The Truth About Obamacare From Someone Who Actually Read It

[gonzoliberal]

Hear-ye, hear-ye, only the Finnster knows what the deal is.

Anyone who disagrees with Finnster is a terrible, ignant person, me included.

"Ignants" can be cured by education.

How about saying something about the issue?

[grggngll]

0 has become a health care dictator

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-T...hcare-Dictator

[Phineas Finn]

Hear-ye, hear-ye, only the Finnster knows what the deal is.

Anyone who disagrees with Finnster is a terrible, ignant person, me included.

You're being redundant.


Unlike some of my brethren on this chat board, I encourage you to continue your snide little jabs because it only goes to show that you can't answer the simple question: What specific parts of the bill support your claims.

Oh, I don't need to call you "ignant"; you do a great job of demonstrating that on your own.

[OnlyTheTruth]

I have a secret for you - rarely do any of the legislators read the bills they vote for. They have other people read them and highlight the important parts and they also trust the ones who sponsor them (usually because it is someone from their own party). What's disingenuous is those who claim they never read it before it came to a vote. Like, somehow this bill was different from others.

No, the Republicans, in this case, were outmuscled by the Democrats and used the "we haven't read it" tactic in an attempt to undermine it. If the parties were switched, the Democrats would have used the same tactic IMO.

Well said. There is a lot of hypocrisy in politics and its backed up by those who repeat those falsehoods.

[Cetshwayo]

You're being redundant.


Unlike some of my brethren on this chat board, I encourage you to continue your snide little jabs because it only goes to show that you can't answer the simple question: What specific parts of the bill support your claims.

Oh, I don't need to call you "ignant"; you do a great job of demonstrating that on your own.

The specific parts I do not support is every page of the unaffordable hc act or whatever it's called. I am against non bipartisan legislation because all legislation of national gravity should be inclusive and tolerant of both parties. Obamacare is intolerant of repyoobs and non-inclusive.

In sixteen days I am declaring obamacare unconstitutional.

heck, might as well have a little fun at the expense of got to read it to find out whats in it pelosi

[NCBirdfan]

Well said. There is a lot of hypocrisy in politics and its backed up by those who repeat those falsehoods.

Thanks. And good to see you back.

[cprenegade]

I have a secret for you - rarely do any of the legislators read the bills they vote for. They have other people read them and highlight the important parts and they also trust the ones who sponsor them (usually because it is someone from their own party). What's disingenuous is those who claim they never read it before it came to a vote. Like, somehow this bill was different from others.

No, the Republicans, in this case, were outmuscled by the Democrats and used the "we haven't read it" tactic in an attempt to undermine it. If the parties were switched, the Democrats would have used the same tactic IMO.

Don't you find that troubling? Our congressmen and women are elected by the people, they make good salaries, get great pensions, and have good benefits. The least they can be expected to do is to read legislation before voting on it. So if they aren't reading it and simply voting on it because it is sponsored by their party, I want to know why my tax dollars are paying them. We can put any slob off the street in office who could do the exact same thing for a lot less money.

[Phineas Finn]

Don't you find that troubling? Our congressmen and women are elected by the people, they make good salaries, get great pensions, and have good benefits. The least they can be expected to do is to read legislation before voting on it. So if they aren't reading it and simply voting on it because it is sponsored by their party, I want to know why my tax dollars are paying them. We can put any slob off the street in office who could do the exact same thing for a lot less money.

In a different reality you'd have an excellent, but the tremendous volume of legislation, hearings, and other activities (let's not forget fundraising) make that impossible.

An example from the 111th Congress.

House bills, total: 6570

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/coll...rue&ycord=1198

And that's just bills.

[Phineas Finn]

The specific parts I do not support is every page of the unaffordable hc act or whatever it's called. I am against non bipartisan legislation because all legislation of national gravity should be inclusive and tolerant of both parties. Obamacare is intolerant of repyoobs and non-inclusive.

In sixteen days I am declaring obamacare unconstitutional.

heck, might as well have a little fun at the expense of got to read it to find out whats in it pelosi

In other words: I'm too lazy to find out, so I'll just believe what a "non bipartisan" pundit/candidate has told me.

If you can't argue like an adult, keep quiet.

[Cetshwayo]

Finnster, are you trying to take away my free speech rights? I won't be quiet. It is not my job to read 2700 pages of lies. It was Nancy Pelosi's job to read it and did she?

Fifteen days to the Invalidation of the Unaffordable Unhealthy Care Act!

God Bless Justice Kennedy!

[grggngll]

Finnster, are you trying to take away my free speech rights?

You need to ask that question?

That is painfully obvious for a long time.

[Calamari]

Finnster, are you trying to take away my free speech rights?

That's not a violation of free speech. I hope you get to the grade where they teach civics soon.

[Cetshwayo]

So Cal and Finn, what's the deal? Upheld or struck down. Place your bets. Put your free speech rights to good use here.

[Creekman]

Its all about the numbers. There are 5 Republicans and 4 Democrats on the SCOTUS. The outcome will be the same as the 2000 election.

[afan]

http://www.westernjournalism.com/the...ually-read-it/

"To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.
The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business, and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats, and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled by the government."

Sounds very much like Romneycare.Hmmmm

[Wizard777]

0 has become a health care dictator

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-T...hcare-Dictator

Soooooo how did having private health insurance work out for Andrew Breitbart? Oh yeah, that's right. The private insurance death board got him. I go to the senior center and look at all the elderly people on that good old government medicare that have survived hardening of the arteries and heart failure for decades. So why did Andrew with his private insurance die so young?

[afan]

Don't you find that troubling? Our congressmen and women are elected by the people, they make good salaries, get great pensions, and have good benefits. The least they can be expected to do is to read legislation before voting on it. So if they aren't reading it and simply voting on it because it is sponsored by their party, I want to know why my tax dollars are paying them. We can put any slob off the street in office who could do the exact same thing for a lot less money.

You can't be this naive? A Senator or Congress person usually has an aide behind him/her who has highlighted passages that will be informative to that person. Even when they read parts of their own bills they are highlighted. I doubt very seriously if every person reads everything. They usually will split the bill into 3 or 4 sections and the 4 aides will read their sections and describe it's meaning to that Senator or Congressperson.

[Cetshwayo]

Soooooo how did having private health insurance work out for Andrew Breitbart? Oh yeah, that's right. The private insurance death board got him. I go to the senior center and look at all the elderly people on that good old government medicare that have survived hardening of the arteries and heart failure for decades. So why did Andrew with his private insurance die so young?

Andrew Breitbart sacrificed himself for his country fighting the insanity of liberal extremism.

[Phineas Finn]

You need to ask that question?

That is painfully obvious for a long time.

Not that I expect you to understand, but you may have noticed that the First Amendment states that the government shall not infringe upon your right of free speech. My right to free speech includes that right to tell you anything I damn well please.

You have a right to speak your mind, but you certainly don't have a right to be agreed with or to speak without rebuttal.

Got that?

[Phineas Finn]

So Cal and Finn, what's the deal? Upheld or struck down. Place your bets. Put your free speech rights to good use here.

Do you think the Justices are reading this forum to see what we think?

I expect it to be overturned, but I also expect that the decision will have more to do with the political perspective of a majority of the Justices; if they stay consistent with the last 50 years of court decisions, the law will be upheld, but I don't see them doing that. They haven't on other cases during the Roberts court -- elections have consequences, and we have the court that the people voted for.

Whether that will be the "right" decision for the good of this country is another matter altogether.