Is everyone crawling deep into the low-information/aversion-to-politics hole?
IN THE COMMENTS: Henry said:
1. Not too sexy for Obamacare.
2. This cat is covered.
3. Drowning is not covered.
4. Early adopters don't.
5. Beer goggles are covered.
6. Fat kids cost the same as skinny kids.
7. Obamacare will make you go blind.
8. Whats with all the kids?
9. Self-employed Comedian live-tweets insurance loss.
10. Birth control is free. Don't you people listen?
पोस्ट्स
१०३ टिप्पण्या:
Do you have any metric to compare this list against any other given week's list? Because I think that cat-video traffic crushes news-traffic pretty much any day of the week forever and a day.
The 'seriousness' of the problems with the Obamacare roll-out was brought home to me when listening to Hannity on my drive home. He rang up the federal site and within a minute was speaking with a live person. Try doing that with your car insurance company.
The "low-information/aversion-to-politics hole" is the natural state of most citizens. Lefties especially dwell there. It's like the real humans in The Matrix: they don't know and don't want to know what's going on.
Lefties I know lately are unaware of the Obamacare disaster. The lack of awareness is strange and unexplainable without the ingredients of delusion and deliberate lack of attention. They do not see, they do not understand, and they do not want to observe what is going on. The problem is too big.
Don't know abou that. My episode of schadenfreudepalooza is over though, as I contemplate what the possible fix might be. Not only that but all the other ways in which the federal government needs to be fixed.
It says something about the stories and headlines in The Daily News, but nothing more. The only headline remotely related to Obamacare is 'Colorado dog accidentally gets healthcare', and that's buried in a long list...
As a Catholic, I get excited when the Pope gets on Buzz feed.
When I read Google News, how do I know it is just giving me what I want to hear?
AReasonableMan, I think I heard live the Hannity show to which you refer. There were actually two calls. Once Hannity called this woman and got an answer. They had a polite discussion, and then the private corporation that employed her fired her. Then Hannity called back, and she politely described how they had fired her pretty much for not being a toad, and Hannity found her a new job. I think there has been a third call since then.
So your point was...what? The federal government is incredibly responsive and reasonable and right on the phone when you have a problem? Good luck with that line.
Oh, and AReasonableMan, I and my wife and my four sons have been canceled because of Obamacare. That's what Blue Cross says. Go for it.
Whoa, wait. Hotel rooms AT SEA!?
Also: Do people go to the Daily News for real News? I think we'd want to see demographics of WHO is going there, before we can draw any inferences on WHAT they're reading means.
NY Daily News is the left-leaning low-information voter's newspaper.
OR
WSJ : NY Post :: NYT : NY Daily News
Maybe they just want to ignore government? And probably they should be able ignore government. A government that can't be ignored is a government with too much power.
I don't see how that helps the ACA.
I think if people haven't burned out on it they will soon. And this is bad for Obama. The low-information crowd has known basically two things about Obamacare: 1) If you like your plan you can keep it and 2) Obama was lying about that (and plus he seems incompetent). They'll go back to their lives knowing he's not to be trusted and will be largely oblivious to the Democratic spin, obfuscation, and blame-gaming to follow. That's the danger of having wide appeal based on image among people who don't know much and don't want to know much. He'll probably never reach those people again.
1. Not too sexy for Obamacare.
2. This cat is covered.
3. Drowning is not covered.
4. Early adopters don't.
5. Beer goggles are covered.
6. Fat kids cost the same as skinny kids.
7. Obamacare will make you go blind.
8. Whats with all the kids?
9. Self-employed Comedian live-tweets insurance loss.
10. Birth control is free. Don't you people listen?
There won't be anything new on Obamacare for a while.
There will be a small spike when the website isn't fixed on December 1st.
There will be bigger spikes when the first wave of identity theft hits.
Then there will be the wave of people losing their insurance in January.
Then the first person to die because they lost their insurance because of the ACA, and couldn't get replacement insurance.
Then there will be comparisons of the millions who have lost insurance to the thousands who have managed to replace their lost insurance.
Then the panic after Feb. 15, when people realize there's not enough time to get insurance coverage for the March 31st deadline.
Lots and lots and lots of bad news ahead -- but each one will only be "News" for a few days.
It's the death of a thousand cutting headlines, not an ongoing tsunami of scandal.
A Reasonable Idiot. It may take a few more minutes to reach my insurance company but when I do they can actually GET ME A POLICY, not just walk me through something that I could do myself, if I was able to use a computer and the website actually worked. But have you tried to use the site?
Obamacare is a sore that won't heal.
Bob Ellison said...
I and my wife and my four sons have been canceled because of Obamacare. That's what Blue Cross says.
And, you believe everything an insurance company tells you? They would never lie or gouge you would they?
AReasonableMan, maybe you are beyond redemption, or maybe you are just a leftist shill willing to lie about everything. I hold out hope. Maybe you can face reality. Many lefties seem incapable of facing reality. Truth is tough. Try it!
...or maybe...maybe you're just trying to make lefties look even dumber than they do all by themselves. Maybe you're an operative paid by Newt Gingrich.
I don't approve of such tactics. Honesty really is the best policy. If you're an honest idiot, it will come out. Don't troll as an honest idiot.
There are two ways to avoid repercussions. First, avoid immoral or illegal activity. Second, saturate the system in order to blind or destroy the senses. It seems that Obama has opted to go berserk, which is effective if he can sustain his activities.
AReasonableMan is just a little too much to be real, I think.
I am beginning to suspect he really is a "rightwing loon" freelancing as a dirty trickster.
He rang up the federal site and within a minute was speaking with a live person. Try doing that with your car insurance company.
Every time I call my auto insurance a live person answers.
Your point?
And, you believe everything an insurance company tells you? They would never lie or gouge you would they?
No. That's why you ask questions and shop the market to find what you need at the best price.
Again. Your point?
AReasonableMan said...
And, you believe everything an insurance company tells you?
I've never seen ARM advocating skepticism of Obama's statements, not one time. Now that we see his ingrained (and reasonable) skepticism I wonder why that is.
It's seems like the same narrow partisan hacks that used to infest this place are still here. Good. Time to learn how the rest of the country thinks.
AReasonableMan said...
It's seems like the same narrow partisan hacks that used to infest this place are still here.
How amusing ARM thinks a "narrow" partisan hack is someone who recognizes the cluster**** rather than the person trying to excuse it because it hurts his team.
Or maybe he is just an obnoxious college kid showing us all how smart he is.
ARM: "Try doing that with your car insurance company."
LOL
You can get that with USAA auto, life and home insurance.
You can get that with USAA banking as well (Credit cards, loan servicing, etc)
ARM you better start working on your "hey employer insurance plans were always going to be cancelled too!" and "no, you can't really keep your doctor if you like your doctor" talking points.
You're going to need them.....as early as next month and January.
Buy hey, I'm just a lying conservative (like all the others) who has been wrong about every obamacare (can we still call it that?) prediction.
You guys have been right all along.
I'd run on that next year if I were a dem.
Really.
I read John Scalzi's website fairly regularly. I don't share his politics but I like his books and he can be relied on for relatively intelligent left-leaning spin on current events.
On November 5 he put up a post announcing that he's decided to avoid all news while he's finishing up his current novel. Since then the site has been pretty much nothing but posting photographs and the occasional "I'll be signing books at this location".
The sad thing is that part of his explanation for the self-imposed news blackout was that "everyone is still screaming at everyone else and it doesn't look like that's going to stop at any point in the next month, so screw y'all..."
So basically the ideas and the political party he feels connected to are taking a monumental ass-whipping right now and he'd rather not be exposed to that. It might make him actually reconsider his ideas and obviously no one should do that. Plus, you know, book to write.
It's actually kind of sad.
John Constantius said......
The "opting out" tactic is simply one liberals response to the reality of liberal politics.
The other tactic is the latest meme (best illustrated by Dana Milbank's column today in the Post) that those darn republicans are scaring all those folks we need in the exchanges by telling them THE TRUTH about the exchanges!!!
Leftist ideas and policies always require deceit as a key element for acceptance.
The worst kind of deceit is, of course, self deceit.
It is a shame that all this frothing at the mouth over Obamacare was not in evidence when thinking about the previous medical insurance system, which was a ridiculously bad system for both individuals and the country. The US paid much more than comparable countries for less coverage.
If anyone wants to link to their thoughtful critiques of that system I would be more than happy to read them.
Well. ARM. For starters it worked with amazing efficiency.
How about all those Obamacare success stories?
How many people have signed up so far. Actually paid something that is?
Maybe you can answer this one. If the ACA is so good how come our representatives aren't subject to it?
The US paid much more than comparable countries for less coverage
Tell you what..I'll start attacking the American health care system pre-Obamacare just as soon as you explain to me why the pople of all those "comparable countries" flocked to the United States to take advantage of our pre-Obamacare health system.
ARM, you're pointing out the obvious. In response to the obvious, and given the power of a majority in both houses of Congress and the presidency, the dems chose to do....the ACA. Which, of course, included no transparency or bipartisan input. An unforced error on you, solely
No matter how bad the left likes to pretend the previous system was, it's clear to all reasonable people Obamacare is worse.
Obamacare policy premiums are higher, deductibles are higher, networks are smaller (ridiculously so in many cases), and there are no out of network benefits. And further the main selling point of Obamacare, that it would expand insurance coverage to the previously uninsured, is not true.
The only expansion of coverage has been increasing Medicaid enrollment, but those costs are directly borne by government. So the worse financial outcomes for Obamacare participants are not contributing to expanded coverage.
Marshal said...
the main selling point of Obamacare, that it would expand insurance coverage to the previously uninsured, is not true.
The only expansion of coverage has been increasing Medicaid enrollment,
But, this was part of the ACA (Obamacare) legislation. So, you manage to contradict yourself within your own post.
It won't be long before ARM is telling us that obama's latest 5-year plan is exceeding all expectations!!!
We can choose to believe what is actually happening, or we can choose to believe the pathological liars of the left.
AReasonableMan said...
But, this was part of the ACA (Obamacare) legislation. So, you manage to contradict yourself within your own post.
Untrue, the legislation expanding Medicaid ocurred (or not) within the states.
I disagree,this story is not going away anytime soon. What will continue to give the Obamacare fiasco thoroughbred legs is the daily, daily impact of this horrendous law and the government's ongoing indifference to the chaos they have wrought in the lives of millions. (Remember: Doc shock, sticker shock, and business group plan cancellation shock are mostly still waiting in the wings.) People in the individual insurance market have just had the government set their house on fire and, basically, walk away. Your house, now ablaze, is an immediate crisis for you, demanding a timely resolution. But it is only a political problem for them, and the solution to this political problem is to get all the house fire stories off of page one. And so we're fed various trial spins: 1.) Your house was really a shack, so good riddance. 2.) What about all the houses that aren't on fire? 3.) You're only complaining about your house being on fire, because you want me to fail. 4.) You never wanted me to set fire to your house in the first place, so your cries for help now are in bad faith. 5.) You'd never complain if a white guy set your house on fire. And so, faced with a growing conflagration and a government worried only about itself, the people will refuse to quiet down until they get a reasonable answer to this pointed question: Just how is our president and his party going to put out the fire they started?
Marshal said...
Untrue, the legislation expanding Medicaid ocurred (or not) within the states.
So you are unwilling to admit what is obvious to anyone else reading that you were wrong. Obviously this legislation was part of the initial design of the ACA and would not have occurred without the ACA.
Sophistry is not argument. There is no fool like a partisan hack.
Obama ate dog.
Obviously this legislation was part of the initial design of the ACA and would not have occurred without the ACA.
And yet since the costs are borne entirely by the government they do not justify the increasing costs and lowering the benefits for people on Obamacare policies.
There is no fool like a partisan hack.
But it is amusing when they refer to themselves as "Reasonable".
So you are unwilling to admit what is obvious to anyone else reading that you were wrong.
Irony alert, ARM looks in the mirror and sees himself. Thanks for the laugh Captain Obvious
I feel considerable empathy for you guys. After the debacle of the government shutdown you needed a pickup. The problem is the story is already fading. It's already fallen to the bottom of Politico.
You can only get so much mileage out of a web page that doesn't work perfectly in its first few weeks.
a web page that doesn't work perfectly in its first few weeks.
Higher premiums, higher deductibles, limited networks, no out of network benefits, and ARM concludes the only problems are imperfections in the website. And this doesn't even include the insurance spiral we'll enter because not enough healthy people will volunteer to pay ten times more than they need to.
I doubt there's ever been a comment on any subject that more clearly demonstrated the author's "anaysis" was pure political advocacy.
Higher premiums, higher deductibles, limited networks, no out of network benefits,
All of these were preexisting problems, as anyone with any familiarity with the subject fully understands. Analysis in a few years will tell whether, as seems most likely, there was a net improvement in these areas.
Anecdotes are not data.
The government shutdown was a "debacle", and Obamacare is a website currently not working "perfectly." Tells you all you need to know about AReasonableMan: he isn't.
After the debacle of the government shutdown you needed a pickup. The problem is the story is already fading. It's already fallen to the bottom of Politico.
1. With this government shutdown, who can even think about sex?
2. Good thing only the federal government was shut down, and Boston's cat juries were unaffected.
3. Drifting at sea, just like our shut-down government!
4. Loads 404s from shut-down government websites in record time!
5. With brewery inspectors all on furlough, better know how to brew your own!
6. If the shutdown had gone on any longer they wouldn't be able to run at all.
7. Not as strongly linked as the government shutdown.
8. Of course they mean spicy, salty snacks and the government shutdown.
9. Furloughed building inspectors. Deny it if you dare, wingnuts!
10. Pity the first kids doomed to live their entire lives without government!
"Anecdotes are not data."
No, they're people.
ARM: "The problem is the story is already fading. It's already fallen to the bottom of Politico."
LOLeleventy11!!1!!
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57613067/poll-obamacare-support-obama-approval-sink-to-new-lows/
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/11/the-incredible-sinking-obama-the-note/
And remember, this is before ARM his fellow liars get 50 to 100 million folks kicked out of their employer provided health plans...next year.
2014.
Right smack dab in front of the mid-terms.
Right. Smack. Dab.
ARM is just like a latter day Stalin when discussing obamacare: killing 1 plan (or person) = tragedy; killing millions of plans (persons) is just a statistic, or as ARM says: anecdotal.
Sure seem to be alot of "anecdotes" around here these days.
ARM: "All of these were preexisting problems, as anyone with any familiarity with the subject fully understands."
Everyone with health insurance understands all of this.
And 85% of them were happy with their health plans.
And you are making 90% of those plans go away.
Gee, I wonder if anyone will notice?...........
ARM sure hopes not, after all, it's fallen to the bottom of Politico!!!
LOL
ARM actually uses that as a metric to determine political toxicity.
He actually did.
You. Can't. Make. This. Stuff. Up.
I thought this was how we got the Obamacare debacle.
Drago said...
And you are making 90% of those plans go away.
Hyperbole without any data to support.
"Burning out" ??? Fucking hilarious 37% approval 37!!!! They're gonna be shooting up zero with SSRIs soon man, to protect him from himself. Then of course when they take effect he'll be looking to get revenge on somebody, wonder who?
Obamacare was the big government version of the KO game, get them white middle-class bastards man and watch 'em squirm. But what's this, tar and feathers and a rail? OMG, They're comin' fer us scream the demos they're comin' fer us. OMG, say the upper classes we got ours what with the 16000 Dow but shit the plebes ain't exactly lovin' their food tickets and medicaid, the ungrateful bastards. But shit what if they start looking our way? What if buying off the progressives wasn't enough to save us from the rabble? OMG it's Irish Democracy! Truculent Micks taking civil disobedience to paralyzing heights.
I am going to really enjoy the next 3 years or so. Burning out? That there's the funniest thing I've read in oh 5 years or so.
Freeman Hunt said...
I thought this was how we got the Obamacare debacle.
Most people are unaffected, hardly a debacle.
Of those that are affected most will have better and more comprehensive medical insurance coverage, hardly a debacle.
It's not clear to me, other than for the obvious partisan reasons, why you guys are giving the medical and insurance industries a free pass. Surely accountability standards should be applied a little more evenly.
Ever notice how the left and far left utilize names that directly contradict what they are?
Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
Affordable Care Act.
A Reasonable Man.
Humperdink, name calling isn't an argument, or in this case even very original.
Yeah, why are you guys giving the SQUIRREL!!! a free pass?
Most people are unaffected, hardly a debacle.
Wow. It is hard to imagine anyone still above ground being this uninformed of what has come out in the last few weeks and the political reaction. You are extremely ignorant of the issues with the ACA and should probably avoid showcasing it.
Just like with Bush Derangement Syndrome, after a while Obama Derangement Syndrome gets wearing on the normals.
I expect that like 2006, the ODS crazies will become increasingly ignored even as Obama's ratings plunge.
Obama, like Bush before him, had people from the very election date losing rationality when their name is mentioned. It gets old.
AReasonableMan,
Why would anyone need to give the medical and insurance industries a free pass? There's no debacle here, right? Nothing to see, move along? So why would they need free passes?
Look, you can either claim there's no problem, or you can try to blame-shift. You destroy your credibility when you try to do both.
John Constantius said...
Look, you can either claim there's no problem, or you can try to blame-shift. You destroy your credibility when you try to do both.
Missing the point. The system was already a debacle. High costs and low production in terms of coverage. Worst of both worlds.
Where was the outrage back then?
AReasonableMan said...
Surely accountability standards should be applied a little more evenly.
Sure, everyone understands that those offering transactions you're free to decline should be policed with greater vigor than those who force you into transactions. Makes total sense.
And strange comment about applying standards evenly from someone resisting any accountability on the part of government while insisting the insurance industry is culpable for legislated changes.
Marshal said...
Sure, everyone understands that those offering transactions you're free to decline should be policed with greater vigor than those who force you into transactions.
If he's typing he is lying.
I simply pointed out that there was no outcry about a bad system before the Dems changed things. The Repubs had the opportunity but no motivation to fix the system and now they have no credibility when they whine. They could have implemented a better system. Apparently they had other priorities.
Polls show some figure around 85% of the health insured were happy with their plans so there seems to be no rationale for wondering where the outrage over being so badly used is/was. I suppose your position must be that they are too ignorant to have known they were being so badly used.
Whether you are just playing Mickey the Dunce or are really this misinformed I guess is irrelevant. In either case you are dismissible as a serious commenter and whining about ad hominen when it is pointed out directly or by inference just reinforces that impression.
I simply pointed out that there was no outcry about a bad system before the Dems changed things
I wonder why lefties lie so openly? Is it simply because no one criticizes another lefty in the drum circle?
AReasonableMan said...
Drago said...
And you are making 90% of those plans go away.
Hyperbole without any data to support
That's pretty much your whole argument. You have no data either. Just assertions.
When the next batch of policy cancellations come, in the 50 MILLION range, before Dec. 31, I bet their attention will again be on Obama, BIG TIME.
Yes 50 to 100 million. Group policies don't meet Obamacare regulations.
Well they voted for the putz.
Yes 50 to 100 million. Group policies don't meet Obamacare regulations.
Well they voted for the putz.
Well, I didn't vote for the fucking putz, and I'm looking down the barrel at that scenario while trying not to die of cancer. I'm working my ass off everyday to just extend my life, and I have to worry about losing a very good plan that I worked my ass off for, for 13 years until I couldn't work anymore. I got lucky, because my employer negotiated her plan early and kept me on a consultant under a state law loophole, so I should be good until '15. Theoretically.
When 85% really liked their health coverage, why the fuck should I really give a fuck about the other 15% when it's my fucking life on the line? I could give a shit about them right about now.
My sense is that it's pretty much like Nixon in '73. Everybody outside the Washington Beltway understands what happened and who's at fault, and they're waiting for the politicians to pull their heads out of their collective butts and take care of it.
Obama's "fix," which is that insurance companies can continue to offer policies which are illegal under the PPACA but he promises not to prosecute anybody has already been rejected by the people. Everybody gets that, with the exception of people working on Capitol Hill and the 1600 block of Pennsylvania Avenue. You see, the people of the United States already know the value of Obama's solemn promises.
ARM said "Humperdink, name calling isn't an argument, or in this case even very original."
Incorrect ARM. I merely pointed out lefties such as you misrepresent yourself going in. Name calling is not in my vocabulary.
The Repubs, when they had control of the levers of power, invested trillions of dollars in two wars of choice in the middle east. For a very brief period, when the Dems controlled those same levers of power, they invested their political capital in improving the health care system. History will judge the relative wisdom of these two decisions.
Seriously, why does helping the "uninsured" require harming others like chef mojo. Seriously, why. ARM, for you this blog is a game. For others here its life and death.
"Anecdotes are not data."
No, they are people.
ARM, take your sick self satisfied game elsewhere. You should be ashamed.
CWJ said...
You should be ashamed.
So, for the millions of people who have been uninsured for decades because of Repub policies, which you insist on defending, you should feel what?
Disgraced?
Personally I can't get enough of this liberal epic fail. I plan to buy more popcorn.
AReasonableMan said...
So, for the millions of people who have been uninsured for decades because of Repub policies,
Apparently ARM believes American society was entirely controlled by Republican policies before Obamacare. The Dems controlled most of government for most of the previous 80 years, but what the hell, ARM has never incorporated a fact into his worldview.
It works out well anyway. As more of the country becomes aware of how much Obamacare costs and for how little it benefits anyone other than government functionaries and their crony parters we can use it to explain the same thing happens every time the Dems "regulate" an industry. The public just doesn't realize it because all they see is increasing prices.
I am so happy about Obamacare. It killed my contract of several years with Blue Cross. BC and my family were stupid to have entered into such a contract. Thank Obama the contract is dead!
Marshal said...
Apparently ARM believes American society was entirely controlled by Republican policies before Obamacare.
No, you seem to believe this since you are the one who wrote it.
I have observed, as we have seem for the ACA, that the Repubs will fight tooth and nail to block reforms that expand medical coverage for people with preexisting conditions and for the poor. It was only thanks to the historic face plant of the Bush administration that the Dems finally had enough votes to push through a very modest package of reforms. I, for one, anxiously await the next spectacularly incompetent Repub president. Maybe then we can finally get single payer.
Apparently ARM believes American society was entirely controlled by Republican policies before Obamacare.
AReasonableMan said...
No, you seem to believe this since you are the one who wrote it.
So if that's not true it also cannot be true that people were only uninsured because of Republican policies. It must be confusing to hold so many contradictory beliefs.
Luckily the Reps will fight tooth and nail to prevent the Dems crony capitalism from ruining yet another industry with higher prices and worse service.
Marshal said...
the Reps will fight tooth and nail to prevent the Dems crony capitalism from ruining yet another industry with higher prices and worse service.
No evidence to support this. Just more partisan blather.
No evidence to support this. Just more partisan blather.
Pretty amusing from someone whose every comment is partisan hackery. And somehow I missed ARM's evidence. Shocking to realize he applies standards only to others.
"I have observed, as we have seem for the ACA, that the Repubs will fight tooth and nail to block reforms that expand medical coverage for people with preexisting conditions and for the poor."
-- Incorrect. Multiple Republicans actually had stand alone legislation suggested and proposed that would deal with pre-existing conditions in a similar way to the ACA, as a way of divorcing a popular part of the legislation from the rest of the millstone that was the ACA. It was Democrats who refused to split the bill up and pass it piecemeal so that the successful, good portions could be used as a shield for the bad portions (not keeping your plan, period.)
Yet again, you're lack of background reading and knowledge on the subject leads you into an unforced, partisan, error that makes you appear like a hack, when you're just uninformed.
Matthew you are a proven fool. How did all that blather from you about what a great guy Zimmerman was stand up to reality?
With respect to medical insurance, you rant has no meaning. The Repubs had every opportunity to pass any legislation they wanted when they were in power. They didn't do squat to deal with the uninsured. The world didn't begin with Obama's election.
"How did all that blather from you about what a great guy Zimmerman was stand up to reality?"
-- I never said Zimmerman was a great guy. In fact, I often said that his actions were the opposite of what I would have done, and he was stupid to do what he did. It was not, however, criminal. Any future or past actions on his or Martin's part were immaterial in whether or not the shooting was justified. Don't try and squirrel this argument.
If in two years, the Republicans pass a law to stop sex trafficking, would you say that Democrats have no moral grounds for talking about sex trafficking because they didn't pass a law to adequately address it? Of course not. Time is limited, and at the time Republicans had the legislature, other matters were more pressing. It's just like if I stop to donate blood to the Red Cross one day, but not the next because I want to do something else. It doesn't mean that I think donating blood is suddenly LESS important, it simply means that time is a finite resource.
I note you did not rebut the claims that Republicans were fine with pre-existing conditions (or at least, a large enough bloc were that stand alone legislation could have passed with bi-partisan approval), which is good. At least you're willing to concede that point.
I'll also note: With the millions losing insurance, and the many of them ending up getting worse insurance/value out of the trade ins, doing nothing was actually the wiser thing. At the end of this, fewer people may have worse insurance than we started (if we look at actual value of insurance, considering deductible/premiums/coverage used/etc.) That's before we even get into the shuffling of hours to more and more part-time workers requiring more of the poor to fight over even fewer part-time jobs.
So, yeah. Sometimes, doing nothing is the right choice.
I stand by my observation. Either ARM IS actually Mickey the dunce or he is playing the role to troll. In either case, he is far too ignorant about the ACA or indeed health legislation or lack thereof in the last 20 years to engage in debate with. The fact that he thinks he is debating or has a basis for his position beyond propaganda and partisanship just showcases the above.
Let the dunce make his asinine comments into a vast silence and he'll take his low end talking points to some other site.
I always have trouble distinguishing Mathew and Marshall. Two underemployed ambulance chasers who rely on sophistry to make a meager living. Neither could tell the truth in a straitjacket while Dick Cheney was applying water torture.
In this sad little echo chamber of right wing nonsense they stand as midgets of mediocrity.
Republican hacks like these guys blew any credibility they have on health care by ignoring the issue for decades. They are, however, good at starting economy crippling wars in the middle east and defending wife beaters, credit where credit is due.
ARM: Do you have anything substantive to address my actual points, or is this a pointless string ad homs to bully me into surrendering the ideological field? Bullying really should be beneath you.
Oh poor Matthew. It was fine for him to throw a black child under the bus. A child who was murdered by a sociopath with a gun. It was in a good cause after all, gun rights uber alles. But, now he is the one being bullied. What a putz. He doesn't give a shit about about people being denied health coverage because of prior conditions or poverty.
The leader of his own party from just one year ago instituted essentially identical policies to the ACA in his own state but now that it is politically expedient to harm the maimed and the poor, Matthew is there with his night stick, a reliable storm trooper for the right.
ARM: Again, Republicans argued for protecting those with pre-exist... never mind. You're not willing to listen. What was it, a few months ago, when I could actually have decent conversations with you?
Eh, time for me to move on.
ARM: Do you have anything substantive to address my actual points...
No, he does not. Nor has he from his entry into the thread. He wanted to derail the thread and the people who engaged him obliged. Your addressing his progressive jackassery just feeds into that. Let him beclown himself in the corner without your notice instead.
Matthew Sablan said...
ARM: Again, Republicans argued for protecting those with pre-exist...
Point to the legislation initiated in the house or the senate or stop repeating this nonsense.
B said...
He wanted to derail the thread
Derail it from what exactly? A bunch of underemployed Colonel Blimp types sitting in their basements (home offices) partially dressed and all nodding their heads in unison to the repetition of Republican party talking points. Spare me.
We get it, you hate Obama. You voted in lockstep for someone who implemented the exact same policies but you are not hypocrites. You just hate Obama.
Derail it from what exactly?
See the post title, Mickey the Dunce.
A bunch of underemployed Colonel Blimp types sitting in their basements (home offices) partially dressed and all nodding their heads in unison to the repetition of Republican party talking points. Spare me.
Oh spare me. You just described yourself. What you've been trying to sell in this thread is the progressive talking points reserved for the lowest information marching moron they own. Doesn't remotely relate to current events or news.
We get it, you hate Obama.
We may despise Obama and certainly do not respect him, but hatred? No. Hatred is a hallmark of the progressive left, not conservatives. We're the grownups, Mickey.
You voted in lockstep for someone who implemented the exact same policies but you are not hypocrites.
Oh, please. That's been brought up by less cognitively challenged progressives than you here and their ignorance of 'Romneycare' handily highlighted and dispensed with. I'm from Mass, Mickey. I know exactly what the Romneycare policies were/are and more importantly daily witnessed the political process in which they evolved. However, you've showcased yourself as an ignoramus concerning what is in the news today. There is no reason to expect you to be any less ignorant about past events. You didn't get to be this way because you've been in the habit of using your head to assimilate more than low end talking points.
B said...
I'm from Mass, Mickey. I know exactly what the Romneycare policies
So, why don't you outline how dramatically different Romneycare is to Obamacare in its key principles. Or then again, despite your desperate braggadocio, maybe you can't.
Sorry, Mickey. The facts are out there and easily accessed. It's not my job to correct your ignorance of them. You'd simply deflect any attempt anyway. As I noted earlier in the thread, you are a waste of time.
So no clue then?
All hat and no cattle.
What a jackass. You make a sweeping assertion, are told smarter trolls have made them and they've been dispensed with multiple times, and you still want someone to waste your time engaging you so that you can disappear. No. I don't play Mickey the Dunce games with lightweights making ignorant claims. Haven't since college.
Here's how it works with serious adults, Mickey. You make an assertion and you defend it. Here's how it works when a Mickey the Dunce troll chimes in. You've made claims about 'Romneycare' (in this and another thread). When called out on it, you make no attempt to defend your assertions. When you can put together two verifiable thoughts in defense of your assertions, or at the least go back to your shepherds and get some more specific talking points, post them and the specific assertion you are using them to defend. And I'll answer IF in my opinion it isn't a waste of time.
Serious adults, Mickey.
I'll give you one hint Mickey so you don't galumph down a donkey trial to start. The Massachusetts Health Care Reform was never an initiative of Mitt Romney. It was never his legislation as you idiotically claimed. It sourced from the Mass legislature. It was veto proof, Mitt had no choice but to sign it, but to his credit he was able to push some small changes to make it more palatable.
Oh, and by the way, Mitt had an alternative. Which I won't tell you...the info is out there and easily found by any serious adult.
Dear B,
Still no actual content to back up your assertions. Please consider correcting this oversight at your earliest convenience.
A. R. Man
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा