.

The pair continue to rip on Obamacare in their own unique manner, to include a healthy number of “f-bombs,” but in the end, they make some very valid points.

Caution: Extremely course language

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed

Tom Tillison

Tom is a grassroots activist who distinguished himself as one of the top conservative bloggers in Florida before joining BizPac Review.He can be reached at tom@bizpacreview.com
About Tom Tillison

Tom is a grassroots activist who distinguished himself as one of the top conservative bloggers in Florida before joining BizPac Review. He can be reached at tom@bizpacreview.com

  • randy harrison

    This thing is going to implode. Best thing is to do nothing.
    Don’t even file for the hardship exemption, that is just another way for them to get you in their system.

    • sputnik1

      Good advice. I suggested people avoid it like the plague. No way in hell would I go anywhere near that website. All your personal information is totally compromised. I’ve seen where people that have entered information but decided to pass are now being sent threatening letters. Once they know who and where you are you’re on their radar, forever.

      • randy harrison

        My congressman has stated to use it at your own risk.
        I have an accountant and a financial manager that advised me.
        So that all being said, it really looks as though it will be poorly enforced and ignored anyway.
        Like the alcohol prohibition law, it will be eventually abolished.

  • Jerry

    I will not file even if were free.

  • stevenlehar

    Its past the point of no-return. We will never get rid of it now. Obama knew that all along. It was planned to “implode”. But as soon as the “needy” beneficiaries start getting their freebies (already started!) nobody will be able to repeal it. Why is there not a revolution? Ask my own children — products of public schooling — they are all Liberals despite my best efforts to educate them otherwise. They will learn eventually, but only when it is too late. Look at the last 50 years — nay, 100 years. Will we ever get rid of the IRS? Social Security? It grows like a cancer!

    • tedlv

      I wonder how many people will be needlessly murdered by this unconstitutional act.

      • renee52

        Turning over your healthcare to the government is the cornerstone of Communism! Who wants the government to decide what health care you get and how you get it? This is not America anymore!

        • Stan H

          There are over 50 Countries (including Canada, The U.K., France, etc.) that have Universal Health care. NONE of them are Communist! Helping people get health care through private insurance companies (like the ACA does) is NOT “turning your healthcare over to the government”, and it damned sure isn’t Communism! Get a clue!

          • NukeWaste

            You are the one with no clue. Do you understand that for complex surgeries people come from those countries to come here? NONE of them have competent health care structures. Move to Europe. The ACA is turning your health care over to the government. If you can’t understand that, I know that you voted for bozo and are too stupid to understand reality. I would pray for you but I don’t work for free.

          • Stan H

            Typical! Lose the debate and change the argument. I assume that you’re conceding that universal healthcare DOESN’T make a country communist, so lets move on to your newest claim. Yes, some people come to the U.S. because we have top-ranked doctors. (Some people say that COMMUNIST Cuba has a comparable health system and doctors, but that’s neither here nor there).

            First, the AMA endorsed the ACA, because the doctors and hospitals would be getting MORE insured patients. We’re not going to suddenly lose those top doctors because of the ACA. Those same doctors will be available to more citizens (and probably making more money) because there will be more people covered by insurance. Having government regulation of an industry (which has been the case for centuries for dozens of businesses) is NOT “turning healthcare over the government” no matter how much your paranoia tries to make it so.
            I think that it’s pretty clear who the “stupid” one is.

          • RIDGERUNNER29

            so stanley,how much is Media Matters paying you to post here??

          • Hotsauce

            I’m thinking maybe Politico or the Hill.

          • seign

            See my comment to RIDGERUNNER29

          • seign

            Well isn’t that a brilliant retort. Why not have an intelligent debate with facts and figures instead of changing the subject, name calling, or calling people plants? Is your argument really that weak, or do you admit you have no idea what you’re really talking about.

          • RIDGERUNNER29

            When I reply to idiots like you and Stan,the ones who don’t attack me back and reply are those that don’t get paid to do so.Stan and several others never do,no matter how badly I zing them.Perhaps you missed my other posts attacking the premise of ObamaCare being good for America.Like libs everywhere,you can’t see the forest for the trees.

          • babbott

            “First, the AMA endorsed the ACA, because the doctors and hospitals would be getting MORE insured patients.”

            The AMA only represents about 17% of the doctors in this country, and the AMA has already backed away from the ACA.

          • Stan H

            Here’s an article from the AMA President from 2 weeks ago. http://medcitynews.com/2014/03/ama-chief-obamacare-perfect-allows-positive-changes-healthcare-system-now/

            If that’s “backing away”, I’d love to see her endorsement. The AMA is the largest physicans’ group in the country.

          • snowmaggedoned

            Only 17% of working in the filed doctors belong to this organization. They do NOT speak for the majority of doctors in this country.

          • babbott

            So the woman who is president of the AMA speaks for ALL their members? I don’t think so, and as I said before only 17% of the doctors in the nation are members of the AMA.

          • Stan H

            Do you have a problem understanding that the president of an organization speaks for the group? And, do you have anything to support your statement that the AMA is backing away from the ACA, (especially in light of the President of the organization’s support)?

          • rfrichey

            Just because someone is a president of some organization doesn’t mean that person speaks for all. If this was the case then we would all be falling in line like a herd of lemmings supporting all liberal causes.

          • Stan H

            I didn’t say that. The president (chairman, etc.) is the voice of the organization. There obviously can be dissidents or “minority reports”, but, the elected leader is the voice of the organization. If you can’t understand that simple point, then we really can’t have meaningful discourse.

          • rfrichey

            Sorry, but in your reply to babbott your posted statement seemed to have read, “Do you have a problem understanding that the president of an organization speaks for the group”. Maybe someone snuck into your computer and wrote that without you knowing.

          • Stan H

            Those statements are both mine, and AREN’T’t mutually exclusive.

          • babbott

            “Do you have a problem understanding that the president of an organization speaks for the group?”

            Do you have a problem understanding that the president of any organization does not control the beliefs and opinions of the group? Does Obama speak for all of us– NO! Does Obama even want to speak for all of us–NO! He is into “rewarding his friends and punishing his enemies”. I know you want to believe that those in leadership positions are gods who are to be supported regardless of what they say, but it should be obvious to you that when they overstep their authority they can be removed. Some labor unions have recently lost court cases because the union members didn’t agree with some of the actions of the leadership. You keep boasting about the AMA being the “largest organization of medical doctors in the country”, but you ignore the fact that the AMA only represents 17% of the doctors. Why do you think the other 83% refuse to be members of the AMA? You also boast that those same doctors will now be available to more patients and make more income. How can you be so blind? Their income will be controlled by the ACA, they will not be FORCED to see more patients, and many of them will retire or close their practices in order to work for someone else. Have you ever considered how many doctors will refuse to accept insurance under the ACA? Do you realize that many doctors already refuse to accept Medicare patients? Do you even realize that Congress just this past week once again postponed the reduction in doctor fees under Medicare? Why do you think they did that again? What do you think they are going to do when doctors refuse to accept the fees offered for their services under the government-mandated Obamacare? Do you think the government has the authority to FORCE doctors to treat patients?

          • MsLiberty

            I totally agree with you, doctors all over the country are opposed to the ACA, and many of them are leaving their practices. I already know doctors that will not accept ACA patients, it is the same finding a doctor that will accept Medicaid patients. This will result in very long wait times to get an appointment to a doctor that will accept this monstrosity or traveling longer distance to find a doctor that will accept it. (Government Healthcare, will become just like the DMV or the VA a huge catastrophe). This will also increase the potential of losing a doctor you like and healthcare rationing (already a problem in other countries that have socialized medicine). Just ask an elderly Canadian. You can thank Obama and the Nazicrat Party for destroying the best healthcare in the world, because ACA will result in lower quality care for everyone and possible death to people that have urgent needs. Who want’s the government telling you what kind of care you can or cannot receive? The Government has absolutely no business being involved with our healthcare and this is just wrong for Americans.

          • seign

            “destroying the best healthcare in the world”. This is a joke, right? You do know, we’ve been the butt of other country’s jokes regarding our health care considering our standing in the world, right?

          • seign

            A president of any association is the voice of said association because the majority of said association hold the same beliefs, opinions and ideas. Are you really this dense? It’s like saying “The NAACP’s president may support black causes but, that doesn’t mean the group does”. Or “GLAAD’s president supports gay marriage but that doesn’t mean the rest of GLAAD does”. Come on. Such a weak, weak argument.

          • seign

            Also, the President of the United states is a terrible example. Things work 100% differently in the business and lobbyist world. You’re comparing apples to oranges.

          • seign

            You know, I haven’t heard ONE single doctor saying that he would stop treating patients or relocate due to Obama care. Can you name names, site sources? Or are you just going off of opinion alone. Also, how many have said they will stop treating patients and/or will relocate? What percentage? I’m intrigued. Please list all sources.

          • babbott

            I don’t keep copies of every article I read, and I can’t give you an exact number of how many, but I have read reports from several doctors who have decided to retire earlier than planned, or closed their practices and went to work for a hospital because of Obamacare. In order to give you a percentage I would need to know the total number of doctors in the nation. Do you know how many there are? I have heard reports even this week that doctors are refusing to accept Obamacare, refusing to treat patients under Medicaid, and I know from experience that there are a lot of doctors who stopped taking Medicare patients a long time ago. If I gave you names and sources, you would just deny that they said that. Maybe you wouldn’t be so intrigued if you pulled your head out of the sand.

          • Combat Veteran Seabee

            So the president of United States speaks for me? I don’t effin think so, and if he does, that is a “Dictatorship! Now go away little troll!

          • Stan H

            Apparently YOU do have a problem understanding it. Too bad. No time for remedial classes.

          • Obamaocare

            The A.M.A. came out against it because of the surprise that they had to cover patients themselves for 2 months if they didn’t pay their insurance. What a surprise huh? Deal with the Devil. IF they said they were for it 2 weeks ago as it’s probably because Obamao’s enforcers were sent to give them death threats.

          • seign

            You also JUST said “the AMA has already backed away from the ACA” so why would anyone care what someone so obviously uninformed and pulling stuff out of their a$$es has to say?

          • John

            AMA is an insignificant minority of medical underachievers banded together for codependent reasons.

          • Stan H

            But, I’d wager that those “medical underachievers” know FAR more about the healthcare system tham “life underachievers” that troll message boards.

          • Cynthia J. McCoy

            How mad are doctors that they were used by the president?? How stupid do they feel?? They not only lied and used them but now they have taken right from their wallets. They told them to help them it would be good for them and now look!!

          • BearNJ

            I guess you want to walk around with an inflamed appendix for six months. Don’t think it will happen? it what happened to my friend who lived in Canada. Wake up.

          • Stan H

            OK. And I know of people who now pay $56/month for healthcare under the ACA. Anecdotal evidence basically means an anecdote. Your example is no more proof of how their system works for everyone than mine is. YOU wake up.

          • babbott

            “I know of people who now pay $56/month for healthcare under the ACA.”
            OK, so who is paying the remainder of their monthly premiums? They certainly aren’t getting health insurance for $56 per month as the total premium. If you believe they are, you are subject to being placed in a mental asylum.

          • Stan H

            He’s young, healthy and yes, gets a subsidy to make his healthcare affordable, just as the ACA was designed to do. Your point?

          • babbott

            The point is the fact that the federal government should not require taxpayers to foot the bill for someone else’s insurance premiums. When you take money from one group and spend it on another group, if that isn’t wealth redistribution, what would you call it? And another point is the fact that you were deliberately misleading when you said you knew a guy who got insurance for $56 per month. That is false. His part of the premium is $56, but someone else is forced by the government to pay the rest of his premium. And another point is the fact that like most liberals you use bogus arguments to support your liberal agenda. You boast about one of your acquaintances getting something paid for by someone else.

          • Stan H

            I know that conservatives hate it, but it is (and has long been) the policy of this country that people shouldn’t die because they can’t get medical treatment. That’s why the government pays hospitals to take uninsured people (through emergency rooms the MOST expensive care) with all of our tax dollars. The ACA allows many of those to not only get affordable insurance, but most importantly get preventative services, avoiding those prohibitively expensive emergency room visits that all of us have been paying for. This is one of the reasons that the CBO is predicting that the ACA will save billions of dollars.

            My statement was (and this is a direct quote) “And I know of people who now pay $56/month for healthcare under the ACA.” That’s what HE pays. The fact that the GOVERNMENT pays a subsidy does NOT change the truth of the statement. Subsidies are an integral part of the ACA. The fact that you don’t like them is really immaterial.

          • babbott

            The entire premise is a lie because he doesn’t get insurance for $56/month. He gets insurance at someone else’s expense and his little token payment is nothing compared to the actual premium. Why do you think I should pay for his insurance? You talk about “our tax dollars” but your remarks make it obvious that you don’t have any skin in the game or you are completely insane. Why do you think taxpayers should pay for those other people to have insurance? If they can’t afford to buy it, let them do without it. It’s not my job to make sure the low income people have all the benefits that others have. If they want the benefits they can earn them just like everyone else does. Your entire argument is based on the false premise that we should provide health insurance for everyone when actually they should be providing their own insurance if they want it.

          • Stan H

            Your grasp of logic (or English) is obviously deficient. WHERE is the “lie”? A “lie” is defined as “telling an untruth; to pretend with intent to deceive.” One of the main mechanisms of the ACA is that access to healthcare will be increased by subsidizing the premiums of certain economic groups. It was never concealed, never obfuscated, never a “LIE”.

            Every taxpayer has “skin in the game”. I, for one would rather my tax dollars go to help people get affordable, comprehensive care, than go to paying for the most expensive care, via emergency rooms, after the problem has become acute, or life-threatening. It’s not only compassionate, but common-sense.

            I just can’t understand why the right-wing, proud, so-called “patriots”, seem wedded to the idea that even though almost every industrialized country in the world makes universal health care available to its citizens, the greatest superpower in the history of this planet, can’t. We can, and we will. Congress passed the law, the President signed it, and the Supreme Court ratified it. The fact that you don’t like the concept or the execution, is completely immaterial. It’s the law. Quit pouting and suck it up.

          • babbott

            “WHERE is the “lie”? A “lie” is defined as “telling an untruth; to pretend with intent to deceive.”

            1. “If you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance–period. No one if trying to take that away from you.”
            2. “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor–period.”
            3. “Under the ACA, families will save $2500 per year.”

            All of these were “telling untruths with the intent of deceiving” the people into accepting Obamacare.

            “Every taxpayer has “skin in the game”.
            You’re wrong again. Even though everyone who pays federal income tax has “skin in the game”, there is a large percentage of citizens who pay NO federal income tax and therefore have no right to expect taxpayer subsidies to purchase their insurance.

            NEVER refer to me as a “so-called patriot” unless you would agree to say that to my face. I can assure you that would be the last time you would want to question anyone’s patriotism. Yes, I am “right-wing” (conservative), I am proud that I served this nation for decades, but for some liberal a**hole to call me a “so-called patriot” is unacceptable, and you wouldn’t have the nerve to say that to me in person.

          • Stan H

            You debate like my ex-wife. (Paraphrase at will, and create your own definitions.) You said that subsidies were a lie. Obviously (to anyone rational) they’re not, so I won’t waste anymore time on that.

            You tried to bring new “lies” into the debate after I called you on your previous “lie” claim, so I’ll address them now:

            “If you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance–period. No one if trying to take that away from you.” – At best a misstatement, could be an intentional lie. I believe that the President is far too intelligent to publicly tell a lie of that magnitude intentionally.
            2. “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor–period.” Same analysis.
            3. “Under the ACA, families will save $2500 per year.” On numerous occasions, (several from the video that you cited, the President said “up to 2,500.00″. I choose to believe that he left out the “up to” in the instances you cite, unintentionally. Of course, with your political bent, you’re going to take the most nefarious construction of the facts.

            “Every taxpayer has “skin in the game”, is self-evident, whether you want to accept it or not. As to calling you a “so-called patriot”, I didn’t, (referring to “the so-called patriots, and not you specifically). That being said, “if the shoe fits . . “. And, so as to remove all doubt, if I deemed it appropriate, I wouldn’t have any difficulty (or hesitation) telling it to your face.

          • Obamaocare

            Stan. Ever see a useful idiot? Look in the mirror.

          • Stan H

            Like most right-wingers, you have an aversion to the truth, which insults don’t change.

          • Obamaocare

            Projection much Stan?

          • babbott

            “You said that subsidies were a lie. Obviously (to anyone rational) they’re not, so I won’t waste anymore time on that.”

            Speaking of blatant lies, show me where I said that. I have talked about subsidies from taxpayers paying your friend’s insurance premiums so he only pays $56, and I have complained about my tax money being used to subsidize Obamacare, so you need to explain to me where I said “subsidies were a lie”.

            “I believe that the President is far too intelligent to publicly tell a lie of that magnitude intentionally.” If you really believe that, you are far too gullible to rationally discuss the man or his remarks. The word “misstatement” or “misspoke” is simply a more palatable definition of lying, and your use of that word simply emphasizes your blind defense of the man. Let me ask you if he lied when he promised to be “the most transparent administration ever” or when he said just last week that he didn’t use a “hard sell” to push Obamacare after spending $17 million on TV ads, using any celebrity who would stump for him, or how about his insistence that the penalty for not buying insurance was NOT a tax until the Supreme Court said it WAS a tax, and then he admitted it. The problem is that he has been making “misstatements” for the past 5 years, yet you really think he is too intelligent to lie.

          • Stan H

            My statement “I know of people who now pay $56/month for healthcare under the ACA.” Your statement was “The entire premise is a lie because he doesn’t get insurance for $56/month.”

            As to the rest of the statements that you’ve attributed to Pres. Obama. Admittedly, the statements weren’t true. For the statements to be “a lie”, they have to be made with knowledge of the falsity of the statements. I’m not convinced that he was lying. BTW, I never said he was too intelligent to lie. I do believe that he is too intelligent to blatantly lie to the public on camera on subject easily refutable.

            Finally, NO ONE not even the Supreme Ct. Justices thought that Roberts would call part of the ACA a tax. That’s one that you definitely can’t blame on Obama.

          • babbott

            “For the statements to be “a lie”, they have to be made with knowledge of the falsity of the statements”

            So you disregarded the reports that there was a meeting at the White House and they agreed they KNEW the people would not be able to keep their insurance and doctors, but the White House decided not to tell the people that?

            I know what the Supreme Court said, but my point was that Obama and company repeatedly denied that it was a tax when questioned why the IRS would be involved in it. However, after SCOTUS called it a tax thereby changing the law, Obama was more than happy to change his tune and go along with the court because he realized that was the only way the court could approve the law.

            I really like the way you say statements were “not true” but they were not lies because Obama didn’t have the knowledge that they were “not true”. That is some of the best liberal spin I have heard, but it sure makes Obama look stupid because others tried to inform him and he wouldn’t listen to them. He is like Bill and Hillary because he never seems to know anything, can’t remember anything, and finds out about events by watching TV news just like the citizens.

          • Stan H

            I’m sorry that you don’t like the definition of “lie”. But, it is what it is. You think that the lied. I think that he misspoke, WITHOUT the intent to mislead.

          • babbott

            “The entire premise is a lie because he doesn’t get insurance for $56/month”
            So where did I say that subsidies were a lie?? The premise I denied was that your friend was getting insurance for $56 per month. That may be all he is required to pay, but “subsidies” from taxpayers are used to pay the rest of his monthly premium..

          • Stan H

            The subsidy was never disputed, or concealed. Hence, no “lie”.

          • babbott

            “Every taxpayer has “skin in the game”, is self-evident, whether you want to accept it or not.”

            I really don’t see how you can be so stupid. Of course every taxpayer has skin in the game, but I clearly stated that there is a large percentage of people who pay NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX, so those people don’t have any skin in the game. What is so difficult for you to understand?

          • Stan H

            Seems like both of our statements are accurate (with the exception of your “large” percentage).

          • babbott

            Well, when it is known that about 47% of the people pay NO federal
            income tax, that is close to half the people, and I would say that is a
            LARGE percentage.

          • Obamaocare

            The whole A.C.A. was SOLD ON LIES!!
            If it’s the law of the land why does Obamao keep unconstitutionally changing it? Just because of POLITICS!! Chalk up another treasonous act by the Fascist in OUR house!!

          • Stan H

            Pres. Obama, as the Chief Executive Officer has the constitutional authority to issue Executive Orders and regulations to implement Federal statutes, (of which the ACA is one). His delaying certain aspects of the ACA was NOT illegal or unconstitutional.

            Despite the braying from the radical right, It’s not even a close call, it’s well-settled law. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/11/14/white-house-defends-legality-of-obamacare-fix/
            BTW, you really should look up the definition of “treason”. Hint: It’s NOT running the Presidency in a manner that YOU don’t like.

          • Obamaocare

            He’s supposed to send it back to the legislature if he want’s to change law. He’s not a King.
            It’s a blatant in your face abuse of power. It’s not well settled Stan. It’s GUMBY Banana Republic.
            Gee. Let me call the White House to see what Obamao DEEMED the law to be today. Really?
            Running the Presidency in a manner I don’t like? What? Like shredding the constitution and abusing his power? It’s not just him that’s treasonous. It’s his Demo-Nazi party that stands lock step with the Fascist. Now don’t bother me. I’m done with my idiot quota for the night………Hey. Is that really you Obamao? It is isn’t it.
            P.S. Washington Post doesn’t count. It’s State Run Media.

          • Stan H

            The existing legal precedent (Heckler v. Chaney) , 200 years of practice, and the Supreme Court ALL says that you’re wrong. Don’t like it? TFB

          • Obamaocare

            What part of Don’t bother me I’m done with my idiot quota don’t you understand?

          • Stan H

            Unfortunately, you’re stuck with “your idiot quota”, since you were apparently born with it.

          • Obamaocare

            I told you I’m done with your aggravatingly annoying stupidity. Go suck your thumb and sulk in the corner somewhere.
            P.S. Brilliant come back from one of such limited mental capacity.

          • Stan H

            We could engage in a “battle of wits”. Unfortunately, you’re unarmed.

          • Obamaocare

            SLAP!

          • snowmaggedoned

            Awesome comeback!!!!

          • MsLiberty

            The lie is that ACA is affordable, if you like your insurance you can keep it, if you like your doctor you can keep him. It is not a tax. And. . . if there are no doctors that want to accept this piece of garbage, how is that going to affect ACA insured patients get the care they need, if they have to wait months to get an appointment. Keep drinking your “useful idiot Koolaide” We are not buying this, it is absolutely wrong. The rest of the world has socialize medicine, and it’s horrendous. ACA is horrendous. 78% of America did not want this, it was forced on us by partisan politics and we will change this, because we don’t have to suck up anything a specific party dishes out without our approval. Suck on that.

          • Stan H

            High on passion, low on both facts and logic. The independent (international) World Health Organization ranks the U.S. as 37th!! The vast majority of those countries ranked above us provide universal healthcare for its citizens.

            The ACA is the law of the land, and will remain so until, at a minimum, January 20, 2017 (at which time I expect President Clinton) to move forward with the ACA.

            As I posted earlier, I just can’t understand why the right-wing, proud, so-called “patriots”, seem wedded to the idea that even though almost every industrialized country in the world can make universal health care available to its citizens, the U.S., the greatest superpower in the history of this planet, can’t. We can, and we will. Congress passed the law, the President signed it, and the Supreme Court ratified it. The fact that you don’t like the concept or the execution, is completely immaterial. It’s the law. Quit pouting. YOU suck it up!

          • Stan H

            Just a complimentary update on the “horrendous” the ACA. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/04/17/fact-sheet-affordable-care-act-numbers

          • BearNJ

            Socialized medicine is a failure. Look at all system were its been implemented. These morons can’t get a simple website to work yet you trust your own and family health care to these Marxists. This is about control not healthcare. What does IRS enforcement have to do with healthcare? You are such a pathetic drone. More people have lost their healthcare than gained it under the unafforable healthcare act.

          • Stan H

            If you’re really interested in the facts, here’s a good article from
            last week as to how the ACA is ACTUALLY working (as opposed to your
            illusory “doom and gloom”: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/03/affordable-care-act-is-working-104942.html#.U0FuYaJCm4T

          • BearNJ

            Facts from Political. The home of failed left wing “journalist” from the Washington Post.

            This isn’t a cost control measure. Its a coverage bill. After all this mess 30 million people will still not have coverage. Why are we doing this? Business owners will drop people into exchanges and larger employers will cut hours to reduce insurance cost liability. That will make it harder for people to pay their bills.

            This is a Soviet style bureaucratic disaster with a 15 member unelected politburo making health care decisions for American citizens. It will not work. Obama’s delayed all the funding manadates for political reasons. It’s a disaster that is limiting choice, driving up premiums and deductibles. There is nothing good about it.

            http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-obama-care/031214-693001-latest-obama-mandate-exemption-change-guarantees-obamacare-failure.htm

          • Stan H

            Your article was published two weeks BEFORE the ACA exceeded the enrollment goals. FACT versus defeatist theory.

          • BearNJ

            You believe any Obama numbers? He lies about unemployment (check the real U6 unemployment. Obama lies about spending. The man is a chronic community organizer liar. The Rand corporation released a report that as few as 858,000 previously uninsured plaid for their own policies. (See link below)

            What I don’t get is why you believe the government should have the right and power to cancel private contracts between people and an insurance company? Where is the constitutional right to impose government sanctioned policies that in many cases affect their choice of doctors, drive up premiums and deductibles. Those are the facts of this law. Everything it was sold on was a lie.

            http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04/01/the-secretive-obamacare-study-that-may-reveal-how-many-previously-uninsured-americans-have-actually-paid-for-a-plan/

          • Stan H

            Ha Ha HA!! You guys are SO far off base that it’s comical! I don’t even know where to start with this ridiculous BS! Do you even READ the articles that you try to cite to? The “Blaze” (a right-wing rag along the lines of TMZ) article that you cite referers an LA Times article for the reference to 858,000 purchasers .

            That LA Times article http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-obamacare-uninsured-national-20140331,0,6550360,full.story#axzz2xYVbfomi
            discusses the SUCCESS of the ACA so far! The tagline of the article is “At least 9.5 million previously uninsured people have gotten health insurance since Obamacare started, surveys and reports show.”

            This is more from the body of the article: “Republican critics of the law have suggested that the cancellations last fall have led to a net reduction in coverage.

            That is NOT supported by survey data or insurance companies, many of
            which report they have retained the vast majority of their 2013
            customers by renewing old policies, which is permitted in about half the
            states, or by moving customers to new plans.

            “We are talking about a very small fraction of the country” who lost
            coverage, said Katherine Carman, a Rand economist who is overseeing the survey.”

            MORE from that article: “The real question is, have they built a system that is sustainable?” said Caroline Pearson, senior vice president at Avalere Health. “Premiums will be the single most important thing that will determine that.”

            But the solid enrollment in the first year has built a foundation
            that for now appears robust enough to support more growth next year.

            In several states, including Rhode Island, Connecticut, Kentucky,
            Iowa and South Dakota, more insurers are looking to join state marketplaces when second-year enrollment begins this fall, according to marketplace and insurance industry officials.

            And after initial resistance, a growing number of states with GOP
            governors or legislatures are looking to expand coverage further.

            New Hampshire’s Legislature just voted to expand its Medicaid
            program. Utah, Indiana and Pennsylvania are looking for ways to do the same.” THIS is what you’re using to label the ACA as a failure? ROFL!!

            Just to make sure that you really understand the level of journalism from “The Blaze” that you’re quoting as fact, the ONLY reference to the 858,000 enrollees is a “comment” from an anonymous “ourchildrensfuture” AFTER the article with NO attribution at all as to where he came up with the claim. But, the right-wing media, being what it is, picked that unattributed comment up, and broadcast it as a “fact”.

            To put it bluntly, your entire post is a lie, built upon ANOTHER lie. You can scour the internet for this mythical report, ’cause it doesn’t exist. If you’d actually READ what you cite to, you’d know that the economist from the Rand Corporation in the article said the exact opposite. You, and your ilk are truly the kind of low(or “no”) information voters that think that Pres. Obama is responsible for the problems with the aftermath of Hurricane KATRINA.

          • BearNJ

            Delusional. You drink the Kool Aid of the social Utopians like Obama who say if everyone sacrifices their freedom,individual liberty to the egalitarian ruling class and their big government bureaucracy everything would be wonderful. History shows they are always wrong.

            In world we are all supposed to go
            along like lemmings off a fiscal and healthcare cliff because Obama wants it. You sound like one of those characters in this skit about Syria.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-sdO6pwVHQ

          • Stan H

            Typical RWNJ. When your laughably weak attempt to argue facts get blown out of the water, you move back to your “sweet spot”, meaningless insults. Just admit that you hate him and everything that he does, because he’s a Black man who’s telling you what to do, and you can leave off the pretense that it’s about issues.

          • OBR 54

            Ah yes………the race card. The fallback for Progressives who are losing an argument. When the going gets tough………the progressives go racial.

          • Stan H

            If you think that I lost THAT argument, you must be crazy, too!

          • Stan H

            Your last post must have been a doozy. It got immediately “deleted”. LOL

          • BearNJ

            You have no facts. You have Obama’s lies and talking points. You repeat them in drone like fashion because you are an ignorant Leftist. You ignore facts, reality, history and reason. You need to be on this issue if you believe this is “working”

            This type of helathcare takeover has always reduced patient options, led to rationing, reduced innovation and medical advancements. English newspapers are full of the disasters of nice and the rationing of medical care.

            You can’t make cogent argument. You point to Obama’s lies and claim some imagined superior high ground which
            you are unable to defend. Go chant in the mirror”Yes we can!”
            while this President destroys your healthcare.

          • Stan H

            I find it hilarious that you say that I “have no facts”, when the ONLY facts that you’ve cited supported MY position and torpedoed yours. LOL. I do give you credit for spunk, though. You keep swinging, though you haven’t come close to landing anything.

            The independent World Health Organization has the U.S. (who spends FAR more on health care than any other country) ranked 37TH in the world, behind almost every country with universal healthcare. Our President is improving access to healthcare, while YOU’RE spouting sour grapes.

          • BearNJ

            What were you watching your Michael Moore videos this weekend? LOL.. Cuba, which has trouble producing toilet paper, is ranked ahead of us.
            OK sure I’ll go there for surgery. You’ll believe anything in survey from the left.

            You are full of left wing lies and talking points. Obama spent 600 million on a web site which one of their personal friends secured the contract but it doesn’t work. You do realize that we could have BOUGHT insurance policies for all the new enrollees you mentioned without throwing 5 million plus off their insurance, causing people to lose their doctors and some cancer patients be denied their treatment.

            You position would be laughable except real people are being impacted by the idiot you voted for twice. The fact you feel the need to reply to every comment on the thread shows that you are an unbalanced drone.

          • Stan H

            Keep swinging, slugger. Unfortunately, you’re STILL factually challenged. The independent (NOT left-wing) WHO listed the Cuba at 39th, two spots below the U.S., which is interesting, since the U.S. spends 10X as much per person on healthcare as Cuba does. It also lists us as below almost every country that has universal healthcare. I wonder why?

            Healthcare.gov had glitches as the start, but it IS working, and has enrolled millions of people. 600 million dollars (about the cost of an new football stadium) is not very unreasonable for the design and implementation of a completely new system (from scratch) to reach and enroll tens of millions of people.

            Yes, millions of people were forced to change (not lose) their coverage. The vast majority of them qualified to get better, more comprehensive coverage at a comparable price. I sincerely doubt if any cancer patients have been denied treatment.

            Finally, I don’t respond to every comment on this thread. I mainly reply to people who comment to me. Especially those who actually have something to say. You’re barely making the cut.

          • BearNJ

            Oh Yes the site is working. It still crashes but some can log on. Of course your private information can easily be stolen by a hacker and there is no back end to link directly with the insurance companies. Yes another fine $700 million dollar government disaster. Its a joke.

            Listen pajama boy. You are a Leftist which means you ignore facts, reason, history and reality. The UN study is a farce. If you think we are 41st in health care you are a fool. Of course the cost could be improved and reformed through competition. That not what happened here. We have is a take over with Obama promising security and taking away your freedom and liberty. Its why healthcare is about control to the left. You want this idiot

            making your families healthcare decision. My wife never smoked but has asthma attacks. It does require occasional hospital visits. Obama is clueless.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxxxGUeZtno

            You are blinded to a utopian ideology which has failed everywhere it been tried. Obamacare is a disaster this nation can’t afford. It won’t work.

          • Stan H

            The site was stable enough to enroll MILLIONS, and there has not been ONE instance of information stolen. Perhaps the money was well spent. You’re the one that ignores facts, reason, history and reality. You call the WHO ranking (by health professionals) a farce, with NOTHING to contradict their ranking or support your claim of a “farce”. Why would the UN, which gets half of its funding from the U.S., and is quartered in New York, alienate the U.S. by falsely demeaning its healthcare system? You’re a conservative, which means that your mind, reasoning and mores remain mired in the last century.

            Your video lists one occasion where the President stumbled over his words. I could post a hundred “Bushisms” without breaking a sweat. Also, the “clueless” Harvard Law graduate handed Romney his ass in the last debate.

            No one is taking away people’s freedom and liberty by establishing minimum coverage levels that insurance policies must offer.

            As I’ve posted before, I just can’t understand why right-wing, proud, so-called “patriots”, seem wedded to the idea that even though almost every industrialized country in the world is able to make universal health care available to its citizens, the U.S., the greatest superpower in the history of this planet, can’t. We can, and we will. Congress passed the ACA, the
            President signed it, and the Supreme Court ratified it. Despite your “gloom and doom”, and historic levels of GOP obstructionism, the ACA is well on it’s way to drastically cutting the number of uninsured Americans while simultaneously, cutting costs and the deficit. http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/03/affordable-care-act-is-working-104942.html#.U0YYuaJCm4T

            You really should just suck it up, and quit spreading lies.

          • BearNJ

            You continue to believe the governments lies. Obama is our liar in chief. He’s changed the census to lessen the ability to compare the impact of the UN-AHA.

            http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/04/15/obama-admin-changes-census-survey-will-obscure-obamacares-impact-on-health-insurance/

            Conservatives believe in individual rights, private property rights, the civil
            society, the rule of law, protecting the innocent, opportunity for all, merit and a strong national defense to protect liberty and freedom. The Founders believed, and the Conservative agrees, in the dignity of the individual. That we have a right to live freely, and pursue that which motivates us not because man or some government says so, but because these are God-given natural rights.

            The Democrats you support have always been about dividing the country on ethnic, racial and divisive lines. They promote collectivism, telling us what to drive (smaller cars), what to eat (kids school lunches),
            what to think (attack via the IRS on political enemies and college
            speech codes), if we life or die (government rationed health care)
            and taking of liberty and property by demanding more of our money to
            fund a failed left wing vision. You promote tyranny yet you aren’t
            smart enough to realize it.

          • Stan H

            No he’s not, but YOU’RE in line for denier-in-Chief. First, “the website sucks, the whole thing is a disaster”. Then, when the website was fixed (on the timetable promised), “you’ll never get 7 million people to sign up for this disaster”. Then, when people started signing up in droves, “young people will never sign up”. Then when they signed up AND the site exceeded its goal “you’ve cooked the numbers”. D.E.N.I.A.L!!!

            The Census was changed to HELP measure the effect of the ACA on the rate of uninsured, NOT vice versa, but being a right-winger, you’ve probably never seen a conspiracy theory that you didn’t like.

            Progressives also (at least I do) believe in individual rights, private property rights, the civil society,
            the rule of law, protecting the innocent, opportunity for all, merit
            and a strong national defense to protect liberty and freedom. We also give more than “lip service” to “opportunity for all”.

            Most Democrats (and Progressives) don’t want (or try to) divide the country along racial lines. If you want to see that, go to any Tea Party rally. Progressives want fundamental societal fairness and equal treatment for ALL, regardless of race, creed, gender or sexual orientation.

            I and (hopefully most Progressives) don’t think that it’s wrong for government to incentivize (NOT demand) more energy-efficient cars to help cut our reliance on foreign oil. We also don’t think it’s wrong for giving nutritional information to school kids, and telling school districts that we won’t use tax dollars to subsidize unhealthy food for our children. The Government does nothing to interfere with parents from sending sugar bombs, pizza or other unhealthy foods to school for THEIR kids every day, but I’m very happy that my tax dollars AREN’T being used to exacerbate childhood obesity.

            The reality is that some groups (on BOTH sides of the political spectrum) that appeared to be more political than “non-profit” received increased IRS scrutiny. After a year of hearings, it STILL appears that the alleged behavior happened at ONE regional office, at the hands of a handful of IRS employees, with absolutely NO White House involvement whatsoever (i.e., the usual right-wing “mountain out of a molehill, that has been the right-wing’s M.O. since the Clinton years).

            I have no idea WTH you mean by “college speech codes”, so I can’t answer that. “Government rationed health care” is ANOTHER RWNJ fantasy. Regulating health care is NOT taking liberty and property for a “failed vision”. Government has a legitimate role in promoting the safety and well-being of its citizens, and the government is FAR less intrusive under liberals than it would be under the theocracy that would almost certainly ensue under a Tea Party administration. (Fortunately, that could only occur once a substantial portion of the electorate has completely lost their minds.).

          • marburyvsmadison

            Bravo, nice post!

          • Stan H

            Thanks.

          • Stan H

            Here’s a complimentary update on the “huge disaster” of the ACA. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/04/17/fact-sheet-affordable-care-act-numbers

          • BearNJ

            You love statistics from the liar in chief. Interestingly he can provide those numbers but not how many previously had insurance, how many are on medicare (the Government dime)?

            Here how people who get fired after March 31 are screwed.

            http://www.forbes.com/sites/deborahljacobs/2014/04/21/the-latest-problem-with-obamacare-could-cost-you/

            Here are people in California who have “coverage” but can’t find doctors.

            http://articles.latimes.com/2014/feb/04/business/la-fi-obamacare-patients-20140205

            You are a drone. This corrupt administration which spent 600 million plus on a website created by one of Michelle’s friends is incompetent. they can barely get a website to work do you think they will improve care or ration it?

            http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/heal-our-hospitals/10178296/13000-died-needlessly-at-14-worst-NHS-trusts.html

            Don’t think it cvan happen here?. Check out the VA. government run healthcare.

            http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/24/senators-call-for-probe-into-va-hospital-deaths-allegedly-tied-to-delayed-care/

            Waske up and take off the silly party hat Stan. This plan is a disaster.

          • Stan H

            YOU’RE the drone. Obviously a drone who can’t stand the on-going success of the ACA. When the figures are compiled from the 20+ different exchanges they’ll undoubtedly be made public, and you’ll undoubtedly claim that they’re not accurate.

            The very article you cite about job loss and COBRA, indicates that the problem is a “glitch” that could be easily remedied by a (god-forbid) Executive Order.

            The ACA was specifically designed to ENHANCE quality of care, and penalizes hospitals that falter in that area. The problems that you listed in England will not occur here under the ACA. The problems at ONE facility in Phoenix is anecdotal, and clearly NOT emblematic of the level of care that government provides Veterans. Are you by any chance suggesting that we “repeal” the VA also?

            The ACA IS a success, and is continuing to get better, despite your ideological blinders.

          • BearNJ

            Denial is not just a river in Egypt chief. Its a disaster. The whole plan is designed to collapse private insurance, ie CHOICE, and create a government controlled market place. Its goal is single payer which is horrible for quality care. Watch till the end. You’ll see the Liar-In-Chief in action.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhEX3rHssJI&feature=youtube_gdata

          • Stan H

            I’ll take the facts over (especially) your opinions every time. The numbers speak for themselves. The ACA is doing fine.

            The ultimate goal, and what IS going to ultimately happen IS single-payer. The hide-bound conservatives will denounce it just like they denounced Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare, and as usual, wiser minds will prevail, and it will be instituted.

          • BearNJ

            Spoken like a true statist. Buying the government promises of security while taking away liberty. You ignore all of Obama’s lies and still believe the hype. You were born in the wrong generation.

            “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress
            dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by
            extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” –
            Joseph Goebbels

          • Stan H

            A Goebbels quote does nothing change the facts that the ACA is not only working as designed, but is exceeding expectations in some areas. Go ahead, and read some more Goebbels. Progressives are busy actually trying to make things better and move this country forward.

          • Stan H
          • Jan McMullen

            More doctors DO NOT belong to the AMA than do, Many doctors have already retired or moved to admin positions! Regulating a manufactured product is NOT the same as regulating your PERSONAL HEALTH. And the Government most certainly has taken over Healthcare!

          • Stan H

            You’re quite “reality-challenged”. EVERY state in the union has had an Insurance Commissioner whose duty is to regulate the insurance industry in that state for decades. Those Insurance Commissioners do the majority of the things that the ACA does, (except of course, they don’t fine people if they don’t purchase insurance). No one has claimed that they’re “communists” or that they “took over healthcare”. They simply regulate it, as the federal governent does.

          • Hotsauce

            When the Federal government dictates to it’s citizens to buy healthcare insurance, then who is the master and who is the slave in that relationship ?
            Slavery…let’s not repeal it, let’s just fix it.

            You are on the wrong side of history !

          • Stan H

            That’s an even more asinine statement (than your previous ones). Everyone who equates slavery with a fine or a minor inconvenience really needs to experience slavery so that they could really understand how ridiculous that comparison is. You sir, are an idiot!

          • Combat Veteran Seabee

            Vladimir Lenin said, “If you want to control a people, control their healthcare.” Guess what, he was a founder of Communism, ergo, here we go!

          • agent50

            Seabee—You gotta stop believing everything you read in those right wing rags….Most of them don’t know WTF they are talking about..http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2013-10-12/health/bs-md-marbella-lenin-20131012_1_lenin-socialized-medicine-health-care-reform-plan

          • Stan H

            When Obama starts going to Communist Party meetings, quoting Mein Kampf, allying himself with Communist countries, or even praising Communism, then talk to me about Communism. Until then, it’s just deranged prattlling.

          • Hotsauce

            Google Obama and the Chicago new party.
            Read Dreams of my father.
            Obama loves Marxism.

          • Stan H

            As I said, “deranged prattling.”

          • OBR 54

            It’s not about party labels Stan. It’s really about ideology. libertarianism vs. statism, individualism vs. collectivism.

            Tell me which of these 10 planks of Communism you think Mr. Obama doesn’t support. And, if you don’t like the source you can Google your own, but they ARE the planks.

            http://www.libertyzone.com/Communist-Manifesto-Planks.html

          • Stan H

            Easy. 1,3,5, 7, 8, 9 and most of ten. (except free education in public schools, which, to the best of my knowledge, is a common denominator in EVERY 1st world country). Short answer, NOT a Communist.

          • OBR 54

            You’re right, he’s a Progressive, someone whose ultimate goal is Communism–just one step at a time. Read the details of the ACA and many of the new tax regulations and see if we are not moving ‘progressively’ to those 10 planks.

          • Stan H

            Nope. ONLY in the minds of the “rabid right.”

          • OBR 54

            And I thought you were the type of person who appreciated facts.
            Denial is not just a river in Egypt my friend.

          • Hotsauce

            Sounds like you should move to Cuba.
            I’m willing to chip in for your ticket.

          • Stan H

            No thanks. YOU’RE the one that can’t live with the law of the land. YOU leave.

          • Hotsauce

            I’m not the one touting Cuba’s healthcare.
            That would be you and the other minions of obamacare.

          • Stan H
          • OBR 54

            You have said that you appreciate facts. Well, I am Cuban and some of my family still lives there. You may want to get your information on Cuban healthcare from real Cubans.:
            http://www.therealcuba.com/
            or this internationally acclaimed blog:
            http://generacionyen.wordpress.com/
            Enjoy.

          • Stan H

            Your first link does admittedly show some deplorable conditions. However, the second doesn’t appear to mention healthcare.

            So, on one hand, we have your source(s) with a negative portrayal versus Michael Moore’s documentary, and numerous independent ratings (including the World Health Organization) that regard the Cuban healthcare system quite highly. I’m forced to guess that, as a whole, it’s somewhere in between the two extreme positions.

            Tangentially, the independent WHO ratings put the U.S. (first by FAR in health spending), well behind most of the countries that have universal health care.

          • OBR 54

            The links I cited were just an example for you to see what Cuba is like for the average Cuban citizen. Michael Moore had to go through the Cuban gov’t to get his info. The WHO relies on data reported by the individual gov’ts. Different gov’ts measure data differently (WHO has no standard measurement), so comparison by WHO is really meaningless.
            In addition to these links, I have the information from friends and relatives who live the daily life of a Cuban citizen, including my aunt, whose diabetic supplies and meds WE provide. The excellent healthcare you cite is not available to the Cuban citizen. It IS available to paying foreigners.

          • Stan H

            I’m STILL sticking with “between the two extremes”.

          • OBR 54

            Sounds more like you just want to stick with burying your head in the sand.

          • Stan H

            Not at all. In life in general, the “truth” is more often than not, found in between two diametrically opposed viewpoints.

          • OBR 54

            Except that you were given facts and you said you were a guy that considers the fact. The fact is that any information that is approved by the gov’t before release, is basically propaganda. It does not have the same weight as personal, uncensored experience.

          • Stan H

            Yes, but in considering facts, a wise person also considers the source(s) from which the sources come, and is not required to give the sources equal weight. In my hierarchy, both the W.H.O. and Michael Moore have have higher credibility than your sources. I am not discounting your sources out of hand, but, if forced to guess, I’d guess that the “truth” is closer to the W.H.O. findings than the sources that you’ve cited. IMHO.

          • OBR 54

            I can’t believe that there is any more truth than the experiences of people who have actually lived a situation. Maybe I didn’t make myself clear. Michael Moore was escorted around by gov’t agents. The government sends data to the WHO. Any information that comes from such a repressive regime as Castro’s is tightly controlled and spun in the gov’t’s favor.
            I have a friend who just returned from Cuba two days ago and returned extremely depressed over the conditions he saw. And he only left Cuba 7 yrs ago. I’m sure I could provide you with a some Q&A from him if you were interested.

          • Stan H

            The Human Rights Report article that you cited doesn’t address Healthcare at all. Nevertheless, I’ll readily stipulate that Cuba is NOT a bastion of civil liberties.
            You’re intelligent enough to know the difficulty of proving a negative. I admit that I can’t prove that the Cuban government didn’t “cook the books”. But neither the UN or Mr. Moore found anything to contest the ranking that Cuba received.

            Further, an independent Gallup poll showed that 3/4 of Cubans were positive about their healthcare system.

            http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brlatinamericara/300.php?nid=&id=&pnt=300&lb=brla

            Anecdotal evidence IS evidence, but it’s only anecdotal.

          • OBR 54

            Interesting, yet totally unrepresentative survey. In order for a sample survey to be representative of the population, it must include 10% of the population. Cuba’s adult population is around 6M. Ten percent would be 600,000 people. The article says they interviewed 1,000 Cubans. That amounts to .00006% of the population. In addition to percentage, a survey needs to include a cross section of the population. They only interviewed folks in two large cities–no country folks. I tried to link to the Gallup Costa Rican link to find out more about methodology of the survey–no luck.
            This survey is not scientific and, in essesence, no less anecdotal than the true life stories of the people I know.

            Also, it is my guess that these ‘interviewers’ were accompanied by ‘representatives’ [read spies] of the government.

          • Stan H

            I ran across this little ditty. It made me think of you immediately.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yVgOl3cETb4

            LOL

          • OBR 54

            LOL. Yet totally based on fiction.

            The link below has a short attached PDF of an actual analysis that was performed regarding WHO reporting statistics.

            http://www.cato.org/publications/briefing-paper/whos-fooling-who-world-health-organizations-problematic-ranking-health-care-systems

            In short: “Those who cite the WHO rankings typically present them as an objective measure of the relative performance of national health care systems. They are not. The WHO rankings depend crucially on a number of underlying assumptions— some of them logically incoherent, some characterized by substantial uncertainty, and some rooted in ideological beliefs and values that not everyone shares.”

          • OBR 54

            Just a little more FYI re the Cuban health system and it’s statistics:

            http://www.pop.org/content/abortion-and-infanticide-in-cuba-1089

          • Stan H

            Not pretty. But, I don’t know how a 20 year-old article sheds any light on the ACA debate.

          • Guest

            The A.M.A. came out against it because of the surprise that they had to cover patients themselves for 2 months if they didn’t pay their insurance. What a surprise huh? Deal with the Devil. IF they said they were for it 2 weeks ago as it’s probably because Obamao’s enforcers were sent to give them death threats. So Stan. You are a Treasonous DEMO-NAZI?

          • Stan H

            The A.M.A. has NEVER come out against the ACA. NO, “treasonous” sounds a lot more like trying to sabotage the law of the land. The A.M.A. actually endorsed it. http://medcitynews.com/2014/03/ama-chief-obamacare-perfect-allows-positive-changes-healthcare-system-now/

            You have no proof of any “enforcer’s” or “death threats”. They’re just as non-existent as the “scandals” that the GOP attempts to manufacture on a weekly basis.

          • seign

            Why throw out broad claims like that and not link sources? I’d like to know where you’re getting your information from. What are the statistics of people from countries with Universal Health Care coming to the United States for “complex surgeries”? Also, when you resort to childish name calling, nobody will ever take you seriously. Just an FYI.

          • babbott

            When the government can mandate what insurance you must buy, what the policy must cover, and penalize you for not buying it, you can bet that your healthcare has been turned over to the government.

          • Stan H

            Have we “turned auto insurance over to the government”? The government regulates the industry, sets minimum-benefit “floors” (just like the ACA), regulates premium increases (just like the ACA), and it is required under penalty of law (just like the ACA). Is that “unconstitutional”?

          • xoxozo

            give’em time!!!

          • awakeawareomshanti

            NO ONE FORCES YOU TO DRIVE A CAR IDIOT.

          • Stan H

            No one forces you to buy health insurance either ( though anyone who can afford it and doesn’t is stupid). You just have to pay a penalty if you don’t. Kind of like when you don’t buy your auto insurance.

          • Chris Brennan

            If you don’t drive a car you are not penalized for not buying insurance. If you don’t buy health insurance because you have decided that you don’t personally need it ,you are penalized for being alive.

          • Stan H

            As Spock would say, “The good of the many outweighs the needs of the few.”

          • snowmaggedoned

            Boy…you use an old Star Trek movie to base our entire health care industry?

            BTW….Didn’t Captain Kirk also say, “The good of the one outweighed the good of the many” in Star Trek III????

          • Stan H

            LOL. I think that he did. The ACA is STILL a big step in the right direction. You can’t make an omelet without breaking some eggs. I wish that everyone could be better off under every new law, but that’s just not reality. At some point, you guys should suck it up, realize the ACA’s here to stay, make the best of things and get over it.

          • babbott

            “I wish that everyone could be better off under every new law, but that’s just not reality.”

            So you admit that it’s “just not reality” for everyone to benefit from the “new law”. So why change it to begin with and why do you think some people should be worse off just to make some people better off? That sounds like an excellent definition of wealth redistribution–take from some to give to others. Why does government get to decide who gets helped and who gets hurt? I thought we were guaranteed “equal protection under the law”.

          • Hotsauce

            You progressives have repealed DOMA,drug laws and immigration laws.
            We can repeal obumblercare…easy peasy.
            Get over it.

          • Stan H

            55 tries is “easy peasy”? Actually, just millions of taxpayer dollars wasted on pouting and temper tantrums.

          • snowmaggedoned

            Please don’t feed Stan the troll. He is delusional and spins your post to attempt a half-hearted argument. He is a pest and should be regarded as such.

          • whyIoughta

            Communist Manifesto

          • Hotsauce

            The first ten amendments of the Bill of rights are about the individual not the needs of the many.

          • OBR 54

            Spock was a Vulcan–not an American.

          • snowmaggedoned

            You are wrong….the ACA forces everyone to buy health insurance through their state exchanges or healthcare.gov. All other health insurances are considered “Illegal” and have been canceled because they don’t measure up to what Obama thinks is good health insurance.

            Wow….I didn’t get the memo that Obama was not just a mediocre community organizer, but that he sold health insurance before he became President.

            Maybe those records were sealed, too.

          • Stan H

            You’re wrong on both counts. Only people that aren’t covered through their employer are required to buy insurance through the exchanges, and the only penalty is financial, IF they can afford insurance and choose not to buy it.

            No, he wasn’t a health insurance salesman, but he chose numerous people with extensive healthcare experience (a lot of them from Romneycare in Massachusetts, (which Republicans loved)). No records sealing needed. Just like no other records have been sealed.

          • rfrichey

            Ha!

          • babbott

            “Only people that aren’t covered through their employer are required to buy insurance through the exchanges. . .”

            And don’t you think that many employees will lose their employer-sponsored insurance when that employer mandate is implemented? It’s obvious that you can see the forest for the trees!

          • Stan H

            Been hearing that right-wing “doom and gloom” for 4 years now. In that time, 8+ MILLION new jobs have been created, and 192,000 were created just last month. You and the rest of the RWNJ’s can have your pity party off to the side while Progressives continue to move the country forward.

          • KnoKnees

            Your “made-up” jobs numbers are not even close to reality.

            http://waysandmeans.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=276866

          • Stan H

            No, you are playing with the numbers. The month that Pres. Obama took office, the country lost over 800,000 jobs. That disastrous decline has been halted, and new jobs are rapidly being created, as I said, 192,00 just last month. ” For the first time in four years more people found jobs than dropped out of the work force.” http://www.forbes.com/sites/samanthasharf/2014/04/04/jobs-report-u-s-economy-added-192000-jobs-in-march-unemployment-remains-6-7/

            http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/04/1289760/-Obama-Job-Creation

            http://www.classwarfareexists.com/chart-of-the-day-bush-vs-obama-on-private-sector-jobs/

            My numbers are NOY made up. YOUR numbers (even if accurate) don’t address job creation at all.

          • KnoKnees

            Ah, the numbers, which are 100% accurate come from the government’s Ways and Means Committee. Not some lying Liberal site you seem to cherish so much….keep up the blatant lying and misinformation, it’s exactly what everyone expects from Liberal hacks..
            We all know why Liberals lie. It’s the only way they can affirm their distorted view of reality…do everyone on this site a favor and go lie somewhere else…

          • Stan H

            Of course, YOU’RE right. “Forbes” is about as right-wing as they come. LOL. Liberals are the reason that this country is the great superpower that we are. Conservatives have lost on almost every major issue confronting the country for the last two centuries, from Slavery to the ACA, and the country is much better for it.

          • babbott

            The 8 million jobs created in the last 4 years is an Obama administration lie, but you can’t ignore the fact that less people are employed now than at the beginning of the recession. How much has the population increased and how many more people are reaching job age over the past four years? Do you even know how many new jobs need to be created just to keep up with the population growth?

          • rfrichey

            I have personally witnessed many cases where people involved in wrecks damage other peoples property and have no insurance. Guess what, nothing is done (can’t get blood out of a turnip) other than revoking their license and they continue to drive without one.

          • Stan H

            Me, too. Your point?

          • rfrichey

            My point is, when speaking of the law on Obamacare you stated. ” You have to pay a penalty if you don’t have it. Kind of like when you don’t buy your auto insurance”. I say people will ignore buying health care insurance under a threat of a penalty. Kind of like when they don’t buy auto insurance. Most people who sign up for the ACA can’t pay for it like they can’t pay for auto insurance.

          • Stan H

            The people who really can’t afford it will be exempted. The rest of the people will just have to follow the law. There’s no “I don’t like it” exemption.

          • Combat Veteran Seabee

            Don’t buy health insurance and get taxed with a penalty! Not forced? FOOL! POOR, SORRY, FOOL YOU ARE!

          • babbott

            State law, NOT federal law.

          • Stan H

            True. Your point?

          • OBR 54

            Only mandatory if you own a car–there are alternative forms of transportation. The ACA is mandatory just for living. Also, the gov’t does not subsidize auto insurance by taking [tax] money from one group and giving it to another. It also does not require coverage that violates people’s religious freedom.

          • Stan H

            Some places there aren’t really other transportation options, just like the ACA has exemptions for people who really can’t afford insurance. Are you saying that you REALLY don’t know that ALL insurance companies base their premiums on actuarial tables with the least at risk regularly being forced to “subsidize” the higher-risk categories through higher premiums than they would pay if the higher-risk participants weren’t part of the group?

            The constitutional prohibition against a melding of church and state doesn’t come with a “religious preference exemption. How far are you willing to take things”. Can Muslims wear their hijab when they take ID photos? Can Hasidic Jews maintain their beards against the employer’s wishes. Can Christian Scientists withhold lifesaving medical treatment for their children.

          • snowmaggedoned

            “Can Muslims wear their hijab when they take ID photos?”

            Yes. Some states allow it.

            Can Hasidic Jews maintain their beards against the employer’s wishes?

            Yes. Some businesses allow it.

            Can Christian Scientists withhold lifesaving medical treatment for their children?

            Yes. Some states allow it. That is how Jean Harlow died.

          • Stan H

            The fact that “some” states allow it, should be indicative that it’s NOT constitutionally protected.

          • babbott

            “. . .just like the ACA has exemptions for people who really can’t afford insurance.”
            I think you have exemptions confused with subsidies. If a person “really can’t afford insurance” that person is covered under Medicaid and the taxpayers are on the hook for that person’s premiums. The only exemptions are those groups like Muslims who have been excused from the law.

          • Stan H

            Wrong again, there are millions of people who (mainly in the states where GOP governors/legislatures stubbornly refused Medicaid expansion) where people don’t make enough for the subsidies, but don’t qualify for Medicaid. Those people are exempt from the penalties.

          • babbott

            So if they are exempt from the penalty and can’t afford the insurance, who is going to pay for their medical care? Why should they be offered medical care when everyone else by government mandate is required to have health insurance?

          • Stan H

            Emergency rooms and clinics for the poor, just like the right-wing wanted to keep for ALL poor people.

          • Hotsauce

            Your rambling and incoherent. To much Colorado pot me thinks.

          • OBR 54

            The part of the 1st ammendment relating to religion: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof….” no one should be required to pay for something that violates their religious beliefs, anymore than they could be forced [BY THE GOV'T--i.e. Congress] to do something that is against their religious beliefs. THAT is the key point–forced by the gov’t.

          • Stan H

            I disagree, but we’ll see what SCOTUS says in a couple of months.

          • OBR 54

            One only has to buy auto insurance if one owns a car–there are alternative forms of transportation. No penalty if you don’t own a car. The ACA is mandatory just because one is alive.
            Also, the state does not subsidize auto insurance.

          • Jan McMullen

            But you still have the choice of NOT To DRIVE

          • Stan H

            You’re right. It still doesn’t change the fact that the ACA is here to stay. Quit pouting and get over it.

          • Hotsauce

            As soon as dems can’t stop it. Ocare will be gone. Face reality pajama boy.

          • Stan H

            The earliest possible date for that is January 20, 2017. Hope that you enjoy the ride.

          • OBR 54

            No law is ever ‘here to stay’. Remember prohibition?

          • Stan H

            Point taken. I’ll settle for the foreseeable future.

          • whyIoughta

            It’s only required if one owns a car, which is still voluntary. You’re an idiot Stan.

          • Hotsauce

            But you can opt out of driving.
            So your argument is as ridiculous as you are.

          • Stan H

            Or, you could not buy the insurance, and pay the fine.

          • atlas007

            Stan, with all due respect….get your head out of Obama’s ass. People have financial problems like major debt because of Obamacare while others can’t get the care they once had.

          • Stan H

            People are avoiding major debt (and bankruptcies) because of the ACA. You should get over your dislike of the President (or in many cases, blind, unreasoning hatred) and look at the actual facts.

          • awakeawareomshanti

            YOU HAVE STOCKHOLM SYNDROME. like a battered wife.

          • Chris Brennan

            That’s interesting.I haven’t heard of asingle person “avoiding bankruptcy” of “major debt”

          • Stan H

            EVERY person that was previously uninsured (or had an exclusion for a “pre-existing condition) and gets a major illness after enrolling under the ACA has avoided major debt and/or bankruptcy. What part of that do you find difficult to understand?

          • snowmaggedoned

            Examples please.

          • Stan H

            If you can’t get from “A” to “B” on your own, “examples” won’t help you.

          • Jan McMullen

            No, that STAN is a huge assumption on your part! A Major illness DOES NOT cause an automatic bankruptcy or debt. Many people prefer pay as you go and also have the funds for it!

          • Stan H

            Your analysis is skewed. I did not say that every uninsured major illness resulted in a bankruptcy. What I DID say was that the protection(s) of the ACA insulates almost everyone from a Bankruptcy under those circumstances.

          • snowmaggedoned

            That is NOT what you said, LIAR:

            “EVERY person that was previously uninsured (or had an exclusion for a “pre-existing condition) and gets a major illness after enrolling under the ACA has avoided major debt and/or bankruptcy.”

          • Stan H

            That’s not a lie, IDIOT. In my earlier post, I wrote “EVERY person that was previously uninsured (or had an exclusion for a “pre-existing condition) and gets a major illness after enrolling under the ACA has avoided major debt and/or bankruptcy”, discussing 3 discrete subset of people falling under the ACA.

            In the follow-up post, I was referring to EVERYONE that falls under the ACA, recognizing that in that much larger group there might be a few outliers that could be forced into bankruptcy. I know that the right-wing historically has problems with nuance, but you really should try harder.

          • snowmaggedoned

            Boring…….YAWWWWWNNNNNNN…….ZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

            CL

          • KnoKnees

            Expanding Medicaid is expanding the deficit. 7 million sign ups was supposed to be of the UNINSURED, not all people. If the 27% holds true to the 6.5 million that actually signed up, then only 1.7 million uninsured have signed up. Does that make up for the 6.2 million who lost their insurance? NO, only 4.8 million who previously had insurance signed up.

            Are they really insured? NO. Of the 5 million that signed up by march 1, 2014, 4.5 million still had not paid the first premium and did not have insurance. If that number holds true, the another 1.4 million our now in the system or 5.9 million now have not paid their first premiums.

            You should be asking why aren’t people paying (because it’s totally unaffordable) instead of bragging about sign-ups which means little to nothing, e.g, to be “potentially” insured.

          • Stan H

            Read this recent article, and you MAY be able to talk about the issues more intelligently. http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/03/affordable-care-act-is-working-104942.html#.U0Ggp6JCm4T

            From your post, as of now, it’s clear that you have NO idea what you’re talking about.

          • KnoKnees

            You’re clearly a scripted liar for the most corrupt (and transparent) administration in U.S. history. Likely a paid shill attempting to show imaginary, yet non-existent support for a failed website that under scores a failed law which is touted by blatant lies and misinformation from the President of the United States.

            Stay classy Obama administration. You have nowhere to go but up!

          • Stan H

            1) Not paid
            2) Not a liar, just sharing the facts
            3) Not trying to “show support” the polls speak for themselves. AND, outside of those taken at Tea Party meetings, NONE show the American public being in favor of repealing the ACA.
            4) The website is not “failed”, it had a troubled start. The bottom line is that the enrollment goal was exceeded, DESPITE those troubles, and the ACA is doing fine.

          • KnoKnees

            Passed solely by democrats, signed by an imposter and ratified by a blackmailed Supreme Court Justice. Perfectly legitimate per liberal standards. Which still makes you a shill attempting to show imaginary, yet non-existent support for a failed website that under scores a failed law which is touted by blatant lies and misinformation from the President of the United States.

            Go lie somewhere else. Nobody’s buying your blatant lib-tard lies here…

          • Stan H

            LOL.
            “Passed solely by democrats”. Key word, “PASSED”. Are you implying that any legislation passed by a partisan minority is not legal?

            “Signed by an imposter”. You RWNJ’s have had almost a decade to prove that lie, and haven’t gotten out of the gate.

            “Ratified by a blackmailed Supreme Court Justice.” ROFL!! You’ve REALLY drank the Kool-Aid.

            As I said before, I don’t need to show support, because the polls do. http://www.nationalmemo.com/poll-obamacare-popularity-hits-new-high/

            (On top of the fact that IT’S THE LAW). Get over it, nut-job.

          • KnoKnees

            The truth, Americans Continue to Disapprove Rather Than Approve of Law “viewed as overwhelmingly negative.” Another lying liberal, as if there were any other kind..!

            http://www.gallup.com/poll/167756/number-americans-saying-aca-hurt-inches.aspx

          • Stan H

            YOUR poll is from February. MINE is from last week. Not a lie, fact. Try to keep up.

          • KnoKnees

            Your poll is quoted from the liberally-biased Washington Post. My poll, while being almost 60-days old, is from Gallop, e.g., relatively unbiased America. You can site biased links all day long and….anyone with a brain can easily demonstrate otherwise…liberals lie..!
            I’ve encountered mossy rocks that are harder to keep up with than the bull you’re spouting…

          • Stan H

            It was an ABC News/Washington Post joint poll, and the most recent that I’m aware of. Intelligent people don’t have a hard time recognizing the truth. But you . . .

          • KnoKnees

            Sure thing, Pajama Boy..

          • JKellogg

            Stan, IMHO, your poll citation only serves to further confirm a selection bias. Further, even the poll you did cite shows rising support only among Democrats. Support among Republicans and Independents has fallen.

            The “facts” are that the majority of polls, as aggregated by the Real Clear Politics Average of polls, shows overall disapproval for the law.

            http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html

          • Stan H

            A right-winger with facts!?! I applaud you, sir. The fact remains (even from your aggregation) that the most recent polls show higher approval ratings.

            As the ACA is fully implemented and people begin to fully reap the benefits, approval will continue to rise. The great thing, is it will be factually driven. Only the most rabid right-wingers will be able to ignore the facts when they get a major illness, and are only on the hook for a few thousand dollars. Or when their never-before-insured relative is now able to get coverage for an illness that might have killed them pre-ACA. They’re going to feel a little warmer towards the ACA when they go in for their annual check-up, and the doctor says “no charge”. And, they won’t only be Democrats.

          • snowmaggedoned

            JKellogg….would you please block Stan H from this site? He is a nuisance. I can’t flag him enough.

          • snowmaggedoned

            Politico…..second-rate journalists hired to support the White House……

          • Stan H

            As opposed to the college drop-outs you get your opinions from (Hannity and Limbaugh)?

          • whyIoughta

            If you think it’s hatred bc of his skin color, think again. Don’t even go there. It’s all because he’s a complete bumbling fool without a slice of a clue.

          • Stan H

            YOU haven’t posted enough for me to reach a conclusion. However, when people are screaming “impeach the black guy” for the exact same actions of the white guy who preceded him )without any such furor), it raises some legitimate questions as to the true motivation of those people.

          • xoxozo

            If it’s SOOOO good, why doesn’t Owebma and the rest of Congress have it???

            And don’t tell me he and the others will have to wait for procedures….they have raped us for years and the Dem have more $$ than any of them

            From the, “you never hear about that from the media” file – Those “Evil, Rich People” that Democrats are always wailing about are actually – Democrats.

            While I don’t agree in referring to rich people as “Evil”, Democrats are often making such accusations. But what most people don’t realize is that the Top 3 “richest” people in the country are all Democrats. This list includes: Bill Gates, Warren Buffett & Larry Ellison are all Democrats. Together, they are worth $126 Billion Dollars.

            An analysis of the Top 20 Richest People in America (from Forbes Top 100) reveals that a full 60% are actually Democrats. Furthermore, if you look at it from a “family” point of view and not as individuals, that ratio widens even further to: 25% Republican / 75% Democrat.

            (The purpose of this analysis is not who makes the most money, but where they contribute / by party affiliation. Obviously, people from the same family would tend to contribute to the same party.)

            Analyzing the data takes us even further. Not only are there more Democrats in the Top 20 list, but those Democrats are a lot more stingy with their money when it comes to campaign contributions. Republicans coughed up $5.2 million while Democrats squirted out only $2.1 Million. These statistics would indicate that the more you have, the less you give to your political party.

          • Stan H

            Your “analysis” should’ve started with your claim about Congress and the President being exempted from the ACA. That’s more right-wing BS. From the Military Officer’s Assoc. of America, “The bottom line of this overly blown out of proportion story, is that Congress members and staffers are still using the ACA exchange system, and they will now be able to continue to receive similar employer healthcare contributions.”

            Further confirmed by the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/04/25/no-congress-isnt-trying-to-exempt-itself-from-obamacare/

            To summarize your so-called “analysis” the rich Democrats on your list spend less of their money trying to subvert the political process with tons of cash. That’s about right.

          • awakeawareomshanti

            you enjoyed being deceived and lied to. you are mentally UNBALANCED.

          • Stan H

            I’m supporting my statements with facts. You’re calling names like a 5th grader. I think that it’s clear who’s mentally unbalanced.

          • babbott

            I think this died in the wool liberal posts under the screen name “nighthawksh” on other forums. Same song, different forum.

          • xoxozo

            YEAH I’m getting tired of him too.

          • rfrichey

            I’ve decided that old Stan is just having fun pulling chains. We should all know there is no way anyone’s really that dense.

          • xoxozo

            Oh yea Soros doesn’t try to subvert the political process..

            The uca says they & we can choose a plan that’s best for us..I HAD A PLAN THAT WAS GOOD FOR US AND I WANT IT BACK LIKE I WAS PROMISED…PERIOD….LIAR!!!!
            THE ONLY PLANS WE CAN CHOOSE FROM ARE THE ONES THAT THEY GIVE US TO CHOOSE FROM…THAT’S NOT FREEDOM OF CHOICE!!!

          • RIDGERUNNER29

            because none of them have a Communist as President as America does

          • Stan H

            You guys are SO delusional!! This is the President’s 5th year in office. Has he gone to ONE Communist Party meeting? Has he signed any treaties with ANY Communist countries? Has he sent any financial support to any Communist Countries? Has he made any speech saying that Communism is a good thing? Just when do you think he’s going to expose himself as a Communist? My guess is that it’ll be some time AFTER the right-wing gets in touch with reality. The only “communism” is being pulled out of your preternaturally tight @3*+#s.

          • RIDGERUNNER29

            perhaps you should research his being influenced by Frank Davis(an avowed Marxist) growing up on Hawaii,then read Saul Alinsky’s “Rules For Radicals” which he follows step by step.Since you’re unaware of this,I suggest the term ‘low information voter’ should be your new screen name

          • Stan H

            I’ve read the rights-wings’ “Obama’s a communist propaganda ad infinitum, and I know that Obama wrote a paper on Alinsky almost 3 decades ago. I read Mein Kampf in school just about that long ago. It didn’t make me fan of swastikas. I’ve also read about Ted Bundy, but I’ve no urge (or plans) to murder anyone. As I’ve said earlier, just how long do you think this avowed communist is going to avoid DOING anything Communistic?

          • snowmaggedoned

            Karl Marx wrote his Communist Manifesto in the 1840′s.

            It took Lenin in 1917 to bring it to fruition.

            Just because Obama, Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, and Michelle Obama all wrote papers about Saul Alinsky three and four decades ago doesn’t mean they have thrown that ideology to the wind either.

            Look at the actions of these people and their blatant disregard for the Constitution and you can see what ideology they prefer.

            Why do you think Obama said on the eve of the November 2008 General Election that he was about to “transform America”?

            It wasn’t to fix problems in the economy….it was to change our government subversively to a Socialist/Marxist form of government.

            What better time to do it than when Americans are brought to their knees economically to bring about radical change in government?

            It is done all the time. that is how Hitler took power over Germany in a relatively short period of time when the Weimar Republic went financially belly up after returning from WWI.

          • Stan H

            As I posted earlier, “Being slightly paranoid is like being slightly pregnant – it tends to get worse.” – Molly Ivins

          • Hotsauce

            Did Breitbart revoke your troll card so now you come here ?

          • RIDGERUNNER29

            LOL<Guess you missed one of the top priorities of both Marxism and Obamaism is redistribution of wealth,and I might add,Obama has said is one of his goals.You also forget he announced his candidacy for the Illinois State Senate in the living room of self acknowledged Marxist and Domestic terrorists,members of the SDS Students for a Democratic Society who smilingly admit to blowing up Federal Buildings and killing at least one pertson during their terrorist careers,Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.Bill and Bernardine have been welcome guests at White House functions the last 5 1/2 years,I might add.If it looks like a Communist,walks like a Communist and smells like a Communist,it's a Communist and the Bamster fits all 3 characterizations.

          • jamalagrin

            Pull your head out! Those in other countries come to America for serious illnesses and to escape from the government red tape in other countries. These plans in England, France, etc. are disasters. Socialized health care is government care which fails everytime as premiums and taxes sky rocket, doctors flee the system, inferior care, and long waits for treatments.

            When you get government in the mix, the health care is decided by a government official ad not the best treatment prescribed by a doctor and the patient because government run plans eliminate the doctor/patient relationship.

            Then comes the death squads because as the government plan runs out of money even with massive taxes, choices will be made as to who will get treatments. The usual ones to be eliminated are the disabled and the elderly. Say hello, Soylent Green tablets.

            Can government do anything right? They can’t run an efficient post office, or run social security right, or Medicare right. The only thing they should be doing that is prescribed under the Constitution is to protect u,s and secure the borders, and this President and his cronies cannot even do that right.

            The scariest thing that can happen is to answer a knock on the front door, and when you open it, a person says,” I’m here from the Government, and I am here to help you.”

          • Stan H

            You’re obviously the one that needs to “pull their head out”. When was the last time one of the Royal family flew to the U.S for surgery, the French prime minister, or even the Canadian elite (who could drive here). Answer: Not this century! As I said in an earlier post, if our system was SO great, why aren’t the other 1st world countries following us? Instead, we’re following them, because it’s both the smart and moral thing to do.

            You can let your hatred of Obama or your government paranoia keep you from getting coverage, ( and that’ll be on you). The rest of the country has moved past your apocalyptic predictions and is happy that access to healthcare is increasing. Sometimes, the government IS there to help you.

          • snowmaggedoned

            The government is NEVER there to help you.

            It is there to take your money and spend it how THEY see fit.

          • jamalagrin

            What a brainwashed, liberal. did you get that way from attending our wonderful liberal educational public school system, watching MSNBC, or just born that way.
            it appears to me that you and Obama would not recognize the truth if it came down walking down the street and smacked you both in the face.
            Obama’s Administration is on the fast track to create a socialist state here in America, and they are more than half way there. Of course, you would love this because it appears communism and socialism is your cup of tea.
            But not for me and millions of other freedom loving people here in America, and those millions who have escaped from totalitarian governments, as well as those poor people still stuck under communism and Islamic fascism.

          • Stan H

            To most RWNJ’s, any one that disagrees with their dogma is a communist or socialist. Most of you don’t even know the definition of communism, and/or would pee your pants if ever actually faced by a communist.

            The only people trying to destroy this country are the feckless fools who were willing to wreck the economy to try to keep their fellow citizens from getting health insurance like THEY already had. You keep praying for results. Those of us living in the real world will be working to ensure that wisdom is returned to Congress in 2014, and a strong progressive in the White House in 2016.

          • jamalagrin

            Look in the mirror if you want to see what a real communist is. The United States founding documents all talk of the power belonging to the people and the individuals with government serviant to the people, not the other way around. The Declaration of Independence says that “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, and that we are endowed from our creator ( not from government) with certain unalienable rights, among them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” our rights do not come from big daddy government, but from God.

            Our Constitution carries out these truths embodied in the Declaration of Independence by setting up three brances of government with checks and balances and a Bill of Rights for the indivudals to protect them from an intrusive government.

            Ours is the only one in the history of the world that sets up a government subject to the people. You, so called, progressives, are really socialists and communists in disguise ( you don’t fool me) want big daddy government to rule the people in every facet it can do. The only Bill of Rights that you leftists believe in is ” I don’t not want to answer that question on the grounds that it may incriminate me.”

            That’s is the 5th that all of you lefties take when questioned by a Congressional Committee on the wrong doings and corruption when your hands are caught in the cookie jar.

            In case you have not been following this great ObamaCare. Oodles of once, covered, people under their prior health care plans are being left out in the cold with no doctor, no coverage for certain ailments for which they had coverage before, tripling of premiums, and huge deductibles to meet, and long waits for treatment at the health exchanges. I guess you are in the group that gets free care at the low income level paid for by the Middle Class who is getting raped by you social engineers.

            Tell your Democrat Congressmen who are running for re-election tin 2014 to not run away from this Plan, but stand tall and stand up with Obama and brag about how great it is. No, they are running into the tall grass like they never supported this albatross coming down the pike. Phonies, every one of you.

            You have, and are trampling on the 1st Bill of Rights (freedom of religion and speech); the 2nd ( the right to bear arms; the 4th ( the right to be free from unreasonable searches); and the 9th (those rights not given specifically to the Federal government are retained by the States, and then, to the people.

            You, so called, progressives are like a window payne, which we can see right through you for what you all are.That is, a destroyer of individual freedoms and love of big intrusive government.

          • Stan H

            Let’s talk about the power of the people. The people (a majority) elected Barack Obama President TWICE. The representative of the people, Congress (again, by a majority) passed the ACA. The people’s Supreme Court, by a majority ratified the ACA as constitutional.

            A vocal, petulant small minority continues to ignore the fact that the people HAVE spoken, and that they’re the ones trying to rewrite the constitutional framework that got us to where we are.

            I will definitely advise any democratic candidates that I contact to embrace the benefits of the ACA. YOU can continue to be the party of “NO” (and RWNJ’s) we’ll see how that works at the polls.

          • Jerry

            It is when it is forced on us. I owe you zero. Got it?

          • Stan H

            So ANYTHING forced on you is Communism? How about vaccinations? School uniforms? Social Security taxes? I repeat, “get a clue”!

          • Jerry

            I owe you ZERO libber. Try to take it from me. Got it boy.

          • Stan H

            Your posts get stupider and stupider.

          • Jerry

            I’m glad the likes of you thinks so. Now I know I’m right. Your posts get more and more infernal.

          • Ed Morris

            Forcing people to buy something they don’t WANT or NEED > Is Communism!!!! .. Get a CLUE!!!!!

          • Tec Sg Beatty

            I couldn’t give an aeronautical intercourse about what “other” countries do. THIS IS AMERICA; we built most of them. This bullsh!t called “Obamacare” is just one more MASSIVE way to control the people, PERIOD. And yes, it is COMMUNISM. If you believe otherwise, you don’t deserve Freedom.

          • Stan H

            From Merriam-Webster’s dictionary’

            Communism – a way of organizing a society in which the government owns
            the things that are used to make and transport products (such as land, oil,
            factories, ships, etc.) and there is no privately owned property.

            Please call/write them and tell them that they need to add “fined if you don’t buy insurance” (that you almost certainly need) to the definition. (Or, do you make up your own dictionary)?

          • Combat Veteran Seabee

            How come the Prime Minister of Canada had his heart surgery done in the United States? Because they have socialized medicine that even he wouldn’t touch!
            And I don’t need to pay for Sandra Fluke’s “the slut supreme,” birth control either!!!!

          • Stan H

            Nice story. If only it were true. He needed a specialist that wasn’t available in his area, and he had the money to not have to wait, so he went to Mount Sinai. He specifically stated that “I have the utmost confidence in our own health care system in
            Newfoundland and Labrador, but we are just over half a million people,”
            he said.

            “We do whatever we can to provide the best possible health care that
            we can in Newfoundland and Labrador. The Canadian health care system has a great reputation, but this is a very specialized piece of surgery that had to be done and I went to somebody who’s doing this three or four times a day, five, six days a week.”

            Your SINGLE anecdote is neither an endorsement of the U.S. system (where even rich Canadians get speedy VIP treatment) or an indictment of the Canadian system, which effectively treats millions of people on a yearly basis.

          • Hotsauce

            Look up Socialism. We don’t want Communism or Socialism. Neither system works for the benefit of it’s inmates.

          • Stan H

            Massachusetts has had the precursor of the ACA, WITH the individual mandate for almost 10 years, now. They haven’t established a Politburo, nor has anyone called Romney a Communist. Wonder why?

          • Brian Robinson

            Fine then go live in one of those Countries!

          • Stan H

            No need. Universal healthcare (finally) is coming here.

          • John

            Hey stan, you lack the importance that warrants capitalization, you referred to me as a troll. Your punk ass can call me Doctor. Your xbox is calling, as well as Chris Matthews (you can share tingles)

          • Stan H

            Don’t remember calling you a “troll”, but if the shoe fits . .

        • Stan H

          The ACA does NOT have the government decide what health care you get. It merely sets MINIMUM standards for insurance polices bought on the individual market.

        • Stan H

          The ACA does NOT have the government decide what health care you get. It merely sets MINIMUM standards for insurance polices bought on the individual market.

      • xoxozo

        ANOTHER divisive move….young AGAINST old…how long do you think the young are going to want to pay??? SOYLENT GREEN…EUGENICS all in one, Let the death panels BEGIN!!!

        • Stan H

          This is 5th year of the ACA, have YOU seen any “death panels”, ’cause no one else has. Your first mistake was getting “facts” from Sarah Palin.

          • zipper

            5 years of fumbling, bumbling incompetence. not even fully implemented or working properly as i write this. just like a Liberal to ignore the Facts! say, Stan, how about that “humanitarian” gesture by Sebelius when she refused to approve a liver transplant for that little girl because she was a few months short of the arbitrary “approval” age?
            what about all the people who had their present insurance cancelled, only to be forced to go with a replacement that they didn’t need, or want, or could Afford?
            Fools like you don’t wake-up even when the weight falls on them personally. they stand there with a dumb look on their faces and say, “how did this happen?”

          • Stan H

            It’s amazing how the right-wing can spout hypocrisy without any sense of shame (or irony at all). Every time Pres. Obama changes a deadline (to help a program work) you scream “constitutional crisis”, but when an unelected Cabinet official allows the medical transplant system to work as it’s designed to, without intervening to change the rules, it’s a travesty.

            As to the rest of your ranting; Common-sense should tell you that whenever the status quo changes someone is going to be on the losing side. The major goal of the ACA was to increase access to affordable care. It’s achieved that goal, and the CBO’s projection from earlier this week predicts 36 MILLION covered under the ACA by 2017. Dispute the disgruntled few, and the even smaller number that’s worse off under the ACA, that’s a “win” in my book.

          • Lynette

            Excuse me, but Obama wants it called “Obamacare” . Remember? lol……This will be his legacy…….and not a good one. And exactly the legacy he deserves! LMAO!!

          • Stan H

            The Official title is the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. “ACA” is shorter and more convenient.

            I agree with you, it WILL be his legacy. And 50 years from now,when we have universal healthcare like the rest of the industrialized world, (like so many other changes Conservatives fought against) most people will wonder what was the BFD.

          • xoxozo

            It’s the UCA…
            Tell me WHY do most wealthy and leaders of other countries come HERE ( or I should say WHY did) for medical treatment??? As far as the poor…they had Medicare..we didn’t need to lower 98% of the rest of us to give them better care UNLESS we want to reform America into a Socialist country

          • Stan H

            A small number of wealth and powerful people (mostly from 3rd world countries) come to the U.S. because we have the best doctors, NOT because we have the best system. If our healthcare delivery system was so desirable, it would be the norm, instead of an outlier.

            The the AMA endorsed the ACA, because the doctors and hospitals would be getting MORE insured patients. We’re not going to suddenly lose those top doctors because of the ACA. Those same doctors will now be available to more citizens (and probably make more money) because there will be more people covered by insurance. The ACA was implemented to make healthcare more affordable for more Americans, and is progressing towards that goal pretty much on schedule, despite rabid, unprecedented obstructionism (and outright sabotage) by the radical right.

          • awakeawareomshanti

            YOU are the radical. no sane person in AMERICA wants this. do you not read the non partisan news blogs like yahoo, a cross section of normal Americans? you are blind.

          • Stan H

            Maybe YOU should look at the latest polls, which shows that more people are for the ACA than against it. (And the number of people that favor “amend” over “repeal” is almost 2-1).

          • snowmaggedoned
          • Stan H

            I don’t know if you’re (not so) cleverly trying to parse words, or if you really don’t understand the huge difference between people being against the ACA and being against the individual mandate (the survey you cited). Sorry, no cigar.
            http://www.nationalmemo.com/poll-obamacare-popularity-hits-new-high/

          • xoxozo

            You’re wrong, we are going to lose some of them to retirement and some to NOT practicing under the UNAFFORDABLE CARE ACT..

            http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/09/report-83-percent-of-doctors-have-considered-quitting-over-obamacare/

          • Stan H

            Time WILL tell.

          • snowmaggedoned

            Yes it will….and you still won’t admit it then when it fails.

            Just like it has already been a huge failure, yet you still defend it.

          • Lynette

            You mean 50 years from now when we’re a Socialist country?

          • Stan H

            How about a “fair, progressive country, NOT run by the oligarchs”, aided by the “sheeple” that can’t even understand that they’re being fooled into voting against their own interests.

            The Trumps, Kochs and Adelsons care FAR less about your welfare than Progressives ever would..

          • awakeawareomshanti

            those people KNOW HOW TO MAKE MONEY. YOU IDIOT.

          • michele

            Liberals have their hands far deeper in moneyed pockets — Stan, sorry to break this to you, but you are an idiot. Nothing any of us says here is going to fix that. It’s pointless to argue with someone intelligent but lacking in wisdom — the worst kind of idiot. In time you will understand what the rest of us can see. It’s not just Obama who’s bringing us down internationally, socially, medically, morally, educationally, militarily . . . it’s people like you who support him. I can’t believe anyone can still support him after the amateur narcissist he has proven himself to be. You make yourself out to be a fool with every single statement you make in his favor.

          • OBR 54

            Given that life isn’t fair
            Given than human beings are imperfect
            Given that ‘fair’ is a relative term,

            Who gets to define what’s ‘fair’ and why are they the ones who get to decide? That is, why does one group get to decide over another? What makes one group better than another?

          • Stan H

            “They” get to decide because WE elected them to do so. If you don’t like the results, vote them out. I certainly intend to do so.

          • OBR 54

            So, because we elect someone to office, it means they get to decide what’s fair in every aspect of our lives? New one for me.How so?

          • Stan H

            Not EVERY aspect, but quite a few. That’s the type of government that we, as a people, have chosen to live under.

          • OBR 54

            Don’t buy it. Those we elect, we elect to legislate in order to protect life an property. Beyond that, individuals have a right to live as they wish, as long as they don’t impose their will on anyone else. Electing someone to office does not make the qualified to define moral concepts such as fairness.

          • Stan H

            I pretty much agree. So, tell your conservative buddies to lay off interracial marriage, personal drug use, women’s rights, ad infinitum.

          • OBR 54

            Then why do you support statism? e.g. Obamacare?
            BTW, I’m not a conservative–not sure where you got THAT idea. You know what they say about ASSumptions……….

          • Stan H

            I don’t support “statism”. I so strongly support the goals of the ACA. The ACA is based on government regulation of the healthcare market, not government appropriation of it.

            I’m pleased that after a rocky website rollout, it’s exceeded its enrollment goals. I’m NOT wedded to the details, but think that the basic framework is good.

            As to you being a conservative; Let’s see, Cuban, anti-Castro, anti-Obama, against progressives, “conservative” seems pretty on-target to me.

          • OBR 54

            I based my opinion re your supporting statism on your earlier comment where you said you were a Progressive. Do progressives not support centralized control over economic and social affairs, i.e. central planning? It doesn’t have to be total control for it to be statism.
            I don’t believe in labels, nor do I have loyalty to any party. Your description of my politics is based on prejudicial stereotypes. I do not personalize politics. It’s issues, issues, issues.I am anti Castro’s, Obama’s and progressive’s philosophies/policies.And the biggest objection I have to those philosophies/policies is that they require the coercive power of the state to be enforced. I believe that the proper role of government is to prevent other people from harming an individual or taking their property. Government never has any right to interfere with an individual for that individual’s own good.
            Actually, this discussion is very timely. I saw a clip yesterday which reminded me of our conversation. Especially the part where you were talking about how we are the gov’t. This clip explains very well why I don’t agree:
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqoBZLSm1WA

          • marburyvsmadison

            No, progressives do not support central planning. In fact, that notion is so wildly far off the mark that I’m hoping you’ll tell me how you arrived at it in the first place.

            Philosophies are very different from policies. To the extent that the Left in this country has a “philosophy”, it’s mostly based on the enactment of public policies that are based on empiricism and that benefit the country. I think the Left is far, far less ideological and more mainstream than the Right, which is why, although I have no love of government and generally dislike politicians, I’m much more comfortable when the Left is in power than the Right – in the U.S. I’m sure the situation is entirely different in Cuba and perhaps in many other countries as well. But, in the U.S. today, the extremists and ideologues tend to succeed only on the Right. To compare Obama to Castro is pure nonsense and a non-starter for any serious discussion.

            Here’s an interesting article that discusses this Left/Right philosophical divergence in the context of the ACA. I’d be interested to know what you think after reading it..

            http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/04/obamacare-train-did-not-wreck.html

          • OBR 54

            Progressives DO support ultimate betterment of mankind through the leadership, not of the common man, but through trained ‘specialists’–a planning class, if you will. Thus my use of the term central planning. But, rather than debate small points back and forth, since you asked, here are JUST two of my information sources. I try to read sources of varying perspectives. I figure the truth is somewhere in the middle.
            This one is through the Progressive lense:
            http://www.progressiveliving.org/progressivism_1.htm

            On through the libertarian lense:
            http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/guideDesc.asp?catid=93&type=issue

            I did not compare Obama to Castro. I said, “I am anti Castro’s, Obama’s and progressive’s philosophies/policies.And the biggest objection I have to those philosophies/policies is that they require the coercive power of the state to be enforced.” Please note my second sentence. I am opposed to any policy, short of protection of citizens and property, which requires the coercive power of the state in order to be implemented.

          • Stan H

            MY brand of progressivism only supports centralized control over economic and social affairs, i.e. central planning where it necessary to implement an important societal objective.

            In some aspects, our view of the proper role of government isn’t too far apart, though it seems as if you’re ultimately quite a bit more libertarian than I am. .I also I believe that the proper role of government is to prevent other people from harming an individual or taking their property. I believe that the other major functions desirable are to protect the union from outside forces and to protect citizens from dangers that are difficult or impossible for citizens to handle on their own.

          • snowmaggedoned

            50 years from now we will NOT have universal healthcare.

            We won’t survive as a country for 50 more years BECAUSE of Obama and his destructive policies that have bankrupted the country.

            But…who cares…..you will be dead by then and it won’t matter to you.

          • Stan H

            I don’t know about you, but I fully expect to be here 50 years from now. I wonder do you guys on the right REALLY believe that almost every industrialized country in the world can offer THEIR citizens universal healthcare, but the U.S. can’t. . Why is that?

            If you’d look at facts instead of engage in demagoguery, you’d realize all that the President has done for the country. Just one example; the month that Obama took office, our economy lost over 800,00 jobs. Last month, our economy CREATED 192,000. But according to you, his “destructive policies” are bankrupting the country. Fortunately, the majority of the country does look at the facts, (as they did in the last two presidential elections), and Pres. Obama’s progressive policies will continue forward.

          • Lynette

            “The major goal of the ACA was to increase access to affordable care.” OH PLEASE!!!! Thank you for the good laugh though. Please tell me exactly how many people are paying LESS than they were before their insurance companies cancelled them.

          • Stan H

            Maybe you live in your own world, where they do, but in the real world, healthcare insurance premiums NEVER gone down. They go up every year. What is indisputable is that the percentage of annual increases since the signing of the ACA is the lowest in history.

          • Lynette

            And you heard this where?? Oh. The mainstream media so it MUST be true!

          • Stan H

            Well, let’s be direct. Have YOUR health insurance premiums EVER gone DOWN?

          • awakeawareomshanti

            so now they are through THE ROOF! brilliant!!!

          • OBR 54

            But nobody has started paying ACA premiums yet. I’m not being contentious here. Do you have some proof that there is not only a correlation, but an actual causation stating that the decrease in premium increases were as a result of the ACA?

          • Stan H

            People started paying premiums in November (some even earlier on the State exchanges). No, I don’t have any proof that the slowing of annual increases is due to the ACA. It would be premature, and I try to avoid jumping to conclusions. It might be just a coincidence. If it is, it’s a handy one. It seems that you’ve conceded that the rate has slowed, but just in case: http://aon.mediaroom.com/2013-10-17-Aon-Hewitt-Analysis-Shows-Lowest-U-S-Health-Care-Cost-Increases-in-More-Than-a-Decade

          • xoxozo

            OUR premiums went up $400.00 A MONTH with a 6000.00 deductible and a 1500.00 out of pocket and a worse plan…BET YOU”RE on the Medicaid or Subsidy plan.
            I’VE GOT A GREAT IDEA…WHY DON’T YOU SEND US $200.00 A MONTH TO SUBSIDIZE US????

          • Stan H

            Yes, I get a subsidy. Sorry for your loss. BTW, I’m certain that your plan is NOT “worse”.

          • xoxozo

            YES our plan is worse..our son is an insurance broker (24yrs) and MOST, including the small businesses he handles & people’s plans are more expensive and have HIGHER deductibles and HIGHER out of pocket. Our co-pay was $30…NOW $60.
            Deductible was $1500.00 NOW $6000.00.
            Plus it does not cover a couple of meds I used.

          • Stan H

            Your new plan also includes free preventative care, and has an annual spending cap, and has NO lifetime limits on coverage.

          • snowmaggedoned

            And it also says that in order to have very expensive life-saving surgeries you will have to be approved by a group of bureaucratic appointees who don’t know anything about the human body or medicine.

            Way to go…..sheeple.

          • Stan H

            That’s a Sarah Palin RWNJ fantasy that has absolutely NO basis in fact, yet you gullible sheeple inhale it like oxygen.

            The law itself says that the IPAB is an ADVISORY board, with no
            authority to change anything. What part of “advisory” does the right-wing find so
            difficult to understand? From Forbes, “The IPAB will consist of
            independent healthcare experts who are FORBIDDEN (caps mine), BY LAW,
            from proposing changes that will affect Medicare coverage or quality.
            In other words, they are a FAR cry from a death panel, with the ACA
            specifically noting that this group is not allowed to do anything that
            would “ration” healthcare. The law also makes sure that the IPAB is
            not in a position to make policy, but instead to simply make
            recommendations to the Secretary of Health and Human Services,
            proposals that Congress is specifically empowered to override if it sees
            fit.”

            Only sheeple believe otherwise.

          • zipper

            WOW. i mean WOW! how you twist everything around to suit your own flawed viewpoint is what’s “amazing.” Obama cannot, on his whim, just change a law to help his political aims. yes! that is un-Constitutional. and to draw a parallel to a bureaucrat, who could save a young girl’s life by making a small exception to the rules, is asinine!
            your true mentality is showing when you think that someone always has to “lose” when there is any sort of change.
            “common-sense” says to me that if the proposed changes were well planned and actually sensible, everyone would benefit without there having to be any “losers.”
            a true “win” would be having you, and those like you, move to some foreign Socialist “paradise” where your distorted delusions would be cheered.

          • Stan H

            You are SO wrong. Pres. Obama, as the Chief Executive Officer has the authority to issue Executive Orders and regulations to implement Federal statutes, (of which the ACA is one). Despite the braying from the radical right, It’s not even a close call, it’s well-settled law. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/11/14/white-house-defends-legality-of-obamacare-fix/
            http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/11/14/white-house-defends-legality-of-obamacare-fix/

            No matter how you try to parse things, your stance is hypocritical. An elected President delaying parts of a law to make it work, better is terrible, but an unelected bureaucrat overstepping her authority and making a life-or-death decision, changing the order of who gets a life-changing/saving transplant is just fine. If you can’t see the dichotomy in that logic, we don’t have any common ground to discuss anything.

            Your statements about the status quo are illuminating. Anyone with any intelligence knows that change in the status quo benefits some subset to the detriment of another. The price of cheese goes up, dairy farmers get more money, consumers have less. Cars get more fuel-efficient, the need (and price of gas) goes down. There’s a million common-sense examples. I guess that the old saying was right, “common-sense’ is anything but.”

            “Everyone would benefit” from a rule change is the kind of “pie in the sky” utopian expectations that the right-wing always accuses progressives of having. I hate to disappoint you, but Progressive aren’t going anywhere (except to the White House) HILLARY 2016!!

          • snowmaggedoned

            Executive orders are not unchecked strokes of power from the president’s pen; they can be challenged and deemed unlawful by federal courts. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court determined during the Korean War that executive orders must fit within a certain sphere of power and cannot simply defy Congressional intent.

            Although this area of law remains in flux, executive orders have the most legitimacy when the president is acting with the implied or express authority of Congress. However, these executive orders may still legally shape policy if the laws or Congress have been silent on an issue.

            Because Congress is rarely silent on major issues, executive orders are most common in areas where the president has been granted discretion by Congress. Regardless of the president’s relationship with the federal legislature, executive orders will only allow a very small policy window in which to make changes.

            Obama’s EO are illegitimate as he does NOT have the approval of Congress.

          • Stan H

            Your analysis is incorrect. The intent (and will) of Congress, is immaterial. The executive Order(s) only needs to be in furtherance of implementing a federal statute. EVEN a federal statute that some of Congress disapproves of. The Heckler decision will be precedential if someone decides to challenge the EO’s. Ted Cruz and his colleagues have made a lot of noise about them, but it was for “show” (as so much of what they do is). They know better.

          • snowmaggedoned

            I bed your pardon, but the will of the people (through Congress) is everything!

            We have over 500 duly elected representatives that are chosen to go to Washington to be our voice and proclaim our will. If Congress as a unified body says no to the President, he had best listen to the will of the people.

            In the earliest years of our Republic, we didn’t call them Executive Orders. They were called Proclamations. They were few and far between and encompassed everything from declaring a day of Thanksgiving to staying out of the war with England and France.

            What about the Constitution? It describes presidential power broadly. There isn’t anything in the Constitution that authorizes a Presidential Executive Order or limits what a president can do with it.

            According to the Congressional Research Service, Executive orders arise from “implied constitutional and statutory authority”. “If issued under a valid claim of authority and published in the Federal Register, executive orders may have the force and effect of law.”

            If it isn’t written anywhere in the Constitution as a legitimate power authorized to the President, how does any President interpret “implied authority” is meant from blank space in our founding document?

            Many executive orders are in a twilight zone of dubious constitutional legitimacy if not open defiance of the Constitution, especially when they amount to lawmaking without congressional approval. Many (especially under FDR) were challenged in court and struck down because they were not Constitutional.

            While “implied constitutional authorized” executive orders look like an easy option for a beleaguered president, they increase the temptation to over-reach.

            In Obama’s case, he has issued EO’s that change law that was passed and signed off by himself. According to EO precedent, he is restricted to change only government agency policies that come under his Executive office.

            Obama has continually taken EO power far beyond what has been accepted (and that is including FDR who was as close to a Dictator as this country ever had, hence the reason for passing a Constitutional Amendment that limits the President to only two terms). That is the very reason why his EO’s are being challenged in courts across the country and have been and will continue to be struck down.

            He is a Dictator wannabe. Hugo Chavez gave Obama his autobiography how to take over a country and it looks like Obama read it.

          • Stan H

            First, Congress is ONE branch of the Government. Second, “unified voice” are you SERIOUS? Presidents from Washington forward have used Executive Orders on hundreds of different subjects and practically all of them have been upheld by the Supreme Court as a valid exercise of authority granted by the Constitution.

            Not ONE of Pres. Obama’s executive Orders have been turned over in any court, and I expect that track record to continue. BTW, if he WAS a real dictator, half of the posters on this page would either be dead, or on a gulag somewhere.

          • snowmaggedoned

            1. Name me one “Executive Order” made by George Washington.

            2. Many have been challenged and defeated in courts. FDR, for example, issued his Executive Orders to form all his entire New Deal policies. FDR issued 3,728 Executive Orders during his years as President…..that is a Dictatorship. It is not what our Founding Fathers wished or constructed in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights (the Constitution’s first Amendment).

            Have you noticed that we don’t have his CCC (Civilian Conservation Corps), CWA (Civil Works Administration), FSA (Federal Security Agency), NRA (National Recovery Act), HOLC ( Home Owner’s Loan Corporation), PWA (Public Works Administration), WPA (Works Progress Administration), and many other programs were taken to the Supreme Court in 1936 and 1937. Nearly every New Deal program was found to be un-Constitutional and rendered obsolete immediately. Very few survived to this day and even those are responsible for most of our huge national debt such as Social Security, Federal Housing Authority, and so forth.

            There are two cases that are the Supreme Court right now that are challenging two of Obama’s EO’s.

            Currently the Hobby Lobby Freedom of Religion case is being heard by the Justices. We will find out the results supposedly in June. If this case goes in favor of Hobby Lobby, the entire ACA will be in jeopardy and it won’t be long until the whole program collapses.

            The other is the National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning where Obama appointed members to the NLRB illegally while the Senate was still in session instead of during recess.

            And in your own words…..the Executive Branch is only ONE branch of government. the position of President is only to ENFORCE laws that have been passed by Congress (both houses) and signed by the Executive Branch. That includes ALL laws that have ever been passed in previous years and decades.

            Obama has ignored many laws that have been passed by past Congresses and Presidents. Those casual refusals to enforce previously passed laws in in direct un-Constitutionality of the Executive Branch’s duties and are the equivalent of “high crimes and misdemeanors”.

            If you attempt to make the point that other Presidents have ignored passed law, name me one who has.

            I am not talking about ignoring past Executive Orders….that is not law. We do not continue to follow FDR’s EO #9066 that authorized the internment of hundreds of thousands of Japanese Americans during WWII in labor camps.

            Or how about FDR’s Executive Order #6102 that forbade any American to hold gold in their possession, but instead to turn all their personal gold over to the government. All that illegally confiscated gold was melted into gold bars and then put into a then newly built Ft. Knox.

            There are thousands of EO’s that are no longer enforced, but that all are still on the books and have never been rescinded. All of the above examples have never been removed.

            Obama is a Dictator. Just because he hasn’t sought us all out, yet, and killed us for speaking the truth and our minds doesn’t mean that he won’t in the future when the opportunity is right.

            Even Stalin waited until he knew for certain he could murder his own citizens and the world would say and do nothing to save the Russian people. Same thing with Mao and Pol Pot.

          • Stan H

            “On
            June 8, 1789, three months after he was sworn in as President of
            the United States, George Washington sent an instruction to the
            holdover officers of the Confederation government asking each of
            them to prepare a report “to impress me with a full, precise, and
            distinct general idea of the affairs of the United States” that
            they each handled. Harold C. Relyea,
            Presidential Directives: Background and Overview,
            Congressional Research Service, CRS Report for Congress No.
            98-611 GOV, July 16, 1998, p. 1, citing John C. Fitzpatrick, ed.,
            The Writings of George Washington, Vol. 80 (Washington,
            D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1939), pp. 343-344.

            NONE of Obama’s Executive Orders have been overturned, and neither the Hobby Lobby Case or the Noel Canning case devolve around Executive Orders.

            He’s not a dictator, but if he wanted to be Dubya was a good example, and I didn’t hear the right-wing going into conniption fits then. I wonder why?

            BTW, Social Security is funded by contributions and has absolutely NOTHING to do with the federal deficit. That’s another RWNJ lie that has NO basis in fact whatsoever.

          • snowmaggedoned

            That is exactly what I thought you would say.

            Executive orders were not issued or called Executive Orders until 1862.

            What George Washington issued were “proclamations”. And everything he asked for was well within his limits according to the Constitution.

            BTW…Washington only issued 8 proclamations.

            You are once again incorrect.

            One of the promises made to Blue-dog Democrats that were on the fence about voting for Obamacare was that abortion would not be included in the law.

            The Hobby Lobby case is centered around 4 required abortifacients that is under the Obamacare law. They are challenging the law on grounds that they are against abortion and abortifacients on their religious values.

            Obama’s Executive Order #13535 after the law was passed and signed was a ploy to get Representative Bart Stupak to coerce his other like-minded pro-life Democrats to vote for ACA.

            #http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13535

            However, once the bill was passed and Obama made it look like he would follow through with his promise to Stupak, he made it a phony executive order that merely restated the bill’s provisions rather than prohibited abortion funding under it.

            The NLRB vs. Channing case is only about an Obama Executive Order that he chose to issue while the Senate was still in session. Obama chose to appoint people to the NLRB in direct violation to his Constitutional authority allowed. He pretended the Senate was in recess although no recess had been given by Harry Reid. He did this to put people in the NLRB that he knew would never be allowed to sit there with Senatorial consent.

            Obama abused his Executive Order power in both cases. One, to fool pro-life Democrats to get his ACA passed, and two, to bypass the Senate to appoint members to the NLRB.

            Obama is a Dictator. Bush 43 was not.
            FDR and Wilson were Dictators, as well.

            Social Security is not only funded by contributions. My mother collected SS for years much more than she ever paid into the program. SS was never conceived to be a retirement program nor was it conceived to be a mandatory one at that.
            That is the only reason why it survived the 1937 Supreme Court decision to allow it to stay….because at the time, it was not a mandatory program.

            Over time, politicians screwed with the program and turned it into the Ponzi scheme we have today. You can thank LBJ for doing most of the rape of the program. He need to raid the SS funds to start his new Medicare and Medicaid programs in 1965 and 1966.

            Democrats love those programs and refuse to fix them. If they are so wonderful, then why did we have to change our current healthcare system?

            Nearly all the “enrollees” to Obamacare are actually signing up for Medicaid. So what the hell did we need to take away millions of covered Americans for if only the “uninsured” are just going to sign up for Medicaid in the first place?

            The Social Security Program has EVERYTHING to do the deficit and the debt. We spend more on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid than any other expenditure in the country.

            Go away, troll and talk to your own kind in the mental asylum.

            You know nothing about history and you know nothing about what Obama has been doing to this country for the past 5 years. You have had your head up your a$$ and only live to praise him.

            Go away.

          • Stan H

            Would it make you happier if Pres. Obama called them “proclamations”? Appointments to Federal agencies aren’t Executive Orders, and your “Stupak” Executive Order (while interesting) has no legal basis (or impact) in the Hobby Lobby case.

            Why don’t you tell me how you’re “in session” with a handful of Senators (out of 50) without even having the majority leader there, and nowhere near a quorum to do business?

            As to Social Security, get a clue: http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/recent-business/ronald-reagan-was-right

          • snowmaggedoned

            No.

            The Dictator doesn’t need to call them “Proclamations” since I already told you that the term has been redesigned as Executive Orders since 1862.

            Or did you not thoroughly read my post>

            Obviously not.

            You are correct when you say that appointments to Federal agencies are NOT done by Executive Orders.

            However, that is EXACTLY what your Dictator surely did.

            He took advantage of a time when the Senate was in still in session OFFICIALLY!

            On January 4, 2012, Obama announced recess appointments to three seats on the National Labor Relations Board: Sharon Block, Terence F. Flynn, and Richard Griffin.

            Incredulously, Obama forgot to notice that Congress had not officially been in recess as pro forma sessions had been held when he made those appointments.

            As for the future solvency of the Social Security Program, read on:

            http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikepatton/2013/06/12/is-the-social-security-trust-fund-solvent/

            Denial is a real problem for you. I suggest going for counseling or better yet, psyciactric therapy.

          • Stan H

            A “flagrant abuse of power” is holding “mock” Senate session without even a quorum, for the sole purpose of frustrating Constitutionally-authorized Presidential appointment without giving them a vote. BS like that is why Democrats finally exercised the “nuclear option”.

            Yes, the Supreme Court will rule on both of those cases. The president has already appointed and the Democratic-ruled Senate has already confirmed replacement members to the NLRB, and the Supreme Ct. decision will have no effect on those appointments.

            Your Forbes article DOESN’T dispute the fact that Social Security is funded by payroll taxes, etc. It merely claims that (what everyone already knows) if changes are not made, the Social Security Trust Fund will become insolvent. I’m not in denial, you’re simply uninformed (and illogical).

          • snowmaggedoned

            And you are still making up excuses for this joke of a President and his unethical administration and cronies.

            Obama makes Nixon look like a saint.

            YOU are the one who is uninformed and clueless.

            YOU are the one who is illogical and in denial about a party that based on lies, deceit, name-calling, and the poor treatment of women and minorities.

            YOU are a joke.

          • Stan H

            People like you AREN’T joke, because it’s very unfunny to be so hate-filled and illogical, as well as clueless.

          • snowmaggedoned

            Stan…time for you go to back to your regular job at Media Matters.

            Really…you should try to get a life and quit coming to sites like this to harass people who do not share your political views.

            You will feel much more at home at sites like Salon or HuffPo. Those people are right up your alley.

            Move along, troll…….

          • Stan H

            What’s wrong? You only believe in freedom of speech when it mirrors your myopic, neanderthal viewpoints?

          • snowmaggedoned

            What on earth is wrong with you?

            You really are a nut job.

            Go away and get a life, troll.

          • Stan H

            I’ll take that as a “yes”. In case I’m wrong, and you actually care about the facts (which I doubt) , here’s a good analysis of how the ACA is working from last week: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/03/affordable-care-act-is-working-104942_Page2.html#.U0DWF6JCm4Q

          • snowmaggedoned

            One in Denial:

            Here is a more truthful analysis if Obamacare is working:

            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2597357/White-House-boasts-10-million-Americans-signed-Obamacare-Medicaid-enrollees-INMATES-added.html

            Now be a good little useless troll and crawl back under your rock……….

            I must admit, though, you are a quite fun village idiot to play with and poke fun.

          • Stan H

            Again, no analysis whatsoever. Even if the facts cited are true (they list Fox News as a source, so it’s doubtful) nothing in your article says that Obamacare isn’t working. I guess the headline caught your attention like something bright and shiny. The article YOU cited says “Higher enrollment figures have given a
            boost to Obama and his Democratic allies against Republicans and other
            critics of healthcare reform by demonstrating stronger-than-expected
            demand for the benefits available under the new law.”

            It further states “The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that 8 million people will sign up for Medicaid coverage under the Obamacare expansion this year.

            The CBO originally projected 7 million private enrollees by this week’s
            deadline, but scaled back its forecast to 6 million after last autumn’s
            botched launch of the federal marketplace website, HealthCare.gov.” Yep, that article’s really a ringing denunciation of the ACA. LOL!! Unfortunately for you, this “village idiot’ can read. Too bad that you can’t.

          • snowmaggedoned

            You really do need to seek out therapy for your mental affliction.

            Have no doubt that you are the only village idiot on this thread.

            Medicaid is NOT Obamacare. It is a separate program that was established under LBJ’s first term as President in the mid-1960′s.

            However, because of the outrageously sky-rocketed high prices of ACA, people that thought they could afford Obamacare (after all….it was PROMISED to be cheaper and save every family $2,500 a year on their healthcare coverage) found out that they can’t afford ACA and had to go to Medicaid and sign up for coverage:

            http://youtu.be/_o65vMUk5so

            Those poor souls that were thrown off their healthcare insurance were told to go to their state exchanges if they had one or go the healthcare.gov and sign up there.

            Originally Obama and all the Demorats that passed this wretched POS law changed the entire healthcare system for supposedly 31 million uninsured Americans.

            A survey by McKinsey & Company found that only 27 percent of the people nationally who reported buying a new policy in February for 2014 were previously uninsured.

            That translates to only 837,000 people that were previously uninsured in the month of February 2014 signed up and paid premiums in the entire United States.

            And that was heralded as a great month for enrollments!!!

            Hahahahaha….what a joke!!

            Yet, Obama touted this entire upheaval to our healthcare system because of the over “31 million uninsured”.

            And guess what, even if the number 7.1 million is honest (which I doubt immensely), what happened to the 23.9 million still uninsured by the deadline on March 1st???

            Now you sit there on your pompous a$$ and claim success if they have signed up a mere 7.1 million??????

            What a laugh you are and this stupid program!

            And another thing; many enrollees have NOT paid their premiums for this insurance program.

            The most recent stats for both enrollees AND who have paid for the first month (not the whole year as it used to be for insurance) in Obamacare is about 80% with Blue Cross/Blue Shield. Aetna is showing about the same stats.

            Nevada shows only 62% have paid.

            Oregon has spent over $300 million on a worthless website and hasn’t even enrolled ONE person so far in their program:

            http://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/2014/04/03/look-at-who-is-paying-obamacare-premiums-or-not/

            Maryland spent $200+ million of Maryland taxpayer dollars on their crappy website and it fell apart so now they have to pay an additional $30+ million to shut down and piggyback on to the Connecticut exchange:

            http://www.politico.com/story/2014/03/maryland-health-insurance-exchange-104478.html

            California’s exchange is a mess. New federal data show that only 868,936 Californians signed up for health insurance in the state’s exchange from October 1, 2013 through March 1, 2014.

            Only 868,936.

            Do you know how many people live in California? The latest figures show the population is 37,253,956!!!!

            I would hardly call that a success story:

            http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-covered-california-obamacare-enrollment-20140311,0,950564.story#axzz2y7sVfDFq

            I guess you haven’t taken the time to research and find out how much this program is going to affect jobs, the economy, and especially the elderly…..the most fragile and vulnerable in our society with the exception of young children:

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2014/02/04/inconvenient-facts-for-obamacare/

            http://thefederalist.com/2014/02/04/5-devastating-obamacare-facts-from-cbos-latest-economic-report/

            http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/05/obamacare-impact-on-seniors

            The real insidious goal has been to have this ACA program collapse. That is why the website contractor for ACA was a complete boob. It was designed and expected to fail.

            However, once millions of Americans were in an uproar when they got their policy cancelations in the mail when ACA went live on October 1, 2013, Obama and all the Demorats had to do the Texas two-step and pretend to care about the stupid website and get something up and working.

            Obama didn’t know that those millions of formerly insured were going to get cancelation notices. He honestly thought that the insurance companies would play politics and say it in a deceptive manner that their insurance policies were not canceled, but rather they were being “transferred” to the new Obamacare.

            However, Obama tied the insurance companies’ hands because Obama made every one of those insured policies obsolete on October 1, 2013. They had no choice but to send out cancelation notices to let them know to go to the website and get new coverage. Many of those health insurance companies are not participating in Obamacare exchanges so they had to let their previously insured policies be canceled:

            http://youtu.be/otmjtqU7tQU

            And Oblahblah LIED to everyone when he said “if you like your healthcare insurance, you can keep your healthcare insurance, PERIOD. And if you like your doctor, you can keep you doctor, PERIOD:

            http://youtu.be/iGAdrQ2RpdM

            And this is one of my personal favorites:

            http://youtu.be/gw3yoyIw3oM

            The ACA is meant to be temporary.

            The video below is a confessional that shows the true purpose of ACA:

            http://youtu.be/xtZMhx3Ceng

            You are a used up tool and a troll.

            I know you can’t help yourself. I’m sure you are a product of the public education system that was taken over by the Communists when Jimmy Carter created the Department of Education and ruined our schools.

            I feel sorry for you, really. You try to defend a complete disaster and keep your ideology in tact.

            If you really want to keep from losing your mind any further, I suggest you go to Media Matters or HuffPo and be with your own kind.

            You will be happier when you can sing to your own choir.

            This is to whom Stan gives his vote:

            http://youtu.be/7KV8W2UiAuA

            As for me, there is nothing….and I mean NOTHING you can say to me to convince me over to your way of thinking.

            So why are you knocking yourself out to change my mind?

            Maybe you are a masochist and enjoy having me intellectually and verbally beat up on you.

            It is an effort in futility on your part.

            Now run along and go outside an play now……it’s recess time.

            LOL…LOL….LOL….LOL….LOL….LOL…..LOL….LOL…..LOL….LOL…..LOL…LOL….LMFAO

          • Stan H

            YOU really need to get a clue. I don’t know if you’re trying to parse words, or just ignorant. We ALL (I hope) know that Medicaid is a separate program from the ACA. We all (should) also know that Medicaid expansion is a major component of the ACA. If you actually researched the issues, you would know that Medicaid expansion featured prominently in the Supreme Court decision ratifying the ACA. The Court struck down the part of the law that required states to expand the medicaid program (or lose Medicaid funds completely). Again, I can’t tell if you just don’t know any better, or if you’re just trying to throw out a “red herring”. Either way, it didn’t work.

            As to your nice little youtube video, I do admit that Pres. Obama was not consistent in his statements, ranging from “savings UP TO to $2,500/yr to saying a family would save $2,500 per year. I’ll admit that he misspoke if YOU admit that that the vast majority of the statements that YOU just cited, say that $2,500.00 is a maximum, NOT what everyone will achieve. (Though, I’ve pretty much given up hope on intellectual honesty from you).

            Love your videos. So, you don’t like Rep. Pelosi, I would have NEVER seen that coming. LOL. I hope that you didn’t expect me to be against a “public option” or “single payer”, ’cause, if so, I hate to disappoint you, but that’s what the country needs. (And, what I’m sure that we’ll ultimately have, after we drag conservatives kicking and screaming into the 21st century.)

            If you are the least bit interested in the FACTS, here’s an analysis of how the ACA is ACTUALLY working, from last week: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/03/affordable-care-act-is-working-104942.html#.U0Ggp6JCm4T
            And a LA Times article among the same lines: http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-obamacare-uninsured-national-20140331,0,6550360,full.story#axzz2xYVbfomi
            DOCUMENTED success! NOT “sour grapes” baseless predictions of failure.

            I think that you are correct on ONE point, I’m pretty sure that even the facts likely won’t change your myopic, neanderthal world-view, but I’m still going to combat the lies and misstatements when I run across them, whether you like it or not.

          • snowmaggedoned

            Since you only use Politico as you main source of “facts” to present to all your stupid ignorant rants, I think I speak for everyone on this thread that we are done with you.

            Not only are you and idiot, but a droll and boring one at that.
            YAWNNNNNNNNN…….Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

          • Stan H

            As usual, “fast and loose with the facts”. I’ve cited: The New York Times, The LA Times, Media Matters, Snopes, and NUMEROUS others. On the other hand, you’ve cited . . . a few of the voices residing in your skull.

          • Stan H

            Since you don’t like Politico for facts, why don’t we try the (non-partisan) CBO?

            Here’s a great article on today’s CBO report with more FACTS that
            you’ll undoubtedly want to ignore.
            http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/cbo-affordable-care-act-getting-even

            I particularly like this quote, “The report found that coverage is likely
            to cost LESS thanks to premiums being lower than expected through the exchange marketplaces. In other words, take pretty much everything
            you’ve heard from congressional Republicans lately and believe the
            opposite.”

            I also liked his conclusion:
            “So, taken together, what have we learned of late?

            * ACA enrollment through exchanges reached 7.1 million, ahead of early estimates. (I believe the final figure is 7.5)

            * The ACA is quickly reducing the uninsured rate.

            * Thanks in part to the ACA, health care spending has slowed
            dramatically and health care inflation is at its lowest point in 50
            years.

            * According to the Department of Commerce, the ACA is also having a positive effect on personal incomes.

            * And according to the CBO, the system is even more affordable than previously projected.

            There are potential pitfalls ahead and some unanswered questions that will
            take time to resolve. But given the independent information that’s come
            to light in recent weeks, this is a system that’s working. The right can
            either acknowledge reality or embrace
            delusions and conspiracies, but the facts are quite evident for those
            WHO CARE TO LOOK (my caps). Why don’t you chew on that for a while.

          • michele

            Wow. She has just the resume you must like after her total failure, dishonesty, and callousness in Bengazi. She was thrown off the Watergate team when she was 27 for unethical and dishonest behavior and she hasn’t changed her modus operandi since then. Way to show your own lack of ethics to back this moral disaster of a human being.

          • Stan H

            Benghazi was a regretettable tragedy that the right-wing managed to turn into a cause celebre for attempted political gain. The Watergate affair was nearly half a century ago. She’s done wonderful things for this country since then, and I’ll be proud to work hard for her election campaign.

          • snowmaggedoned

            Fool.

          • michele

            Regrettable and preventable. That was Hilary’s job, which she failed to do. Then she tried to cover it with lies, blame shifting, and diversion. She If you watched the hearings, it was not the right that was trying to politicize it. It is in the interest of a hearing to try to

          • Stan H

            I agree, it was both regrettable and preventable, and I agree that Hillary deserves part of the blame (not nearly as much as the military) for not securing the consulate. I don’t think that your claim of lies, blame shifting, or diversion is accurate. She quit to take a break before running for president, I definitely will support her candidacy.

            It was DEFINITELY the right that succeeded in politicizing the incident, though EVERY in-depth investigation (the Accountability Review Board, The (GOP-chaired and run) House Armed Services Committee, the Senate Intelligence Committee, and the New York Times’ month-long investigations) all found that there was no “cover-up”, and that everything possible was done to repel the attack and rescue our people. Nevertheless, over a year later, practically every other sentence from the right-wing is “Benghazi”. THAT’s politicizing the attack.

          • michele

            Part of the reason that the ball got dropped in Bengazi is that Hilary was campaigning on the world stage, making a 48 country tour in preparation for her 2016 bid for office. She was thinking of herself and her own aspirations, not those she was supposed to protect. She was derelict. If she is to blame, why would you think of giving her an even higher position? But I’ve noticed that the State Department seems to have become a vehicle for rewarding those loyal to the ruling party — doling out ambassador positions to campaign contributors, etc., who don’t have the qualifications or interest in the countries they serve in. Amateur hour in the White house has spread world wide. I am really embarrassed by the actions of this administrations reps, and the first lady’s classless act in China. How can you still support these people?

          • Stan H

            While Ms. Clinton is an extremely smart, accomplished lady, she’s not a soldier or military strategist. She controlled no troops or military forces. She shares some of the blame, but to claim that the incident happened because she was campaigning is baseless and unwarranted.

            Patronage appointments to ambassador positions has been an American tradition for decades, and Pres. Obama’s predecessor embraced it whole-heartedly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSEOd1W3fZA

            I seriously doubt if any of Pres. Obama’s appointees come close to the boorish behavior of Bush’s John Bolton. Just what “classless act” did Michelle Obama commit? I sincerely hope that you’re not talking about her eating at a Tibetan restaurant? I can (and do) support “these people” as you put it, because they’re far superior to the alternatives on the right-wing.

          • zipper

            “well-settled law” — hardly!
            you reference an article from the Post by an admitted Liberal commenter, wherein the Opinion of one man is your foundation. meanwhile, back at Reality Ranch, Obama alters the established law to favor a select group for political gain. that’s called Discrimination. it is also un-Constitutional; “take care that the Laws be FAITHFULLY executed.” (article II, sect. 3, clause 5). Congress approved no changes to the ACA. your first erroneous claim disproved.

            “You are SO wrong.” to say my stance is hypocritical on the next point. there is no dichotomy in logic in finding the illegal, over-stepping actions of the president, which have sweeping ramifications, to be objectionable compared to a single case involving a humanitarian act to save a little girl’s life, which by the way, was ordered by a federal judge.
            no Liberal mental contortions will convince “anyone with any intelligence” that these two cases are at all comparable.

            yes, “common-sense”…is not so common. you are living proof of this, as evidenced by your “detriment” examples. you have no concept of the intricacies of the free-market economy. for example, motor vehicles have never been more fuel efficient, yet gas is Still at over $3.50/gal. there are far more factors that influence the price of petroleum products beyond fuel-efficiency. and people are not wont to change their driving habits much, if at all, so the “need” will not drop. of course, as a good little Progressive does, you ignore those facts that inconveniently disrupt your delusional propaganda.

            Conservatives, despite the Left-wing propaganda to the contrary, have the welfare of the people at heart. they would support a “rule change” that was, as i stated, well-planned and sensible. Obamacare is not.

            the only place i expect Hillary Clinton to be in 2016, is in a federal prison for her role in the Benghazi debacle.

          • Stan H

            Yes, well-settled law. The President did NOT “alter the established law to favor a select group for political gain, he altered certain deadlines in the law TO EFFECTUATE the law passed by Congress and ratified by the Supreme Court.

            In the history of this country, only 2 of the Presidency’s thousands of Executive Orders have been overturned by the Courts, (i.e. well-settled law). In fact, the power was even expanded by Court in Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha, which basically stripped Congress’ ability to legislatively veto most Executive Orders.

            Ms. Sebelius’ position was that she didn’t have the authority to make that exception to the rules. Once the Judge directed it, Ms. Sebelius expedited notification to the transplant list, and didn’t appeal the ruling.
            Your position IS hypocritital, whether you admit it or not.

            Of course, the free market is more complex than my simple examples, but the principle is clear (to anyone who wants to see it) and ironclad. Any change to any status quo benefits some to the detriment of others.

            Benghazi is a VERY dead horse, (that RWNJ’S continue to beat) and it will be a fitting testament to how overblown the “Benghazi scandal” was when she’s sworn in on January 20, 2017.

          • zipper

            thank you for providing a little mirth(if nothing else) while i sip my morning coffee.

          • Stan H

            Happy to be of service. You ought to try “truth” with it more often.

          • awakeawareomshanti

            speaking of UNELECTED, how ’bout those dead voters voting dozens of times? this POTUS is a fraud in every sense of the word.

          • Stan H

            Show me some actual proof of that, and we can have a discussion. Matter of fact, just give me proof of ONE example of ONE dead voter posting a dozen votes.

          • snowmaggedoned

            Read this and weep:

            http://www.rnla.org/votefraud.asp

            Notice how every instance of voter fraud is done by Democrats?

            It is because that is the only way they can win elections.

            Democrats = the party of lies and deceit.

          • Stan H

            You’ve listed a few isolated instances, NONE of which included the requested ” ONE dead voter posting a dozen votes.” You’ve listed a couple of dozen irregularities across the entire country. Pres. Obama won by over 5 MILLION votes (an average of 100,000 votes per state), what’s your explanation for the other 4.99 MILLION votes?

          • snowmaggedoned

            Here are more instances:

            http://www.truethevote.org/news/how-widespread-is-voter-fraud-2012-facts-figures

            And some very specific ones in North Carolina:

            http://dailycaller.com/2013/09/06/report-475-cases-of-alleged-voter-fraud-in-nc-from-2008-2012/

            There are many many more examples if you wish me to forward to you.

            A “few” isolated instances……bwahahahahahahahaha!!!

            Millions of votes were cast illegally for Obama in both elections. Also he had a whole lot of support and help from the Black Panthers and Acorn.

          • Stan H

            I see that facts just can’t make it through your “reality repulsor shield”. If you put everything in your two cites together you don’t come up with a hundred proven cases of voter fraud. Your Daily Caller itself states, ““Most allegations prove to be unfounded, lack criminal intent, or cannot be substantiated;” You’re still 5 MILLION votes short.

          • snowmaggedoned

            Wow…so now you upped the ante to 5 million votes.

            Next post will be 6 million and then 7 million…..

            North Carolina just revealed massive fraud in the 2012 General Election. Just made news and you sit there in denial that Obama stole both elections.

            Your a tool….as Lenin aptly described….a useful idiot.

            Read the True the Vote article and try Googling “Democrats vote fraud” and see how many links pop up.

            Denial, denial, denial, denial………it really is a medical issue and you need to seek out mental health help.

          • Stan H

            Find me 1,000 proven cases of fraud NATIONWIDE in the last election (STILL leaving you 5 MILLION votes short) and I’ll eat a copy of the ACA. YOU’RE the one in denial, and I don’t know if mental health therapy would work for you. I’m afraid that the problem is “hard-wired”.

          • Jeff Simon

            Who is Stan H. to think that requiring you to provide 1,000.00 examples is a remotely reasonable request? You are arguing with an idiot and by trying to do so you are making yourself look like one. You cannot reason with “him” because “he” is not REASONABLE!

            Did you not read the article that identifies Liberalism as a mental illness that causes a retardation in perception of reality? You cannot reason with an unwell individual. Stan H. believes YOU are unwell; not he.

          • Stan H

            Much more reasonable than to claim that over 5 MILLION votes were fraudulently cast to steal an election. If election fraud was that widespread, (more than 100,000 votes per state) a thousand examples nationwide should be walk in the park.

            Of course, if you really want to see how to steal an election, here’s a primer.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSEOd1W3fZA

            As I pointed out earlier, Conservatives have lost on almost every major issue in the history of this country, from slavery to the ACA. Liberals have made this country the world superpower that it is, dragging protesting Conservatives along the whole way.

          • Jeff Simon

            I have no doubt that you REALLY believe that, Stan. I also have little doubt you you have woven your web of philosophy from the World of the YouTube video.

            “Liberals have made this country the world superpower that it is, dragging protesting Conservatives along the whole way.” — Stan H.

          • Stan H

            From your posts, I rather think that most of your days are grim and cheerless.

          • Jeff Simon

            How could they be, when I’ve found THIS circus with it’s liberal clowns like you? And this entertainment is free! It’s just that… you never shut up. Isn’t your shift about over, JTRIG? Or is being one of Rodham’s Rangers your life now that you’e taken a break from your corporate empire? I imagine that is what lots of financially sucessful Liberals do with their leisure time: Spar on the internet with faceless anonymous conservatives.

            Wait. I’m feeling blue. Why don’t you cheer me up and tell me some more about all the money you made before coffee break again? I love it when you Liberal Beta Males get SO caught up in their online personas they start posting “I’ve got a big penis” lines. Especially the feminists!

            “Liberals have made this country the world superpower that it is, dragging protesting Conservatives along the whole way.” — Stan H.

          • Jeff Simon

            “Liberals have made this country the world superpower that it is, dragging protesting Conservatives along the whole way.” — Stan H.

            Thanks for the quote, Stan. I have no doubt that you believe it whole heartedly.

          • snowmaggedoned

            I don’t need to give you 1,000 proven cases NATIONWIDE when there are 35,000+ cases of it in just one state!

            A very important state that just went Republican for the first time in its history in 2010.

            Oh, how the Democrats are pissed over that shift and they are doing every thing in their power to get it back under their tyrannical thumb.

            Would you like salt and pepper on your copy of the ACA (all 2700 pages)?

            It might make it easier to swallow….but then if you can’t stomach the taste, you can shove up your aSS where it belongs along with all your other Communist B_llsh_t.

            Go back to Media Matters and get your payment from dear old George Soros.

          • Stan H

            IN the midst of all that bluster, WHERE ARE the (LOL) 35,000 cases in one state? Bring it on, loser!

          • snowmaggedoned

            Here you go dumba$$:

            http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/04/03/oh-my-evidence-of-massive-voter-fraud-in-north-carolina-n1818137

            Try to keep up, troll.

            I know it is hard when you only have one cell membrane, but do try……..

          • Stan H

            Well, if I have “only one cell membrane”, you must have less, because it doesn’t take very much brain power to tell the difference between “facts indicating the possibility of voter fraud” and PROOF of fraud, a task that’s nevertheless apparently beyond your meager mental capabilities. Because a person named “John Smith”, born May 1, 1975, voted in NC and FL is not proof that “John Smith” voted in NC then drove to FL and voted (or vice versa). It’s more likely that there is more than 1 “John Smith” in the U.S. born on May 1, 1975. If THAT’S what you consider proof, I sincerely hope that they never let you serve on a jury. SMDH

          • Stan H

            Watching the talking heads this morning and marveling about right-wing crazies made me think about you. Chew on this. If everyone of your 35,000 names was a mythical “voter fraud impersonator” (who in actuality is seen only slightly more often than unicorns), and EACH of them magically voted TEN TIMES, and ALL of those votes were disallowed, the GOP STILL would have lost by over 4 MILLION votes!! The people have spoken.

          • snowmaggedoned

            LOL…LOL…LOL…LOL…LOL…LOL…LOL

          • babbott

            “The major goal of the ACA was to increase access to affordable care. It’s achieved that goal”
            Then why have more people been cancelled than those who got insurance, and don’t forget that the employer mandate hasn’t even kicked in yet. There will be another round of substantial cancellations, so why do you think Obama postponed that mandate for the second time? Even the CBO talked about the job losses and cancelled policies that would occur when the employer mandate is enforced.

          • Stan H

            SOOO many lies! The CBO said no such thing. If you actually read the report, (or reviewed a credible source) you’d see that what the CBO actually predicted was lower employment from (a small percentage) of people VOLUNTARILY dropping out of the workforce because they were no longer FORCED to work to simply have health insurance, NOT any job losses.

            Despite your ridiculous claim, in actuality, there has been a net gain of millions insured, not counting the many millions that will continue to benefit from the coverage minimum “floor”. The final numbers could be a high as 10 million new insured. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/04/02/obamacare-enrollment-numbers-what-we-know-and-what-we-dont-know/?wprss=rss_national&clsrd

          • babbott

            SOOO many lies!

          • Stan H

            Just a complimentary update on the “huge failure” of the ACA. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/04/17/fact-sheet-affordable-care-act-numbers

          • babbott

            If you choose to believe the White House propaganda on the success of the ACA, good luck!

          • Stan H

            Over your completely unsupported opinion, I do!

          • babbott

            My opinion is NOT completely unsupported. But even if it was it would still be more credible than the propaganda published on the White House website.

          • Stan H

            NOT “completely unsupported”? So just where (and what) is the so-called support for your position? (The drag-addled rantings of Limbaugh really don’t count).

          • babbott

            “So just where (and what) are the so-called support for your positions other than the White House propaganda website? Speaking of “drug-adled rantings” maybe you should review some of Obama’s rants.

          • Stan H

            Until there is some reason to disbelieve the facts listed and published on a government website (“propaganda” is just ANOTHER of your unsupported claims), I don’t have any reason to seek corroboration. So, what we have is figures compiled and published by the Federal Government, versus . . . ? I think that I’ll go with the Government.

          • Jeff Simon

            Yes. If you were a loser who had no health care you are definitely better off now that people who HAD a plan are required to pay more for theirs in order to subsidize your healthcare. You are definitely better off and you should continue to vote for communists like STAliN H. here. What’s giving up a few liberties compared to freebies from Big Brother at your neighbors’ expense?

          • Stan H

            The people “who had a plan” also benefit from the enhanced benefits mandated under the ACA (e.g. free preventative care, annual spending caps, no lifetime limits, etc.). Are you giving those benefits back anytime soon?

          • Jeff Simon

            I did not claim that Obamacare is completely without a good idea or two.

            I will not be benefitting from Obamacare. My own personal happy situation has no bearing on the quality of the Obamacare idea.

            By the way, I worked my ass off for what I have. No myopic selfishness involveds. If you feel someone else in “entitled” to what I’ve earned by the sweat of my brow we should meet in my living room. There you can argue your point and I will make my rebuttal.

          • Stan H

            You might be surprised to know that you’re not the only person who worked their asses off to advance in the world. I don’t feel that anyone is entitled to what anyone else has earned. Despite the reflexive bleating of the right-wing, Progressive is not synonymous with either Communism or Socialism.

            Finally, if we should happen to meet, I’m confident that I could “make my point” quite effectively, via whatever medium was required.

          • Jeff Simon

            You’re never ending hyperbole is an excellent cure for my insomnia.

          • snowmaggedoned

            Hahahahaha!!!

          • Bob

            January was the FIRST month of ObamaCare. The last 4 years were just leading up to the beginning. the “Death Panels” are a little mis-labeled, but there is, or will be, a panel of 13 people, some in Congress, some Medical Drs, and some Lay people, who have or will be commissioned to reduce costs of health care. Part of their function will be to decide if an 85 year old would be a candidate for a hip replacement or a heart transplant, or should they just get pain pills or a handshake for living so long. It’s part of the 2700 ACA Bill. No, I’m not going to tell you what page it is on, as I don’t remember. Go read the Bill. You can find it then.

          • Stan H

            January was the first month that individual policies took effect under the ACA, which was signed into law on March 10, 2010. The 5th year started on March 11, 2014. I don’t know if you’re deliberate lying, or just not a very good reader.

            What part of “advisory” do you find difficult to understand? From
            Forbes, “The IPAB will consist of independent healthcare experts who are FORBIDDEN (caps mine), by law, from proposing changes that will affect Medicare coverage or quality. In other words, they are a FAR cry from a death
            panel, with the ACA specifically noting that this group is not allowed to do anything that would “ration” healthcare. The law also makes sure that the IPAB is not in a position to make policy, but instead to simply make recommendations to the Secretary of Health and Human Services PROPOSALS (caps mine, again), that Congress is specifically empowered to override if it sees fit.”
            http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterubel/2013/01/09/why-it-is-so-difficult-to-kill-the-death-panel-myth/
            How many of these non-issues (like Obama being a Kenyan) are you going to cling to forever?

          • awakeawareomshanti

            wow! you have such profound LYING RADAR. why don’t you use it to detect if your DEAR LEADER lies? BINGO!

          • Stan H

            Like most of the right-wing, you apparently have problems with the facts.

          • JKellogg

            The “tu quoque” is getting old.

            https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque

          • Stan H

            If you have a better response to “awakes” rants, I’m open to suggestions.

          • Kathy Smith Suddeth

            Actually am seeing death panels, or at least the results of death panels. Don’t feel left out, sure you’ll see it soon enough. May have already witnessed it, just to clueless to realize it or don’t care as long as it isn’t affecting you personally. Liberal mentality.

          • Stan H

            I can claim that I see dragons. Support your statement with facts (when you can). You’ve got it backwards, it’s Conservatives who don’t care about anything until it affects them personally.

          • Jeff Simon

            It’s called enlightened self-interest, hippy.

          • Stan H

            More like myopic, selfish greed.

          • Jeff Simon

            Spoken like a true parasite. Only Communists define working for yourself as greed. But communists don’t like work. They like telling other people what to do.

          • Stan H

            I don’t define working for yourself as greed. I define rigging the system so that the ultra-wealthy can keep more of their million (or billions) while continually squeezing the poor and vulnerable, as myopic, selfish greed. And, after rigging the system in the first place, using their millions (or billions) to buy politicians to block fair reform of the system. THAT’S greed. .

          • Jeff Simon

            I’m inclined to agree with you on that point. It’s just that in your infantile world only Conservative FatCats Game the system and no Democrat was ever bought. It’s impossible to debate with a clown who think like that.

            Or like this:

            “Liberals have made this country the world superpower that it is, dragging protesting Conservatives along the whole way.” — Stan H.

          • Stan H

            I never said that the greed was limited to Conservatives, though they HAVE raised it to a fine art.

            Conservatives have lost on almost every major issue confronting the
            country for the last two centuries, from Slavery to the ACA, and the
            country is much better for it.

          • Jeff Simon

            And the fact that something hasn’t happened YET is ironclad incontrovertible proof that it will NEVER happen. Just like the current RUSSIAN agression that LIB/Progs like Obama and Stan H had such a good time ridiculing and mocking 18 months ago.

            Stan H you are either inexperienced and stupid or you are willfully blind. Neither is a good recommendation for people to listen to the drivel that oozes from your lips.

          • Stan H

            The same Putin who invade Georgia under Bush? Your point?

            The law itself says that the IPAB is an ADVISORY board, with no authority to change anything. What part of “advisory” do you find difficult to understand? From Forbes, “The IPAB will consist of independent healthcare experts who are FORBIDDEN (caps mine), BY LAW, from proposing changes that will affect Medicare coverage or quality. In other words, they are a FAR cry from a death panel, with the ACA specifically noting that this group is not allowed to do anything that would “ration” healthcare. The law also makes sure that the IPAB is not in a position to make policy, but instead to simply make recommendations to the Secretary of Health and Human Services, proposals that Congress is specifically empowered to override if it sees fit.” http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterubel/2013/01/09/why-it-is-so-difficult-to-kill-the-death-panel-myth/

            “Death Panels” is a Sarah Palin fabrication, and anyone that believes it after 4 years, is as stupid as she is.

          • Jeff Simon

            “The same Putin who invade Georgia under Bush? Your point?”

            You are such a liberal drone you make me want to puke. Yes, EXACTLY the same Putin who inveded Georgia under Bush. HOW in the world does THAT justify Lib/Progs ridiculing the very notion that That Putin might misbehave after Killary’s much vaunted “Russian Resest”.

            I swear to God – the one you don’t believe in – that if George W. Bush had not existed, you Communists would have had to make him up. A Conservative “Boogyman” that you can point at to justify any and all Leftist Liberal Excesses or Stupidity.

          • Stan H

            What do you want me to explain? Putin now has done the same thing that he did under your Republican “shoot first, ask questions later) Dubya. HIS posturing didn’t deter Putin either. That says absolutely nothing about Obama or his policies.

            What’s actually being “evaded” is the fact the fact that THERE’S NO DEATH PANELS!! (And not even a statutory basis to make the claim (originating from Palin, that’s no surprise)).

          • mac12sam12

            That happened late in Bush’s last term, plus he had a congress and senate full of democrat loons. You probably blame Bush for Katrina.
            They aren’t called death panels, but your life saving operation will be decided on your age and health history as it is in other countries with Socialized medicine. Why do you think so many people fly here for their healthcare? If you support Obamacare it’s because you will pay nothing or you’ll be subsidized. The costs of the plans are outrageous for the middle class, so are the deductibles and co-pays.

          • awakeawareomshanti

            we don’t need formal death panels. the destruction of the country is killing enough people right now from stress. our jobs, life and future are going down the drain before our eyes. the middle class is being annihilated. THIS IS THE DEATH PANEL.

          • Jeff Simon

            I want you to explain why this administration’s inability to predict that Putin would do exactly as he did during the previous adminstration is not an indication of stupidity or incredibly naive thinking. You are being dishonest. You are not stupid. You mnow exactly the point I am making and you have no answer for it. Therefore you try to derail the argument and send it down tangental roads.

            Just because something has not happened YET is not proof that it will happen at some later date. Juxtaposed with the fact that if something HAS happened already there is a greater chance it will happen ie: Georgia-Ukraine. At least George W. had the excuse that Putin hadn’t started trying to rebuild the USSR during the previous administration.

            President All Drama cannot make that claim. He was caught with his ass hanging in the breeze and a perplexed look on his face. If you were not a logically handicapped Lib/Prog you would admit that. But being what you are, honesty is beyond you.

          • Stan H

            Your skewed analysis leaves out the fact that Russian has ALWAYS acted in that manner, something that you’d know if you ever cracked a history book. For you to imply that Bush was taken by surprise because Russia had NEVER done something like that before, but Obama’s incompetent because it had happened once before to Bush, is the height of intellectual dishonesty.

          • awakeawareomshanti

            FORBIDDEN??? like the POTUS is FORBIDDEN to destroy the Constitution? we are working to rectify that one right now. he and is ILK are going to face the Wrath of Hell from the American people before too much longer.

          • Stan H

            A mind is a “terrible thing to waste.” You really should get back on your meds.

          • snowmaggedoned

            And your waste is a terrible thing to mind…..

          • NukeWaste

            This is not the 5th year of ACA. Who is paying you to lie? The problematic parts have been held off until bozo is gone. We need to end it all.

          • Stan H

            January was the first month that individual policies took effect under
            the ACA exchanges. The ACA was signed into law on March 10, 2010. The 5th year
            started on March 11, 2014.

          • babbott

            This is not the “5th year of the ACA” because it just went into force January, 2014, and the delays have been coming as fast as Obama can think of them. So the ACA hasn’t been in force 5 years.

          • xoxozo

            Oh NO NOT yet…we have to wait until there’s NO OTHER way to get healthcare. I personally know of 2 people NOT being able to get the meds they were taking because they are TOO expensive even though they worked well for them. Look at the care in England. I have friends there and they have to wait sometimes MONTHS to get a procedure done.
            YOUR 1st mistake was listening to the Progessive/socialist talking points and NOT investigating for yourself.

          • Stan H

            One word. PARANOIA!! The exchanges ONLY cover people who don’t get insurance through their employers, less than 10% of the market. There’s absolutely NOTHING to support your claim, and in fact, the legislation says the exact opposite.

            The AMA endorsed Obamacare, because the Doctors KNOW that not only will it work, but they’re guaranteed more insured patients.

            I’ve researched PLENTY in order to debunk the fantastical claims that one runs across on sites like this.

            “Being slightly paranoid is like being slightly pregnant – it tends to get worse.” – Molly Ivins

          • awakeawareomshanti

            with people like you around, there are not going to BE EMPLOYERS. you clown.

          • JKellogg

            The AMA endorsed Obamacare, because the Doctors KNOW that not only will it work, but they’re guaranteed more insured patients.

            OK. They are also guaranteed more losses from those who haven;t met deductibles under high deductible of the silver and bronze plans.

            The AMA huh?

            The Association of American Physicians is opposed to the ACA.

            Doctors for Patient Care is opposed to the ACA.

            The American College of Surgeons is opposed to the ACA.

            The American Academy of Dermatologists Association is opposed to the ACA.

            The American Urologic Association is opposed to the ACA.

            The Congress of Neurologic Surgeons is opposed to the ACA.

            37 other professional medical associations, to date, have come out in opposition to the ACA.

            Shall I go on?

          • Stan H

            You can, if you want. The AMA is the pre-eminent and most prestigious medical organization, but I could also come up with a few dozen that are on the same page. Here’s a great article by a Dr. in Tea Party country about the ACA. http://www.healthbeatblog.com/2012/07/doctors-fighting-for-the-aca-in-flyover-country-dr-pat-s/

          • JKellogg

            Hmm… A post on a an English Professor’s blogs by an individual identified as Dr. Pat S.? Doctor of what? And if this doctor is so sure of himself, why is he/she anonymous?

            In the meantime, what to actual doctors have to say about the law?:

            http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottatlas/2012/10/11/what-do-actual-doctors-think-about-obamacare-now/

            Even just last month, on March 19th, the AMA stated that there was a “significant financial risk” for doctors and hospitals.

            In NY the support for the ACA is only 23% of doctors:

            http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/health-care/item/16831-survey-ny-doctors-adamantly-oppose-obamacare

            Seriously Stan, the AMA endorsement which you cited numerous times, in support of a confirmation-biased support of your political position, is a very weak debate point. You can support the law as you wish, Stan. That’s fine by me. But what you’ve stated so far over these past few weeks is normative politics.

            Only around 15% to a high of maybe 20% of doctors belong to it anymore. Down from ~75% in the 1950′s. In other words, the participation rate is even worse than that of labor unions.

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3153537/

            This article “Doctors And AMA Split Over Contentious Issue Of ObamaCare” says a survey in 2011 found only 13% of doctors support the AMA’s endorsement of the ACA.

            “Preminent?” Maybe once. But the declining trend has been noted for a very long time. But nowadays, the AMA is just another liberal political organization of the 1%. Here is a PDF article over 13 years old describing the problem:
            “The Decline of the American Medical Association Leftist Politics and Bureaucratic Incompetence Fuel Dramatic Membership Decline

            http://rsvpamerica.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/The-Decline-of-the-American-Medical-Association_John-K.-Carlisle_Nov-2001_Organization-Trends-Capital-Research-Center.pdf

          • Stan H

            The AMA remains the largest and most prestigious medical associations. Your listing of old articles doesn’t change my opinion. Though I really think that their membership size has very little to do with the efficacy of the ACA. I’m not a doctor, but I estimate that the odds of droves of doctors leaving the profession because of dissatisfaction with the ACA to be very slim.

          • snowmaggedoned

            “The AMA remains the largest and most prestigious medical associations.”

            Broken record, Stanovsky. Blah, blah, blah.

            JKellogg ate your lunch and you are too ignorant to be able to tell you just got your Communist butt kicked.

            Next argument point…….

          • Stan H

            I’m sure that you’ll understand if I don’t give a lot of weight to your opinions.

          • snowmaggedoned

            About as much weight as I’m giving to yours, Stan…….

          • JKellogg

            Though I really think that their membership size has very little to do with the efficacy of the ACA.

            Then are you admitting that it’s a poor point for debate then?

            As for the efficacy of the ACA, whether or not it is a macroeconomic net-positive is still quite ambiguous.

            However, when I questioned the fiscal costs (such as the IT development expenditures both state and federal, the costs borne by insurance companies, the 21 new taxes—seven of them directly to consumers, in addition to the total subsidy outlays) you quickly pivoted to your standard mantra about “RWNJ” opposition and the costs they have incurred on behalf of what they consider to be their legitimate self interest. (Come to think of it, your general narrative is that the interests of anyone who disagrees with you are all illegitimate and that America should just eliminate them in any way possible.) Anyway, how can the macroeconomic efficacy without considering the total net costs, Stan?

            Further you have avoided the notion that people will somehow not have to be concerned about payment of deductibles which are quite high under the ACA.

            It’s my contention that once the bill collectors start to call about unpaid bills, those same people who have insurance will again be reluctant to seek the care they need.

            In other words, the system drifts back to the equilibrium we already have, except we have new taxes coupled with their economic deadweight costs which will be higher and borne chiefly by the consumer because of the innate elasticities of seeking healthcare verses the more inelastic provision of the same.

            So not only are your points an insufficient argument from a macroeconomic standpoint, neither do they argue effectively from a microeconomic one.

          • Stan H

            No, I admit no such thing. The AMA is still the pre-eminent and most prestigious medical organization. When journalists are looking for an authoritative medical quote, I doubt if “Doctors for Patient Care “is the first group they think of to call.

            As to the efficacy of the ACA, your opinion (apparently) is that it will fail and/or be repealed. My opinion is that it won’t. The ACA was designed and implemented by a coterie of smart and experienced people, who had the benefit of reviewing the experience gleaned from “Romneycare” (and to a lesser extent, the experiences of other countries offering universal healthcare). Despite GOP obstructionism, intransigence and outright sabotage, the ACA has met its 1st major enrollment goal, and is well on its way to success. Just this week, the CBO projected 36 MILLION covered under the ACA by the end of 2017.

            Of course, people will be concerned about the cost of deductibles (just as people were BEFORE the ACA). However, I’d posit that most will be much LESS concerned, knowing that there’s an annual cap that will insulate them from being bankrupted by a single major illness.

            Pragmatically, my opinion, your opinion and the opinion of the posters on this page are basically irrelevant. The ACA train has left the station. It’s the law of the land, (has been ratified by the Supreme Court), and almost certainly will remain so for most of the next 3 years, at a minimum (despite 50+ meaningless, symbolic votes to repeal in the “runaway” House. The smart alternatives are to get on or get out of the way.

          • snowmaggedoned

            OMG….he is a broken record….he says the same thing over and over and over.

            And he always uses Politico as his primary resource to attempt to prove his point.

            He needs professional help and none of us are qualified to render him the assistance he needs on this site.

          • Stan H

            Just for you, a complimentary update on the “huge failure” of the ACA. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/04/17/fact-sheet-affordable-care-act-numbers

          • JKellogg

            To start, don’t SPAM this forum, Stan H.

            I read the CBO report the day after it was made available to the public as well as the spin White House applied.

            Part of that report also states:

            A crucial factor in the current revision was an analysis of the characteristics of plans offered through the exchanges in 2014. Previously, CBO and JTC had expected that those plans’ characteristics would closely resemble the characteristics of employment-based plans throughout the projection period. However, the plans being offered through the exchanges this year appear to have, in general, lower payment rates for providers, narrower networks of providers, and tighter management of their subscribers’ use of health care than employment-based plans do.

            In other words, when you cut benefits and access to save costs that would normally be much higher—you get shortages.

            Now then, don’t spam this forum again by posting the same thing FIVE different times on the same thread!

          • Stan H

            I RESPONDED to people who had various people that had claimed the ACA was “horrendous”, “a failure” , etc. which IS NOT spam. And, NOTHING in that CBO report said that there were (or would be) “shortages”.

            Finally, because I don’t agree with YOUR position while responding to multiple people IS NOT SPAM, “Mr. BPR Adminstrator”!!!

          • JKellogg

            It has nothing to do with whether or not I agree with you, Stan. It’s about posting the same link 5 different times on the same thread on the same day. Instead you could have posted it at the top of the thread—once. Further, I won’t stoop to trading ad hominems with you.

            You can have the last word on whether or not you spammed this thread.

          • Stan H

            Fine. My “last word” on the topic is that before BPR bestowed the lofty title of “BPR Administrator” on you, they should have educated you on what “spam” actually is. You can look up the purpose of a “reply” on your own.

          • Stan H

            An in-depth analysis of why (and how) the ACA is already working, if you’re interested in the facts: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/03/affordable-care-act-is-working-104942_Page2.html#.U0DWF6JCm4Q

          • snowmaggedoned

            Please block Stan H from this site….your post was fabulous and it just went right through one ear and out the other. It wasn’t absorbed because there isn’t a brain between his ears…only methane gas.

          • JKellogg

            Thanks for the compliment, Snowmaggedoned.

            From my view such an action is unjustified at this point. Stan might be tunnel-visioned in his support of the Democrat’s worldview and prejudiced against what he perceives as the Republican one, or he might not be. But he is generally respectful in he presentation of of his points. I think it’s important that we have as many views represented as is reasonable.

            I will be the first one to say that there are a considerable number on “nut jobs” on the Republican side. I could say the exact same thing of the Democrats, Libertarians, Christians, atheists, Muslims, Black Liberationists, you name it.

            BTW. please avoid the ad hominem attacks like the one you just made against him. If you read between the lines, Stan shows himself to be reasonably well educated and intelligent.

          • snowmaggedoned

            Yeah..I was a bit harsh…but he was getting redundant and becoming a pest.

            I thought if I punched on him for awhile, he would just go away.

            I finally decided that he is completely certifiable so I’ve left him alone.

            I understand your desire to have many views, but when he says the same points over and over ad nauseum, he doesn’t prove anything except that he just wants to harass readers as well as posters.

            Think about that regardless of how educated and intelligent you may think the poster. Sometimes it is just best to remove them for a while until they can come back and quit beating a dead horse to a pulp.

            Even making nice harassment doesn’t contribute to the discussion or move ideas forward.

            He just becomes a nuisance.

          • marburyvsmadison

            The ACA requires a lot of adjustments by health-care providers, and since there is natural resistance to this sort of major institutional change, it’s to be expected that the law may be unpopular with many physicians, at least in its initial stages.

            But that’s not the measure we should look to in assessing the law’s success or lack thereof. The results of the ACA will be measured over time. At this early stage, it’s pointless to engage in judging it as a popularity contest among any single demographic, especially since the huge volume of propaganda and anecdotal evidence greatly outweighs empirical evidence. I’d note that the rate of increase in healthcare costs has slowed, and more people have insurance. These were the intended objectives. But only time will tell if the law truly works as planned.

            J, I returned from travels to find the previous thread, on the Financial Crisis, economic policy and Keynesianism, had been discontinued. Disappointed. I wanted to respond to the interesting article you sent and point out your spin, bias and exaggeration. I also had replies for BOBS and John. Any way to reinstate?

          • JKellogg

            Well first, healthcare costs began slowing before the ACA. Much of that can be attributed to the recession and it’s lack of a classical V-shaped recovery. But not all. Here is some anaylsis of these dynamics.

            http://www.economics21.org/commentary/no-grounds-claim-obamacare-lowers-healthcare-costs

            In short, CMS (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) stated in it’s report that the reasons for the slowdown in the growth of healthcare costs were:
            1) Medicare/Medicaid/other programs “unrelated to the ACA” (50.7% of improvement).
            2) Other factors “unrelated to the ACA” (26.1%).
            3) Updated data on historical spending growth (21.8%).
            4) Updated macroeconomic assumptions (6.1%)

            As far as more people having insurance, that true. But, 1) That does not necessarily improve healthcare outcomes (which is the central premise behind justifications in support of the law.) And 2) CBO estimates are that, even with the ACA, 31 million non-elderly people will still not have healthcare insurance by 2024.

            My contention is that the law attempts to establish government involvement in a market that is better left to private industry, with reasonable oversight. My rationale is that the price elasticity of demand for healthcare is high enough to produce dead weight losses that simply don’t need to be born by the tax-payers. The higher the elasticity for any tax incidence on a good or service and the cost of institutionalization and regulation of government intervention, the higher the dead weight loss. (Note: many would interpret the term “dead weight loss” as simple government “inefficiency and waste,” but that not what the term means in economics.)

            Further, my view is that the law also attempts to establish a price ceiling on the cost of insurance. That ceiling, if maintained, will quickly become a binding one. There are only two outcomes of a “binding price ceiling.” Shortages and/or attempts to raise prices in ways that circumvent it.

            As far as bias? I am the first to admit that I have them. We all do! It is my observation that many are aware of only other people’s biases. What are yours?

            As an example, my first approach is toward the free market. That’s a bias. But… markets can and do fail. This is primarily where I part from the Libertarian/Austrian POV that everything should be total laissez-faire. (I’ve even seen articles that propose national defense be privatized.) On balance, there is no doubt that government regulation and involvement “can” help, but the promises of that help, that so many politicians claim, “can” be just as inefficient as the problem it attempts to alleviate. In fact, this was the reason Milton Friedman, a strong Keynes critic, coind the term, “We are all Keynesians now.”

            So…at the end of the day (to use a well worn cliche), did the healthcare system pre-ACA represent a bonafide market failure worthy of a total remake of insurance delivery as well as the institution of price controls and the imposition of a basket of standardized benefits to the extent that the ACA has? I suppose that depends on the biases of the observer.

            Given that you seem to hold the bias that those who oppose the law (the GOP and TP) represent “only the interests of the rich?” I could easily come to your conclusion.

          • marburyvsmadison

            J – First of all, I appreciate your responses, which provoke thought and insight.

            No one can say for sure why the rate of increase in healthcare costs has slowed; but, gee, it’s a nice coincidence, isn’t it? As was the deficit reduction when Clinton raised taxes, which the GOP still strains (or prefers not) to explain. Let’s just recognize – and respect – that we need far more experience before we draw valid conclusions about the effects of the ACA http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2014/01/08/does-obamacare-deserve-credit-for-slowing-the-growth-in-health-care-spending/
            http://www.newrepublic.com/article/116115/national-health-spending-down-again-shrinks-percentage-gdp

            Yes, I think the pre-ACA markets for health insurance and health care were intrinsically dysfunctional.
            Insurance carriers profited most by denying the service they sell to those who need it most; and the knowledge differential between medical provider and patient, along with the stakes (life vs. death) provides perverse profit incentives to increase costs without regard to efficiency or value. Every other advanced country has recognized this and instituted a national health plan. I think many supporters of the ACA understand that, of necessarily and by design, it’s a compromised piece of legislation (which is why it still leaves many uncovered) that still improves significantly over the pre-ACA and that will, hopefully, put us on a path towards a more reasonable, humane and effective system.

            You’re correct, of course, that we’re all biased. An individual viewpoint is biased by definition, and we’re all individuals – which is why I like to stress the difference between the group and the individual and encourage people to read outside their comfort zone, travel to foreign countries, learn other languages. If we too casually accept the inevitability of bias, we’ve allowed ourselves to head down a slippery slope towards totalitarianism. Bias is part of our human condition, but it’s one of those parts that adults are called to deal with, if we are to get along. In a large, vibrant, complex and heterogeneous nation like ours, it’s always excruciatingly difficult to disaggregate self-interests among the many different
            constituencies, and when the subject is health itself, it’s unfortunately all too easy for bias to be
            harnessed for the benefit of unscrupulous power brokers. I think this is what’s happened within the
            GOP/TP, not only in the case of health care, but also taxes, immigration, gay rights, etc. And yes, this happens on the Dem side as well, except there it focuses on different issues (with the exception of immigration, which is subject to demagoguery by both sides) and has more limited success.

            Moreover, spin is not the same as bias. You engaged in spin when you assumed that, since Obama could not make a deal with the GOP while Clinton could, Obama must have moved to the left. Why couldn’t it be that the GOP had moved to the right? That’s my view, and I can easily support it. You simply spun that to your side (your bias) and then claimed your otherwise unsupported view proved my narrative “invalid.” You tried to use spin to legitimize your viewpoint and delegitimize mine. And yes, I’m sure I do the same, so please try to show it to me. Spin is usually done without conscious intent to deceive, and I only hold politicians accountable for it. Their job is – or should be – to see the bigger picture in relation to the sum of its parts. Most of the rest of us don’t have the same responsibility.

            I, too, have a bias towards free enterprise. I also have a bias towards practical solutions and against dogma. But my greater bias, like most liberals, is towards trust and compromise. It’s part of the liberal worldview, and it’s not always right, I’m afraid. As to your argument that I favor the ACA because I “hold a bias that those who oppose the ACA represent ‘only the interests of the rich,’” I don’t see the logic there at
            all. I support the ACA because I believe the pre-ACA system was an economic fiasco and a moral failure, a national disgrace. Again, I think the evidence shows that it’s bad public policy when good health is allowed to be a commodity sold only to those lucky enough to afford it.

            Lastly, I think the rabid dogmatists on the Left are generally marginalized and exert far less influence than those on the Right, who currently lead their parade. The two sides are asymmetrical in personality, methodology, composition and behavior. To make a controversial generalization that I’ll happily stand by, it’s consensus & compromise on one side vs. confrontation & conquest on the other. This is an important issue that’s, unfortunately, rarely examined. http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/04/obamacare-train-did-not-wreck.html

          • xoxozo

            This is in CA. the 1st or 2nd biggest entitlement state in the Union.

            http://www.libertynewsonline.com/article_301_34597.php

            BUT don’t let the facts get in the way

          • Stan H

            Seeing that the source is the liberty news online, a publication that seems to be right of even “Faux News”, I’ll take their “reporting” with a grain of salt.

          • xoxozo

            this is getting very boring…we WIL NEVER agree so i will let you go on spewing your talking points.
            AND I will let your next reply be the last one

          • Stan H

            Sounds good to me.

          • Chris Brennan

            Don’t play the shithead. They obviously were not going to call them “death panels”. But that’s exactly what they will be when the healthcare rationing begins. Ridicule Palin all you want, but time will prove her right on the “death panels” just as it has on Putin and Ukraine.

          • babbott

            NO, it’s not the 5th year. It only went into effect January 1, 2014. Even though it’s been discussed and debated for 5 years, you still haven’t understood what it’s done. More people have lost their insurance than gained it, lots of people have seen higher premiums for coverage they don’t want, half of those covered under the ACA were actually placed under the “expanded Medicaid” which means they are covered at taxpayer expense, you haven’t even considered the drastic increase in deductibles and co-pays, and you can bet that the 18-member panel included in the ACA is only for rationing of medical care. But you want to focus on people allowed on their parents’ insurance until 26, removing lifetime limits on coverage, eliminating pre-existing conditions, all of which could have been done separately without “fundamentally transforming” the ENTIRE health insurance industry. And then you lie and say this is the 5th year of the ACA. The law isn’t still completely implemented and there are still deadlines rescheduled and employer mandates postponed, so tell us how great the law is. Since it has been front-page news for the past 4 years, WHY was the March 31st deadline extended while the Obama administration used the excuse that many people didn’t even know about the deadline? Have they all been hiding under the same rock?

          • Stan H

            January was the first month that individual policies took effect under
            the ACA exchanges. The ACA was signed into law on March 23, 2010. The 5th year started on March 24, 2014. Simple math.

      • zipper

        possibly those who are most critical of it. they will have unfortunate “accidents”

      • Stan H

        Much less than (have previously) died every year due to inability to pay for necessary healthcare.

        • Mr Tony

          No one in this country has died because they could not pay for “necessary healthcare.” The hospital emergency rooms are and have been overrun with those who chose not to purchase “insurance..” which is different from “healthcare.” Insurance does not equate with health care. You mindless libs either are too stupid to understand that or willingly cover it up. Get a life, Stan.

          • Stan H

            Emergency rooms are a last resort, and are expensive for everyone. You’re myopically ignoring the people that don’t get regular check-ups because they can’t afford it; the people who DO get treated and diagnosed, but can’t afford the needed medicine(s); the people who put off going to the doctor because it’s too expensive, ad infinitum. If you think that people don’t (regularly) die due to lack of healthcare, you’ve REALLY drank the Kool-aid!

          • RIDGERUNNER29

            stano,why bother,we all know you get paid to post here as nobody with an iota of intellect would support the ACA which is DOA

          • Stan H

            I don’t get paid to post, but if you know of some good progressive, organization that needs my help, please let them know.

          • snowmaggedoned

            You know who they are…..don’t be coy.

            Paid troll!

          • Stan H

            “Real-life” example for you: http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/04/09/3424629/florida-medicaid-charlene-dill/

            NOT an actor playing a role, that you see in so many of the right-wing ads.

        • NukeWaste

          Data, please, Stan. You have nothing to do with medical care. You obviously don’t pay for it or you would notice its increasing cost. If you aren’t a public leech its cost is becoming prohibitive. Time to end bozo, bozocare and all his czars.

          • Stan H

            MY coverage went down nearly $00 per month. As I posted earlier, I’ve been gainfully employed for 36 years, have NEVER had a red cent of welfare or food stamps, and have run my own businesses. I’m FAR from a public leech. I, unlike so many conservatives was just born with a “compassion” gene, (and a modicum of analytical ability).

          • RIDGERUNNER29

            and a narcissist gene

          • snowmaggedoned

            And how much “compassionate” money did you give to charities last year…..this year….the year before…..anytime in your whole life???

            Yeah…I thought so…..you don’t think you should give to charity. Instead we should all give collectively through the iron fist of the government to the poor.

            Kind of take the enjoyment to give away when it is forced out of our wallets to give willingly.

          • Stan H

            I both give to charity and donate time (and expertise (and have done so for years). Do you?

          • snowmaggedoned

            I have done the same for many many years and I still am involved in volunteer work. I prefer to give money and goods in situations where I get to interact with the poor and afflicted.

            I do not like the government taking my money and giving to someone THEY deem is worthy of my dollars.

            I am in a better position in the actual situation to determine if someone truly is in dire need of monetary support.

          • snowmaggedoned

            Must belong to a government union.

          • Stan H

            The “$00″ per month was a typo. Should have been “$100″. Haven’t worked for the government in over 20 years, and have never been a part of a union. (Though I’m a staunch supporter of union rights).

          • snowmaggedoned

            Well….I figured you worked for the government in some capacity.

            And of course, you would be for “union rights” since you have never been in a union and know nothing about how they control the workers and stifle their free speech and where their money goes after they pay their dues.

            I know….I used to be in a union.

          • Stan H

            Just because I’ve never been in a union doesn’t mean I lack knowledge. I have dealt with Unions from BOTH side of the fence. I’ve seen abuses from both sides, but I remain a strong supporter of union rights. In many cases it’s hard for the employees to be treated fairly, even with a union.

        • snowmaggedoned

          Provide primary sources to back up your claim.

          Nothing from HuffPo, Media Matters, or Salon, please.

      • Obamaocare

        Easily more than will die from Gun Violence.

    • Scott Leger

      my kids are not liberals, keep preaching to them brother !!!!!

      • xoxozo

        MINE TOO!!! There are quite a lot of Millennials who HATE Gov’t interference…Keep the AIRWAYS open no matter what. The news media is who is RUINING this country…never any bad reported when it comes to Progressive/socialist ideas.

    • xoxozo

      We’ll get rid of it if all the producers STOP paying into the system!!! Let the Liberal Elite give their $$ to the Takers..

      • zipper

        haven’t you heard the expression: “Liberalism is great, until you run out of other peoples’ money.”

      • Today22011

        Let all Congress be forced to be covered by Obamacare instead keeping their present coverage and deciding to opt out.

    • Stan H

      Could it be that your children are liberal BECAUSE they’re educated?

      • zipper

        Not educated, but Schooled. the longer you are in the system, the more IT changes you, rather than you changing IT. the school system has been a haven for socialist/communist-leaning teachers for decades. it’s actually on the Agenda to subvert a country for eventual take-over. if You don’t know this, you will allow it to happen; part of the Plan.

        • Stan H

          A GOOD education teaches a person to review the facts, analyze the circumstances and reach logical conclusions. I DON’T know this, and apparently, your children don’t either. BTW, liberals don’t need to “take over”, we have the votes (and our lead is extending).

          • zipper

            unfortunately, you Progessive-Socialists have made Far to many inroads into our society; right about that. but, the time is coming(very soon) when there will be another solution effected.

          • Stan H

            You’re right. We’re going to kick the Teabaggers out of office in November, and keep our country moving in the right direction.

          • Jeff Simon

            Well, I guess we are going to find out, right? I’ll be checking to see if you’ve renamed yourself or suffered liberal “amnesia” if your fantasies should be proven wrong. I am GENUINELY interested to see which route you choose.

            By the way, your liberal idealogue performance is decaying. You haven’t mentioned FAUX NEWS or the KOCH BROS. In like… 5 or six posts now. Tell me another fairy tale about all the money you made after you cut your ponytail off, Hippy.

          • Lynette

            Stan, oh Stan. If you think this country is moving in the right direction, you may need to get some new meds.

          • Stan H

            From what he inherited from Bush, to now? You’re the one who needs meds if you can’t see how much better the entire country is since January, 2009.

          • Lynette

            LOL!!! YOU are delusional!!

          • NukeWaste

            Sure you will. On whose money? Libtards only spend others’ money. Spend your own for a change. If we take the Senate things will change. And if they don’t change may very well be forced.

          • Stan H

            Big talk. If you take the Senate (doubtful, because the public is beginning to see the right-wing for what it is). The only change will be to go from from 25 RWNJ’s blocking progress, to one President vetoing things to keep them from moving backwards.

          • zipper

            ah, now the REAL Stan comes out. the nasty, elitist, condescending, insulting Lefty. this guy sounds like a paid Obama shill, assigned to spread his half-a$$ed Socialist pap among the decent.

          • Stan H

            Yeah, and you’re ALL “sweetness and light”. See you in November.

          • zipper

            come the Patriots’ War, you will certainly be one of the first “corrections” effected; promise.

          • Stan H

            OOOh! I’m quivering in my shoes. Loser.

          • RIDGERUNNER29

            pay no attention,he’s paid to post here.Nobody,even Stan is dumb enough to believe that drivel.

          • OBR 54

            You mean the left.
            I have personally lived communism and studied it extensively. Progressivism/socialism is only a point on the road to communism. It is an amoral system based on envy and ‘self-sacrifice’, it uses compulsion and the organized violence of the gov’t to expropriate wealth from the producer class for its redistribution to the parasitical class.
            http://ashbrook.org/publications/onprin-v1n3-thompson/

          • Stan H

            Thanks for the glimpse of your credo. I’m motivate to work even harder for the Progressives this fall.

          • Jeff Simon

            Stan H.is a communist who enjoys pretending that spending American worker’s tax money on people who cannot or will not work makes him somehow a superior moral specimen. A BETTER person than those people who oppose MANDATED philanthropy.

            He is an enemy of freedom who somehow imagines that requiring people to act against their own self-interest is not a type of slavery. He also claims to be fabulously wealthy after 36 years of work but the only way he can find to benefit his fellow man is to spread lies and dissemanation on a conservative forum. If you don’t think the way he does; he believes you are a bad person.

            I highly doubt “Stan H” is honest about what he is or what his agenda is really about. Lib/Progs are like that. This is why I hate them so passionately.

          • OBR 54

            Thanks for the heads up Jeff. It is obvious to me that Stan H. has not lived the reality of communism.
            I wouldn’t say I hate them, but I definitely hate their philosophy. But, at the same time I feel sorry for them because they don’t realize how badly they’ve been fooled, and, even if they do realize it, they continue to promote a failure for fear of appearing the fool that they are.

          • Today22011

            And keeping the major media outlets in your pocket.

          • Stan H

            Can you say “Roger Ailes”, or “Rupert Murdoch”?

          • snowmaggedoned

            Can you ay George Soros, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, three fourths of Hollywood, etc???

          • Jeff Simon

            There is no cure for Liberalism like a good hard dose of reality. Fortunately AND Unfortunately something like that is on the way. Of course, while the Lip/Progs are in charge YOU will be better off because you are probably a LOSER who has some justification for why you cannot compete and succeed in a meritocracy.

            PARASITE.

          • Stan H

            I’ve worked for 36 years, and have never taken a penny of food stamps or welfare. There’ve been some days where I’ve probably made more money before lunch than you make in a month. I’m hardly a loser OR a parasite. Why don’t you take a look and see what states get MORE federal monies back than they pay in taxes. Hint: They’re uniformly red. Whenever you want to really talk about “parasites”, I’m more than ready.

          • Mr Tony

            Where are the facts to back this ridiculous lie? It is the large cities (read black, Hispanic) that vote your way.

          • Stan H
          • NukeWaste

            Remove the cost of federal bases and those states are way ahead in the money that is stolen from them. You say that you worked for 36 years. Good. Doing what? If you took a vacation during those years you didn’t run a company. Nuff said!

          • Stan H

            So, “military bases don’t count”, “anyone who’s ever taken a vacation didn’t run a company”, and “taxes are stealing” Sounds like you’re REALLY “koo-koo for cocoa puffs”.

          • OBR 54

            You may want to read this article which debunks this ‘red state’ myth
            http://rare.us/story/exploding-the-lefts-red-state-myths/

          • Stan H

            Just proof of the old adage, “figures can’t lie, but liars can figure”. By “adjusting” the figures for cost of living, You can move states out of the “poorest” category, and by the particulalry disingenuous argument, “it’s not the red state that gets all of the welfare money, it’s the blue-voting people in the red state,” you can (with a straight face) claim that red states don’t lead in welfare dollars. GMAFB!!

          • Mr Tony

            You have the votes……..my Mother voted in every election for a Republican……until she died…………now she votes for the dems.

          • Stan H

            Good one. If Obama got enough “dead people” to vote for him to win TWO presidential elections (while being a Kenyan, Muslim, impersonator, and didn’t get caught in ANY of the 50 states, he’s obviously, much, much smarter than the Republicans. LOL

          • Jeff Simon

            As always with Lib/Progs: “The ends justify the means.”

          • Lynette

            OMG!! You still think Oblowhole got into the White House on VOTES??????????

          • Stan H

            Yes. The same votes that kept Romney on his squash court.

          • Lynette

            Obama was “selected”, not elected. Go back to sleep.

          • Stan H

            You’re confusing him with “Dubya” and his father’s buddies on the Supreme Ct.

          • Lynette

            Then you’re living in La La land if you still believe that.

          • NukeWaste

            I personally reported the fraud that we stopped at our voting site. Nothing has been done. And nothing will be done. Next election we are going for donkey.

          • Stan H

            Nothing “was done”? Probably because your “voting fraud” was just as non-existent as the majority of the rest of the RWNJ scandals.

          • OBR 54

            You have no proof of non-existence. Part of the object of fraud is to be good enough to not get caught. Just sayin………

          • Stan H

            That’s why in our system the accuser has the burden of proving the claim. It’s almost impossible to prove a negative. And, apparently you had no proof of EXISTENCE , since NOTHING came of your claim.

          • xoxozo

            RIGHT.. ‘The ends justify the means’ with this bunch of Progressive-socialists. NBL
            Nothing but liars…in every piece of the administration. Worse than ANY OTHER one BY FAR.

          • RIDGERUNNER29

            he’s certainly slimier

          • Lynette

            Good one!!!!!!!!

          • awakeawareomshanti

            your analyze skills are stunted. you can’t even discern that HAVE BEEN LIED TO. sheesh. pathetic.

      • Jeff Simon

        You mean INDOCTRINATED, with little real world experience to counteract the hypothetical Utopian bullshit Liberal/Progessives like you have been dripping into their ears for decades. I wish that you could be held accountable when they harvest the bitter harvest of the crop you have sown. Unfortunately, Personal Resposibility is an issue that Liberal/Progressives spend their lifetime perfecting their ability to dodge; so the odds that you will be held personally accountable for the harm your hippy counter-culture “feel good” bullshiite has done are pretty minimal.

        If it were my decision to make you and your parasitic ilk would be condemned to hard labor for the rest of your lives. Fortunately for you it is not up to me.

        • Stan H

          I think that the effects of YOUR indoctrination are pretty clear. The “bitter harvest” is what the Koch Brother’s of the right attempt to scare you with to get you to vote against your own (and the country’s) interests. Fortunately, educated people are far less likely to fall for it.

          It’s also fortunate that myopic, hateful people like you rarely get to positions where you can make important decisions, anyway.

          • Jeff Simon

            You mean YOUR own interests, Parasite. I’m doing fairly well because I worked and studied my ass off. What’s the matter “Stan”? Is it looking like your JTRIG gig might be drying up?

          • Mr Tony

            Koch brothers? Not George Soros? You are laughable.

      • NukeWaste

        No. As a former teacher I will tell you the truth. No properly educated person is liberal. To be liberal you have to have no concept of economics, never have met a payroll, and never did a real job. Libtards think that they work hard. They don’t. Want a libtard to become conservative? Let them try to run a company. Big fun.

        • Stan H

          With your attitude and perspective, I’m glad that “former” applies. I’m an avowed liberal, and I’ve taken 2 economics classes, met payroll, owned a company, and I VOLUNTARILY paid my employees more than the minimum wage. And I’m STILL a liberal (though I prefer Progressive).

      • xoxozo

        INDOCTRINATED!!!!

      • xoxozo

        American school children’s INDOCTRINATION grew greatly starting in the late 60′s and early 70′s

      • RIDGERUNNER29

        if you have a BA in UnderWater basket Weaving,the only thing your education taught you to do was weave baskets underwater,that sort of Affirmative Action education Stanley?

    • Jockey

      Don’t say that. Of course it can be repealed. We went to the moon! Remember?

      • NukeWaste

        Slavery was once the law of the land. Oh wait, it still is. Now it is a Federal plantation. Not a private one. Keep voting high taxes, welfare for trash and see what happens. People who work are getting tired of supporting the useless. Starting with govt workers who can’t even describe their own job.

    • Jan McMullen

      Oh yes we will as soon as the GOP take back the Senate.Then let Obama try and veto a replacement to it!

    • Brian Robinson

      At least with Social Security people pay into it well before they draw it. It’ the ones that draw from SS that never put into it or put very little into it that is the problem with SS. Plus the Gov using it as another pot of money to use.

  • Herman Vogel

    It was because of people like O&A our young were distracted from the truth and NOW they want to protest,,,wow. It’s like opening the barn door then complaining about the damage the animals did to your Garden…geez

  • Lester Peoples

    Dump it’ in the Bay just like the early colonists did with the tea bags that England was taxing to extremes! Let it soak up some salt water and contaminate the fish!! before it sinks to the bottom. Then as Jesus said about the ones that harm his little children, It would be better for them had a mill stone be tied about their necks and tossed into the sea! This might be referring to abortion and killing late term births, but God will decide.

  • Myrtle Linder

    Obamacare:written against the American people, a device of destruction.

    • auntielib

      Another lovely item crafted by the Democrats are the “gun free zones” that we have read about in the news. Places such as Columbine High School and Aurora High School and Newtowne High School and Fort Hood.

      Democrats have created places which make it easier for a killer to get the body count really high, because he can count on 15 or so minutes going by before anyone else with a gun will show up. So people are injured, maimed for life, and killed, thanks to that scheme of the Democrats.

      November = Payback Time

      • zipper

        it has been said that these horrific shootings are actually perpetrated by the Left in order to use them as propaganda for gun control. i don’t believe that’s true, but they surely don’t let a “good crisis” go to waste.

        • Stan H

          “It’s been said by” whom, another RWNJ?

      • Today22011

        The latest was an attack in a gun free zone
        and the murder of its personnel at Fort Hood, Tex. Can anything be more insane than designating a gun free zone on an Army base?

        • Stan H

          Another lie, there was no “gun free zone” at Ft. Hood.

          • Today22011

            Lt. M. Milley, senior officer, Ft. Hood.
            “..Milley stated that carrying concealed weapons on the base was prohibited.

            ” Like many military installations, Fort Hood is a “gun-free zone.
            Arming DoD personnel with firearms shall be limited and controlled. Qualified personnel shall be armed when required for assigned duties and there is reasonable expectation that DoD installations, property, or personnel lives or DoD assets will be jeopardized if personnel are not armed,” the 2011 directive states.

          • auntielib

            Perhaps the kindest and best we can say about Stan the Democrat Troll is that his ignorance is “impressive”.

          • Stan H

            I stand corrected (unlike so many on this page, I can recognize facts). And I do apologize for calling that a lie. However, I’d like to point out to you and “auntielib”, (who claims that gun-free zones are the exclusive province of Democrats) that DOD Directive 5210.56, establishing the “gun-free” zones was instituted by . . . (wait for it) George H.W. BUSH.

      • Stan H

        You don’t mean “gun-free zones” like Ft. Hood, do you? There’s ONE common denominator in every mass murder in the last century in America. A GUN!

        • Jeff Simon

          A communist against guns in the hands of private citizens. Wow. Who would of thunk it?

          Hey, has anyone seen “Jim” the anti-conservative Canadian recently. Did he change his ID or is he still around? He and Stan H could pass for spit swapping sisters. Same fondness for ad hominems and topic derailment… same “you only disagree with State Policy or Liberal thinking because you are an idiot” mentality.

          The only difference is I haven’t seen “Stan H” call anyone a Nazi or a klansman yet. I’m almost certain that is on it’s way, though. Liberal Playbook 101.

        • Stan H

          I misspoke there were 2 common denominators. A man with a gun.

          • xoxozo

            3…mental case

          • Stan H

            “Mental cases” aren’t born with guns, they get them from somewhere, and reasonable people understand that universal background checks could prevent some of them from going on rampages.

          • xoxozo

            Again…don’t let the facts get in the way,
            Keep reciting the talking points

            http://government.brevardtimes.com/2013/01/obamas-gun-control-facts-and-statistics.html

          • Stan H

            I like facts. Is it your contention that gun control advocates should discard the 18,000 suicide gun deaths from their totals? They’re still just as dead.

  • Mex Seiko

    There’s far too much evidence against ObamaCare. We don’t need to jump in bed with these foul mouth attention junkies.

    • Memphis Viking

      I’ll have to excuse their language in this case. I know from experience it can be hard to talk about Obamacare without using expletives.

      • Mex Seiko

        Bet your socks. You open the letter with your revised insurance policy and it’s like you just hammered your thumb. I’d still look for better choices than poster boys for what’s wrong with our society. Thanks.

        • Memphis Viking

          I’m not saying they should be role models, I just sympathize with the desire to curse when discussing Obamacare. Or any number of other Obama actions.

  • jackcandobutwont

    The more folks get rejected…so they are FORCED to find a new carrier, the more the entire US will see what a disaster this is going to be and already is….by design it is intended to fail…it is just the soft headed types and those riding in the cart that don’t have to pay will continue to say/think they like it. ANd the Dems will cull that one person out of the herd to say…SEE it is working. When it really isn’t.

  • Jim Delaney

    Libs are adroitly jockeying for single-payer. And, unless we’re circumspect they could pull it off.

    Yes, Obamacare is unravelling, but the pain inflicted in the meantime is unconscionable. Can’t wait for the GOP to take over the Senate in November. THEN, perhaps, we can really put the skids on this disaster before it engulfs us all.

    What’s truly tragic about all this is the fact that a large percentage of “Americans” still support the Progressive-dominated Democrat Party–and Comrade Obama as well. Totally mindless and sick!!!!! The enemy within.

    • zipper

      if you think the Republican Party, as it is now, is salvation, you better think again! with all the RINO’s bending over so as not to appear to be “obstructionist,” your conservative values will never be manifest.
      be careful whose bandwagon you jump on! support Tea Party-endorsed candidates.

      • Memphis Viking

        I agree with you about the tea party. But it just so happens that tea party endorsed candidates are pretty much all Republicans, because of the two major parties, the Republicans are the only ones who have any members who aren’t communists.

        • zipper

          we have members of our local TP who are staunch Repub’s. they are so disgusted with the GOP that they are thinking of changing to Independent; a smart move, imo.
          the Repub. party locally, has been infiltrated by Leftist elements. this is a fact, not theory. they are on the executive board and are pushing the Liberal agenda.
          attempts to thwart them are being beaten-down. (remember, they are in leadership positions). the Left is well-organized, well-funded, and presents a solid front. the GOP is fractured, under-funded(by comparison), and allows its image to be created by the Left. they had better get their $hit together Real soon, or……

    • RockyMtn1776

      IMO the only way to get rid of this is not to fund it in any way. It can never pay it’s own way so it will die on it’s own. We have to keep pounding this into the heads of the low information voters ,the Democrats passed ObamaCare on their own with NO help from Reps. Since many voted on race alone even this will not change the minds of some.

  • auntielib

    November = Payback Time

    • Henry

      Unfortunately I believe you are correct. I also believe you will suffer hugely for it.