Government cannot force you to buy things that you have no choice.......

We accept mandated car insurance, but ignore the fact that the government already pays the bulk of medical costs and mandating health insurance would lift some of that burden from the taxpayer. As a former resident of Canada, I know firsthand that descriptions of "rationed healthcare" are ridiculous. I never got better healthcare (nor quicker and more thorough) than I did when I lived in Toronto for five years.

I think individuals should be able to opt out - with one caveat: they be required to sign and notarize a statement that they waive all access to the state Medicaid funds for medical care and all support from church and social service agencies to cover them. When they get cancer, run over by an uninsured driver or fall off the roof or down the icy stairs and break their back, self-insurance or a fund-raiser is their only option.

Insurance works appropriately when the entire community participates, not just those planning to use the medical system.

young people and healthy people could save a lot of money by not having insurance...Illegals get free insurance and you and me pay for it, is that fair ?? no..

Is like going to a restaurant , those who have money have to pay for those who claim not to have money, not fair...

what i want to see happen ??? a law that force anyone who hire illegals to pay their hospital bills when they get injure on the job-----have babies----when they get sick...

businesses love the cheap slave workers , let force them to pick up their medical bills is only fair.

Car insurance is completely different, u pay based on your record and you can be denied by a company such as Allstate and nyou can be dropped.

Driving a car is not a right, it a privalage. If I don't want to pay the costs associated with owning a car I don't have to buy one.

A better comparison, would be forcing people who don't drive to pay car insurance

Do you think that's fair?

Thus the comparison to auto insurance doesn't hold.

If you force people to pay its no longer insurance. Think about it.....

I should pay based in my medical history and MY CHOICES.

Not someone else's who drinks, smokes, and eats and McDonalds all the time.

Everybody needs insurance - this act has a lot of good things in it and opened the door for many people to have insurance.

The government has proven time and time again that it cannot manage anything cost effectively. It will just turn into another money pool for politicians to dip into and the administrative costs will be just another bureaucratic juggernaut.
Wouldn't it be better to offer low cost insurance funded in part by premiums but also offer wealthy individuals and companies double tax credit for every dollar donated into a supporting fund? The competition would lower the costs to people with traditional health insurance as well. Otherwise mandatory health insurance won't work any better than mandatory auto insurance. Which doesn't work at all since there is virtually no enforcement and even less punishment. Look around, we have become a nation where the law only affects the law abiding.

We already pay for people with no insurance through outrageous premiums. As a people, we are compassionate and many take advantage of that by using medical facilities and not paying their bills. Those costs get passed on. If we denied care to those without the ability to pay, we would be considered barbaric, yet it is those people without insurance who say, "I don't need it, I'm healthy" and walk out the door and whine when they do need help and think the rest should foot their bill. You are insuring 'against' the chance that you will need care and guaranteed in life, you will need health care at some point. By taking responsibility for your own care, you are not laying that burden on anyone else.

Obamacare is a disaster. The purpose of Obamacare is to let the government take over more control of our lives. You can already see that with the government determining the coverage private insurers must offer. What right does the government have telling a private business what products they can sell?

Do you really want some government bureaucrat determining what health care treatment you will get? Do you really think that the government has your best interest in mind when determining what care you will receive?

Nothing the government does really works. Social security-a Ponzi scheme. The US Postal Service-bankrupt. etc., etc., etc.

Socialism destroys everything it touches. We see what socialism is doing to Greece, Spain and Ireland. We see what socialism has done to Cuba, Venezuela and North Korea. Socialism is already on its way to destroying America.

President Obama is our first socialist president. Thumbs down.

Premiums will not go down under Obamacare, that's a talking point.....please
People will not not be able to keep what they have....they will be for Ed into government supplied HC.

Name me one program the government runs where the costs came in lower? I'll help you there is none.

Let Europe keep there government run HC system. Fix ours and make it better.

Throw out Obamacare.

We should have had a single payor system, so that self employed people, who make up the bulk of our small businesses and start up companies, could get reasonable rates. Single payor was the answer and it would help those business prople brave enough to work for themselves an opportunity to get coverage at a fair price, but the loonies in tri-corner hats and don't tread on me flags, carrying posters if our president in a hitler moustache (mccloud)were crying about death panels because their radio told them right wing, insurance company paid talking points. The rest of the civilized world, including Steindude's beloved Norway has a single payor system. While we have a million different forms for every insurance co and hoops of fire to jump thru if you really get sick and need cutting edge treatment. Basically it comes down to it being pure money or health driven. The repubs always go for rhe cash and never think about anything else. To them life is about the accumulation of wealth in some sort of 6,000 sq. ft. rather than trying to make wherever they are a better place. Cash vs. A better world?

As a small business owner, we are strapped to pay the health insurance premiums we have now. If we were allowed to form associations across state lines and combine risk pools, we could obtain better insurance. Reduce the regulations and remove the barriers to better insurance rates.

Obamacare instituted some very sweet initial offerings like keeping kids on your policy until they are 26 and removing pre-existing conditions to insure more people. They don't mention that you get rated up if you have a pre-existing. You can get the insurance but open your wallet wider.

Single payer system seems good until you think about how they will set care limits based on age, how long the wait times are for surgical procedures in other countries and while many Canadians I've spoken to love their health care, they say they come to the US for any serious procedure and the wait times are very long.

With apologies to Simon and Garfunkle; "Laugh about it, shout about it when you've got to choose. Any way you look at it you lose."

"Beam me up Scotty, there is no intelligent life on this planet."

Richard, I see you don't know any more about Universal Health Care then you do about guns!! Same old Faux News positions with no real thought.

Health costs have always been rising, due in part to state run legislators passing mandated benefits forcing carriers to cover such things as birth control, alcohol counseling, viagra, ect. A company cannot exist by writing the extra costs put on them off as charity, so everybody pays more premium dollars. By homoginizing coverage, they put competition to a minimum, therefore the legislatures are in large part responsible for this mess. Now they want complete control? I guess they think the taxpayer will absorb the blow, making our out of control debt even more unsustainable than it is right now.

Think of the guy who lives in a cabin and lives off the land.........he has no car and does not work.

Why should he be forced to buy health insurance?

But I bet he pays taxes...

Bruce Harvey: "Lucky for him that by then we will smarten up like the rest of the civilized world & have universal health coverage & no money hungry health insurance Co.'s around to screw us over."

Yes, monopolies are always better than competitive markets and that's why government has enacted anti-trust regulations. Oh wait a minute, I'm wrong about that. Government has enacted anti-trust regulations because monopolies are not good. Government is the ultimate monopoly.

Just what we need-more government in our lives telling us what to do and when to do it. Maybe Bruce Harvey needs more direction, but I'm capable of figuring stuff out for myself.

A recent survey indicated that 83 percent of doctors currently practicing will consider leaving the field if Obamacare is implemented. What will Bruce Harvey do when there are no doctors left to treat him when he needs a doctor?

My guess is that Mr. Harvey will start complaining.

He chooses not to go to a doctor.......why should he be forced to buy insurance? Constitution says government can not force you to buy things. If you need health insurance....where does it end? How about cell phones? Food? Gas? Electricity?

The farce legislation called Obamacare is based on false assumptions. By mandating coverage they assume all 30 million current uninsureds will be forced to buy in, therefore the extra dollars will compensate the higher costs. Think about it, if you have a family of four, and only $300 in your checking account, my best guess is you buy groceries and brace for the penalty.

Don't worry, there won't be anyone to provide health care. Many physicians are opting out of Medicare even now. Hospitals will go bust and you will wait, wait, wait. You will be consulting someone who was educated at Chicago Electric and Medical and who will be paid $10.00 per hour. Good luck.

The wwat the GOP talks about Europe and demonizes everything about it is absured. Have any of your tea party people actually traveled outside the US? I'm not talking the epcot center in disneyworld or the Venetian in Vegas. I love my country but to always think you know everything and not question anything the GOP and PAC money feeds you thru sound bites, is the very essence of an ignorant, uneducated voter yhe corporate interests depend on. Everything about Rommney is faux. From his perfect wife and kids (stepford) to his hair gel. Thank hod the average tea party nemebers age is 67. The young in our country, aren't anti gay anti middle class anti anything that requires

Here again the psychotic rants of an intolerant, all knowing, slandering strange preconceptive liunacy and somewhat illiterate liberal.

Health care is more and more expensive because there are more and more expensive evaluative and treatment procedures that fuel people's unsatiable desire to "do everything that can be done" and "remain alive no matter what because you just can't put a price, including bankruptcy, on doing so.

Single payor is most cost efficient to the insured because of having the largest pool (everyone), but would come with the loss of so many jobs in our convoluted system, such as all the secretaries, paper-pushers and money transferer's in managed care as well as insurance companies, brokers, sales people etc.

Be nice if there were some practical reasonable guidelines for making medical decisions, but neither government bureaucrats nor corporate executives seem to be the best candidate to do so.

Dolph Zielinski, CLU: "It makes more sense for everyone to pay in direct proportion to their income, not to do so is unconstitutional."

What page of Karl Marx's Das Capital are you reading from? I'd like to follow along.

Sorry, but Marxism/Lenism was tried in the Soviet Union and failed, although millions of people were murdered trying to implement the system.

The US Constitution says nothing about the allocation of resources to the citizens of this country. It's hard to fathom that anyone in the United States actually believes what was stated above, but it shows how far we've come along the road to socialism. Socialism results in nothing but misery.

Where do people receive the radio waves that single payor would be more efficient? Administration costs are minimized currently by private insurers to maximize profit, and claims admin is usually 5% of total premium, while profit believe it or not is also built in the rates of only 5% and has realized about 2.5% of total premium. Costs are never determined in these Obama models to include the insurance company paying $200 for an aspirin tablet to cover the costs of the uninsured in the current system.

Why is everyone complaining about forcing the non-insured to buy/pay for insurance, when we should be complaining about being forced to pay higher premiums for the uninsured?
Medical costs have been going up long before anyone knew Barak Obama existed.

If already covered, I apologize. Medicare and Social Security are TAXES which is undoubtedly a federal power granted under the Constitution. The Democrats intentionally used the Commerce Clause because they didn't want to appear to be raising taxes. They didn't mention the power to tax until they went before the Supreme Court. Medicare and SS don't apply as a comparison.

No government at any level requires anyone to have homeowners insurance. Your Mortgage company requires that to protect them.

There is no Federal requirement to purchase auto insurance. The States require it but the 10th Amendment allows that, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." That means that States can pass laws that the Federal Government can't, like Romneycare in MA. as apposed to Obamacare.

Similar to the concept of a K through 12 th grade education, our citizens need affordable base-care health coverage/access. Our property taxes help support "free" public education, so why can't we devise a public approach for healthcare? The wealthy send their children to private educational institutions if they deem the public choice as lacking, similarly everyone would be free to purchase more extensive coverage if they could afford it. Maybe we all need to compromise here in that public education isn't perfect, but it is better than NO education at all... I'm personally tired of paying extreme monthly insurance premiums (self-employed & self-insured) to never meet my high deductible. My family can only afford to see a doctor if/when we think we might have a life-threatening condition, while others either have free access with no insurance, or they are covered throughout a life-threatening condition (spending millions) to live a few more years. We all want to live a long and healthy life, just as we all want to be educated. Hum... maybe government-funded colleges too? I don't know... nothing is "free" and we ALL need to pay something.

Stop paying for all the illegals first!! They are sucking billions of dollars free education, medical treatment, housing, day care ect.... As a tax paying American I want to opt of of supporting illegals and deal with that issue before being forced into health care by a President that is allowing illegals to continue their free ride.

America has the most expensive health care system in the world by a factor of two yet we have health outcomes that rank us 37th in the world, right there with some third world countries. Why? Because of the profit-motive system. We overbuild and build the most expensive machines because competition demands it! Countries with single payer health care offer better care for fewer dollars. Wake up and smell the espresso!

http://csteventucker.wordpress.com/2010/03/21/how-bad-is-the-democrats-health-care-reform-bill-really/

What we’ve been told about the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act vs. THE TRUTH -- http://www.sbisvcs.com/Brochures/Obamacare%20One%20Page%20Leave%20Behind.pdf

One of the major differences between the mandate of auto ins vs the PPACA mandate is that auto ins. is based at the state level on the state constitution. BTW, not all 50 states mandate auto ins. Mandating health ins. at the national level IS unconstitutional, but it would be ok at the state level based on what is in their constitutions.

The "funding mechanism" (a.ka. the "Individual Mandate") portion of Obamacare is most definitely Unconstitutional. The Federal Government can NOT use the Commerce clause (or any other clause) to COMPEL commerce (via mandating health insurance purchase NOW so that they can regulate that commerce later).

Secondly, car insurance can indeed be compelled by a STATE because our Constitution's 10th Amendment allows the states to do that and much more. Furthermore, there is no correlation between car insurance and health insurance. States that mandate car insurance do so to protect the VICTIM of a car accident, not the driver of the vehicle. This is why only minimum car insurance coverage is a required purchase in most states.

Lastly, if you do not drive a car, you are not mandated to purchase car insurance. With the Obamacare 'individual health insurance purchase mandate', you have no choice to purchase or not purchase health insurance. You are simply illegally COMPELLED to do so by an ever intrusive Federal Government whether you like it (or want it) or not.

Lastly, any first year law student knows that ANY contract (which is what a health insurance policy is) that is entered into by FORCE, where one or more parties to that contract are either unwilling or are coerced is ILLEGAL. This is PRECISELY what will be occurring if the Obamacare individual mandate is upheld in the U.S. Supreme Court. For more truth visit www.TruthAboutObamaCare.com

So you don't like the individual mandate in the health care law.
Fine.
What would you replace it with?
Why do you think Newt Gingrich back in Hillary's days was for it -- after they had looked at everything else?
There was no way around it.
"The insurance mandate is socialism, plain and simple."
If it's socialism, you'd have to buy it from the government, which would also tell you what doctor or hospital to go to. But you can buy health insurance from anybody, and you can get treated by the doctor and hospital you want. What's socialist about that?
"Can't you see, the government is making us buy insurance. We have no choice in the matter."
Do you have a choice not to get hurt, or not to get sick? Why then do you want a choice not to have insurance to pay for it when you do?
States in fact already have an individual mandate for car insurance, and they have been putting uninsured drivers in jail for years.
"That's different. Driving is a privilege."
Then free health care must be a right in your book. Maybe this idea came from hospitals continuing to treat the uninsured the last half century.
The tradeoff to us living in a civilized society is that we have to follow rules we don't agree with. In return, we get great many things, including goods and services that otherwise would be unavailable. But, we still have to pay for them. The mandate makes sure that we do.
What's wrong with that?

Except in the UK, medical care is multi-tiered and tending to private modes/ The UK is single payor but folks with money can opt out. The US system is so distorted that no national system will work at this point without major cultural changes. And for certain, no national system will work until there is tort reform. Everyone in the system knows that.

You folks don't get it. There are not going to be enough doctors to take care of 40 million more patients and tyhe ones who don't quit will only see certain patients. The next step will be forced participation. That should work well.

And here's the best reason of all to keep government out of health care:

Government Bureaucrat: Mr. Schulte, I see your medical records indicate that you voted for Barack Obama in the last election.

Mr. Schulte: Yes, that's correct, but how did you know that?

Government Bureaucrat: Never mind how we know that. We have our ways.

Mr. Schulte: Oh, OK.

Government Bureaucrat: I'm sorry Mr. Schulte, but you are not eligible for treatment. If you had voted for Mitt Romney, you would have been eligibile. The next time you vote, I hope you will consider the ramifications of your vote. Your health depends upon you voting the way we want you to vote. Do you understand what I'm telling you Mr. Schulte? Good. Now, go put a Mitt Romney bumper sticker on your car and come back and see us in about 4 weeks. If you do the right thing, maybe we'll be able to get you in to see a doctor. Good day, Mr. Schulte.

Mr. Schulte: Thank you. I'll go get a Mitt Romney bumper sticker right away and I just decided to contribute $10 thousand to the Republican Party. I write a check to the Party on the way out.

Government Bureaucrat: Well then, if we get an opening, perhaps we'll be able to get you in to see a doctor sooner.

Of course, Republicans would never do that, but the Democrats would do it in a heartbeat. That's the way the City of Chicago and Crook County have operated for the last 50 years.

There is videotape of Obama before he bacame President who explained that his method for single payor would be gradual fraud, passing slow grab legislation that would fail to lead eventually single payor. Trouble is our economy now that the fraud passed is on life support, this will just be the kick over the cliff.

Socialized Medicine: Baby at risk of brain damage has crucial operation cancelled because of doctors' strike

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2163810/Baby-risk-brain-damage-crucial-op-cancelled-doctors-strike.html#ixzz1ylMKkFa7

As I have said many times, if you go back and research the arguments against medicare in 1065, they were that it would break the system. Guess what?
The only way to save it now is to ration care and which one of the bureaucrats will do that intelligently? Just as they do in the UK if you are 55 or older and have end stage renal disease. " I am so sorry, Mrs. Curmbly. Just go home and have a nice cup of tea. The end will come soon".

"the Q"...
I always shop around before going to a doctor and the response from the doctor's office and health insurance company is outrageous! They think I'm crazy for asking and when I tell them I want to make sure I can cover the expense before booking an appointment, they all tell me most don't ever call and ask... it takes so much time to complete that process that most don't ask. The doctor's office has to predetermine what might be wrong based on a lengthy phone conversation with office staff and the doctor, then they assign "codes" for treatment, then I call the insurance company to see if they will tell me the discounted price based on my plan for those codes... and they want everything in writing; they won't quote pricing over the phone, and the doctor's contract with that particular insurance company is considered "confidential", and it goes on and on to the point that most patients drop out of "the asking" since they are covered... but not completely covered even though they are lucky enough to have insurance. I feel like a burdensome patient for the asking even though I'm paying an arm and a leg for the coverage with a higher deductible so that I can find a way to pay the monthly insurance premium. YES, the doctor's fees are discounted from having this insurance, so I'm happy to be charged one fifth or one tenth of the "list" price for service.

A free and open market for insurance across the borders seems logical to me. The insurance companies need some competition to bring their coverage and prices down. I write this knowing that insurance companies have no way of knowing how much their customers will require for future treatments. What if I get the dreaded cancer? I would want to fight that one to the finish. There are no easy answers, but I agree with ALL who have stated that it is time our county stop paying for the illegals who want to live here for free!!!!!

Justice Oliver Wendel Holmes -- a great conservative -- put it this way: "Taxes are the price we pay for civilization."

"Taxes are the price we pay for civilization."

Would you consider Greece to be a civilized nation? It was, until Greece taxed and spent itself into bankruptcy.

Nobody I know thinks that all government and taxes should be abolished. Excessive government interference in our lives and excessive taxes should be abolished. Obamacare is excessive interference in our lives.

The two founders of the TEA party movement were President Obama and Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Fortunately for America, these two radicals came along just as America was about to destroy itself.

Bob Stock: "Raymond, don't listen to Schulte, he is apparently gone over the ledge with so many of his fellow lemmings."

Based upon Mr. Prusak's posts on this thread and on others, it is my opinioin that Mr. Prusak is a marxist. Nothing really wrong with being a marxist if you think that Cuba and North Korea are the ideal model. Everybody in Cuba and North Korea are equally impoverished (except for Party members). And their are no over-weight people in North Korea because everybody is malnourished (except for Party members).

Not many people that I know aspire to ideal of Cuba and North Korea, but "diversity is our strength". Mr. Prusak's opinions are part of the "diversity" and should be welcomed. People who think the Cuban/North Korean model of government is best need to speak up more.

Some information on just how effective Federal Government social welfare programs are:

" “[S]ince President Obama took office, federal welfare spending has increased by 41 percent, more than $193 billion per year.” the study says.

Federal welfare spending this year now totals $668 billion, spread out over 126 programs, while the poverty rate that remains stubbornly high at nearly 15 percent – roughly where it was in 1965, when President Johnson declared a federal War on Poverty."

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/study-more-half-trillion-dollars-spent-welfare-poverty-levels-unaffected

1965-47 years ago and the poverty rate is pretty much the same.

Obamacare will just be more of the same-another government failure.

Let's see, a quick check of Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution makes no mention of health care being a responsibility of the Federal Government, therefor health care falls through the 10th Amendment to the States or the individual people.

Pretty simple stuff. A first year law student should be able to get Obama-Care nullified in any court with an ounce of intellectual integrity.

What's all the fuss about?

From Reuters:

"Americans are strongly divided along partisan lines. Among Republicans, 86 percent oppose and 14 percent favor the law and Democrats back it by a 3-to-1 margin, 75 percent to 25 percent, the Reuters/Ipsos poll showed.

But in what could be a key indicator for the presidential contest, people who describe themselves as political independents oppose the law by 73 percent to 27 percent.

Opposition among independents has been growing. In a survey conducted in April, two weeks after the Supreme Court heard the case, 63 percent of them opposed the measure, and 37 percent favored it."

Read more on Newsmax.com: Reuters Poll: 73% of Independents Oppose Obamacare

Independents oppose Obamacare 73 percent to 27 percent. I'd say that the people have spoken-it's time to repeal Obamacare.

Can the government make you buy broccoli? If it is ruled Constitutional they can.
http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/03/scalia-wonders-about-a-broccoli-mandate-118823.html

From the Heritage Foundation:

"Top Five Reasons Obamacare Is Bad for Doctors:

Exacerbates future physician shortage. America is projected to face a shortage of 91,500 doctors in 2020. Meanwhile, many surveys have concluded that American doctors have a negative view of Obamacare and its impact on the medical field. One survey found that Obamacare is motivating 43 percent of doctors to move up their retirement within the next five years. This will intensify the already existing doctor shortage."

Source: http://blog.heritage.org/2012/06/22/top-five-reasons-obamacare-is-bad-for-doctors/?roi=echo3-12373352320-8978653-8bf4060d4b5cacfc7c9978e8e3c84343&utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell

Regardless of the Supreme Court ruling, this law was passed against the large majority who oppose it. The leaders in Washington had no reason to listen to the will of the people, they were more interested in taking advantage of a crisis in the economy for political power. They passed this knowing the turmoil and consequences we all continue to feel, and are about to experience the worst of this carpet bomb.

Bob Stock: "You need to stop watching Fox news and listening to Rush, it has obviously melted your ability to "learn" about things before you provide your opinion."

Mr. Stock, I have only watched Fox News once in my life-I don't own a television.

That notwithstanding, you didn't explain why I should stop watching Fox news. I assume it has to do with bias. What you don't seem to realize or understand is that ABS, NBS and CBS are also biased, as is CNN. Everybody has a bias.

What you seem not to want to admit is that you are also biased. Do I have a bias? Yes, of course.

With respect to Rush Limbaugh, once again I will ask you what the problem is with Rush. Rush clearly admits he is biased.

Rush has conducted a discussion of national politics for 3 hours, 5 days a week, for the last 23 years (24 years in August). Rush not only expresses an opinion, but also provides a basis for opinion. Although Rush has been on the radio for almost 24 years, his liberal competition, Air America, died after a few years.

The reason that Rush has been so successful is that he is highly knowledeable on the subject of his radio show and he's entertaining-Rush's show is never boring. show. Rush is the "big voice on the right". Thumbs up.

People don't understand what the "individual mandate" - originally a Republican idea until the Democrats said ok so now it's "no good". Simple: get health insurance or pay a tax penalty. The only alternative would seem to be a single-payer system, which would mean a federal tax. We have forced retirement (social security tax); forced senior health care (medicare); hospitals are forced to serve the indigent / illegal (EMTALA); we are forced to buy roads (federal gas tax whether you drive or not). We are forced to buy / use water-saving and energy-saving products (toilets). We have a fundamental right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" (Declaration of Independence) and the federal government has a mandate to "provide for the general welfare (US Constitution). Without health, both life and the pursuit of happiness are compromised if not denied; and when the health care system drives people into bankruptcy, it defeats the general welfare. Over 200 years ago, the words "health care" may not have been part of the vernacular. Today it is, and our constitution is resilient enough to adapt to changing national needs. It's called substantive due process. Scalia is rolling his eyeballs.

If the individual mandate had been set up as a tax then it would be constitutional, some of the justices mentioned this a few months ago during SUPREME COURT open arguments. But all the arguments are moot points anyways as the USA will eventually have a single payer system. This is because the "nanny state" will just continue to grow and grow. Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare and all federal vouchers to any recipients are examples of the "nanny state".

The thing that really amazes me is that there is probably no comment here from a physician or hospital person. The physicians know exactly how this BObamacare will make a flawed system worse. They know that the only folks who will suffer are the patients. The physicians will be able to shuck and jive to fine a comfortable spot in any system like not working weekends or after 5:00 pm. The hospitals will become so bureaucratic that mistakes will increase. Someone commented that single payor systems have better outcomes. That is pure baloney. The United States has the highest survival rates for any serious cancer, etc. The UK system gave Mugrahbi 3 months to live when they released him to Lybia. He lived three years. That is because the UK protocol for prostate cancer results in three month survival at that stage. He went to Lybia and they treated him with state of the art therapy and what do you know. The tragedy is that the coming decrease in quality of care will be gradual and in some ways imperceptable to most. My advice: Don't get sick. And if you do, expect to wait and wait to talk to someone who knows what they are doing.

The virus called Obamacare has already made an impact on unemployment. Employers are unable to make long term plans, as nobody really knows the fees and penalties attached to it. Once the other aspects of it release, our economic system as we know it will never be the same.

Those folks who think BObamacare is great are rthe same ones who think that the government is benevolent and that society can be ordered to perfection, that there will be no crime, no poverty, no ignorance, no suffering, pleasant music in the background, good wine for dinner at a fine restaurant, etc. And ythey are hoping that in that state of their fantasized world, all of the conservatives will convert to their point of view. Please check out a little world history to see how all of that might work out for you.

Ignoring the constitutional issues, I am confused as to why the right wingers are so opposed to making individuals responsible for paying their own way on healthcare. Personal accountability is such a right wing concept.

In this era of Europe bashing, we should look at a country that is located in Europe but is not part of the EU. Switzerland has a totally private healthcare system. There are no public clinics and no public insurance. There is a clear INDIVIDUAL MANDATE that every resident must purchase private insurance and a requirement that insurance companies must sell a basic policy regardless of medical history. Insurers sell these policies with no medical questions and compete on price. If you want upgrades to the policy, you can ad them in and the insurance company is free to reject or accept your request for non-basic coverage.

Bob must be a liberal, liberals know everything, how the earth was created, how carbon is somehow ruining creation, that there is no God, how stimulus spending gets us out of a recession, that rich people are evil, that Republicans are corn picking hayseeds, how much money is enough. The more a liberal speaks the more stupid they look.

" As your mind rots as you stare at four walls in the basement eating Cheeto's think about joining the human race"... nothing but funny.
The insults being slung in this thread would make Don Rickles proud.
Several of you should consider getting together and taking it to Zanies. I'd pay...
Thanx for the laughs... : )

Bob, thanks for the tip on Keynes, I read a book about it a long time ago in college. Sorry to ruffle any feathers, I just continue to hear the insults and same talking points from liberals and that it gets repetitive. Not sure I believe stimulus saving us from the depression thing, I heard that with the debt ceiling debate and we now know that after a vote with conventional wisdom our credit rating had been downgraded after. This happened after all the talk about without a ceiling increase vote we were surely destined for credit downgrade. This is where once again the Tea Party was proved correct and the conventional wisdom wrong. Who makes up this conventional wisdom, MSNBC?

Of course there is never enough money because we don't have real money. We have a note that says I owe the federal reserve for printing this "money". As for ANY kind of insurance, the whole thing is a racket. I know because I studied in school how to help insurance companies increase their profits by screwing people where it really counts.

General Sandra Sims: "Having nothing intelligent to say never stops you from ranting on for a thousand words at a time."

Ms. Sims based upon your comment, I assume that you are a graduate of the Chicago Public School system and have difficulty reading and writing more than a few words at a time. Sorry, but simply because you have difficulty reading doesn't mean that I have to write my posts so that you will be capable of understanding them.

Mr. Shulte,

I don't care if you watched Fauz news once -- you
are the epitome of their ideology. I don't know what your situation is, maybe a middle class person, not professionally motivated to spew this brainwashed ideology, or you were indoctrinated by your father, a conservative, or you are a well-to-do businessperson, but your blather about in-favor of privatizing and hatred for the government which leads me to think you are a mouthpiece for conservatives, a shill or at least a tool on this website for conservative speak which has a value of zero. You are a recycler of garbage thought. I tend to be an observer, an as an astute one at that. I am a statistician and get paid for this.

The reasons are threefold showing you are trying to influence on this site: First, you promote Rush Lumbaugh, the fattest garbage spewer on your side (see below). Second, you launch ad hominem attacks (attacking the character)
of our president -- he is not a socialist. Would a socialist allow the stock markets to double under his watch? The markets under idiot Bush, number 2, hemorraged from December 2007, as National Associationof of Business economists determined the contraction's beginning during his illegitimate occupier of white house terms and hit the bottom 3 months after Obama took office, March 2009.

its going down tomorrow........you LIbs are going to eat a lot of crow!

Richard Schulte
7:58 pm on Monday, June 25, 2012
Bob Stock: "You need to stop watching Fox news and listening to Rush, it has obviously melted your ability to "learn" about things before you provide your opinion."
Mr. Stock, I have only watched Fox News once in my life-I don't own a television.
That notwithstanding, you didn't explain why I should stop watching Fox news. I assume it has to do with bias. What you don't seem to realize or understand is that ABS, NBS and CBS are also biased, as is CNN. Everybody has a bias.
What you seem not to want to admit is that you are also biased. Do I have a bias? Yes, of course.
With respect to Rush Limbaugh, once again I will ask you what the problem is with Rush. Rush clearly admits he is Rush has conducted a discussion of national politics for 3 hours, 5 days a week, for the last 23 years (24 years in August). Rush not only expresses an opinion, but also provides a basis for opinion -- Rubbish!

Rush has been on the radio for almost 24 years, his liberal competition, Air America, died after a few years.
The reason that Rush has been so successful is that he is highly knowledeable on the subject of his radio show and he's entertaining-Rush's show is never boring. show. Rush is the "big voice on the right". Thumbs up.
You are a simpleton cheerleader for the conservatives, if you are open minded, listen to

The Progressive station, a voice of the people and for the people which provides intelligent and honest talk about politics listen to http://www.chicagoprogressivetalk.com till 9 pm CST on 92.7 FM, 99.9 FM and others and 24 hours on the AM. Air America may not exist, however, there is a stronger, fact-based, intelligent source for politics.  I suggest Norman Goldman from 6 to 8 pm.

I believe you are not only posting as Mr Schulte, but Gary and maybe Joe Nelson.  That or either ya'll feed from the same trough.  I'll post a graph to show what 30 years of conservative garbage has resulted in for US workers and cite some legitimate sources.

Read about the misconception of the distribution of wealth in the US. I vomit in my mouth when conservatives and the Q say: "it's (I presume the affordable care act in it's entirety) going down tomorrow and liberals are going to eat a lot of crow". Do you understand that Health care companies egregious rejection of applicants with pre-existing conditions is hurting your fellow Americans? Do you have no compassion, no shame?
So the Q, you are so focused on playing the game, you hate the players (fellow Americans) who maybe literally hurting with pre-existing conditions and will either physically die with cancer or die financially (bankruptcy) paying ungodly prices for cancer or healthcare coverage for other maladies? Instead of hating the game, you hate your fellow players ( in your words liberals), Q you are a shortsighted idiot!

If the affordable care act is struck down, your humble-pie brain may win, but have you thought of who loses? I, Doug Smith, have been personally rejected by Blue Cross Blue Shield Of Illinois, Health care Service Corporation after college due to pre-existing conditions.  You are also against the 6 million or so 26-year old and unders that would receive coverage under the affordable health care act.  It is clear you are against the act; therefore, you are against covering these people, you bigot!  I sure as hell know I and others will continue fighting for healthcare coverage for all in the US.  In the meantime, while you reflect, U will post some evidence to show what the conservatives have given the US for the last 30 years -- Rubbish!

The misconception of wealth in the US, a Duke and Harvard University Business School collaborative study, authors Michael Norton and Dan Ariely, respectively. Note Harvard Business school not exactly a bastion of liberalism:
http://www.people.hbs.edu/mnorton/norton%20ariely.pdf

See the visual inequality depicting our wealth inequality in the US here:

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/21/12345961-that-wealth-inequality-chart-rachel-showed-last-night?lite

More rubbish. If the ffen corporations (especially them) and the tax evading 1% paid there fair share that would do. Ah the conservative mind, you say who is to pay for this? I thought I read you saying there is no revenue enough to pay for this, an expected response denying any revenue would be insufficient. No you and your ilk stop!

I am now 38, have worked for A company bought by IBM, Allstate Insurance headquarters, Ironically, Blue Cross Blue Shield Association. If as your Richard Schulte persona exclaimed:

Richard Schulte
10:57 am on Sunday, June 24, 2012
Brian: "Why is it that you can only ever see one side of things?"
An excellent question. First, let's acknowledge that the United States already has the best health care system on the planet. When independently wealthy people anywhere in the world are ill, they come to America for treatment (usually the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota).
The problem is the cost of health care treatment in America. Everywhere else in life, better products cost more than inferior products. Shouldn't better health care cost more than inferior health care? It would seem so.
Your comment assumes that our government can improve on the existing health care system, but we already have when experience tells...

us that the government is, at best, incompetent. In the mid-1960's, the Johnson Administration declared war on poverty. LBJ's War on Poverty in America has been on-going for more than 45 years and we've spent trillions of dollars to eliminate poverty, but poverty is still with us. If we can't eliminate poverty in America in 45 years, what makes you think that the government can retool our health care system to make it even better than it already is?
While people in our government may be well intentioned (and that is debateable), good intention are not a substitute for performance. With the implementation of Obamacare, the quality of our health care will decline and cost will still be a problem. Obamacare is a lose-lose situation for the American people.

Let's jointly Acknowledge that the United States is the richest economy and it's corporations are the most profitable in the world and that we have the best healthcare system in the world, sure as hell we can give healthcare to all in the US!

I know your part of the party of no: No healthcare, no taxes, no abortions, prohibition (no alcohol), no immigrants (mainly brown), regulations, no education, no civil rights, no affirmative action, no marijuana, no College odd to vote, only drivers license to supress the young, college students and some elderly to vote! You learned to say yes to war, suffering, coddling the rich, freedom, and falsely faux responsibility, why not say yes for 2 decent things ( besides freedom)?

Yes freedom for the rich, corporations, and the privileged -- that is the Republican party! Any responses besides no?

Effem robots, effen Republicons! Conning the American People for 30 years is coming to an end soon!

Progressive party is for people and by the people. Libertarians are more for Freedeom than the Cons! Problem is, their candidates are crazy idiots.

Doug Smith

I have faced death sentences twice, and opted, both times to take matters into my own hands, do the research, adjust the diet, detox, etc...and both times regained my health. It was cheap, effective, but required taking responsibility for my own health, for researching how to do it, and staring down the guys in white coats who looked at me as though I would surely die if I chose to go my own way. This was over 13 years ago, by the way, and I'm fine, thanks. We have been hypnotized into believing that we're sane only if we hand responsibility over to "the experts," who, I might add, make a pretty penny by taking that responsibility on. I would rather be banned from emergency rooms catering to the general population than give up my freedom to practice health care as I see fit. There are worse fates than death, like loss of freedom to take care of oneself as one sees fit. June Shellene, President of Egmow.org and Chairwoman of Lieberman for Illinois.

I know this is a little off-topic, but this has bugged me for a long time and I wonder when it got started and for what reason. Why is driving a privilege and not a right? How about riding a horse, is/was that a privilege? Since when has it been a privilege rather than a right to transport yourself around the country? Years ago when I turned 16 and did the required training I went to the DMV took the test and passed. There was no "privilege" involved, it was and still is my right to drive unless I screw it up. It is my right, not a privilege to vote also, unless I screw that up. I thought "driving is a privilege, not a right" was something we told teenagers to keep them on the straight and narrow. I had no idea (until the past few years) that there are adults who actually believe it! I guess maybe that threat stuck a generation or so ago.

I agree with Johny, I would consider it a right. I thought about it and why it might be considered a privilege. Maybe the cost of buying a car is why it is deemed a privilege. Consider that getting a license means you have the intelligence to navigate, the motor skills to steer, stop and accelerate -- a skill. Thus, I would say getting the license and having the chops to drive is the right. For example, the privilege maybe associated with the money required to buy a car. Remember, people with less means or privilege can rent a car at less cost or privilege or get a used car. Privilege is synonymous with money and wherewithal. I think that healthcare to car insurance is apt. Having worked for the largest publicly-traded insurance company, Allstate, I know we go through the State department of insurance for approval of rates and regulation. The conservatives would love healthcare ...

... To be relegated to the states, as that would be tantamount to herding cats and they (the Cons) could prevent certain groups from getting healthcare (discrimination).

Similar to the cons objection to immigration issues, the aspect of allowing immigrants the same individual rights to live with dignity, hence the hatred against the president's decision to lower the priority of hunting young, non-criminal, educated and positive contributions to the United States. The cons want to disenfranchise the immigrants, as they usually don't vote republican. Some may go so far as wanting a homegenous society to expel all the "brown folk", but I digress. Surely, the republicans are for the rich and corporations, so this is a class war -- not a ethnic or race war necessarily. They don't want it publicized as a class war, because that would empower those of us who live paycheck to paycheck and those hurting; the poor and the hungry, would revolt. It is the republicans god damn egregious injustice would be exposed. They try to squash talk of the 1% and reality of living in the United States.

Back on topic, Having worked for Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, the umbrella organization for states plans, I think the auto insurance to healthcare insurance is a valid analogy. In fact, a friend of mine's brother was hit enough in his car that he may have been paralyzed, the motorist who hit his car was poor. Hence, no justice for a man physically impaired hit by someone with no insurance. The same thing for health insurance that is why the individual mandate is important, it will mitigate those situations of uninsured getting care and the costs get spread out to all those paying into insurance or insured, essentially everyone.

I think the analogy is valid. Johny good for speaking up as what was once accepted is no longer accepted until we stop accepting it. For example, blacks sitting in the backs of the bus, and seniors dying with no social security during the 1st depression.

and Freedom rings.......

Nope. The country is lost.

Now the United States joins the 21st century.

How does the unemployed and illegal immigrants fit into the Obamacare plan?

"House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said Thursday that the Republican-led House will vote on repealing the health care law soon after the July 4 recess.

Cantor, who sets the floor schedule in the House, said in a statement that the House will vote on the repeal the week of July 9 – which Cantor said will clear the path for “patient-centered reforms that lower costs and increase choice.” "

Source: http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-congress/2012/06/cantor-house-will-vote-on-repeal-week-of-july-127555.html

The Democrats shoved Obamacare down America's throat. Now, the Republicans will shove Obamacare up the Democrats' donkey.

Sure, now that it is called a tax, it is the largest tax increase in history, dwarfing all others. This happening on a weak economy means poor people will suffer, but you guys win.

Answer: No

I am really surprised the "right" doesn't realize that we are all paying for a bunch of freeloaders who don't buy health insurance but don't get turned away. Where is the outrage? There is not a righty around who would honestly deny that if a republican president put forward an individual mandate they would be for it. You guys really need to start thinking for yourselves and stop being blinded by hate and rage. Your getting what you want - more insurance customers with no government competition (single payer or a govt backed option). You worry about the wrong things and it is boring.

From the internet: You know the honeymoon is over,when the comedians start.

"The liberals are asking us to give Obama time. We agree...and think 25 to life would be appropriate." --Jay Leno

Divorce (as an alternative to civil war) is looking better and better with each passing day. The election of 2012 is looking a lot like the election of 1860.

Secession, as an alternative to civil war, might not be such a bad idea. Divide up the country between the red and blue states and let the purple states vote on whether they prefer the red or blue nation.

Instead of the Confederate States of America (CSA), the new (red) nation could be called the Constitutional States of America (CSA). The other nation (the blue nation) could be called New Greece and the capitol of New Greece could be located in Detroit. Detroit would be the perfect capitol city for the blue nation.

Of course, the currency of the blue nation (New Greece) would feature a picture of Barack Obama on the front and a picture of downtown Detroit on the back. You could win a poker game with a picture of Barack Obama and downtown Detroit-two of a kind.

"Chief Justice John Roberts has handed a remarkable victory to American conservatives by threading the judicial needle with perfect precision. The initial disappointment collectively felt by Americans who had hoped for a Supreme Court ruling that would overturn Obamacare soon will be replaced, upon further reflection, by the excitement that will come with a fuller appreciation of what the Chief Justice has wrought."

Read more:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/the_chief_justice_done_good.html#ixzz1zBoi3ViH

I think so too. Chief Justice Roberts has framed the issue for Americans and American voters will tell Washington to go to hell.

"Instead, even as he cast a powerful vote to rein in the Commerce Clause as our Founding Fathers intended for it to be applied against federal intrusiveness, Chief Justice Roberts returned Obamacare front-and-center back into the November elections debate. Defining it for what it really is -- a new, enormous federal tax on at least four million Americans (Slip op. at 37) -- the Chief Justice has lobbed a fat hanging curveball for conservatives to clobber. The ObamaCare tax does not apply to those who presently are untaxed, and it will not apply to the more wealthy, who will be excused because they carry health insurance anyway. Rather, the President who promised no new taxes against the middle class conclusively has been "outed" by the Chief Justice as having imposed the biggest tax on middle-class Americans in a generation."

Read more:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/the_chief_justice_done_good.html#ixzz1zBzdoqB5

Thumbs up Chief Justice Roberts!!!

The Dems got their butts kicked yesterday and they haven't figured it out yet. Oh well, by election day it will be obvious that the Chief Justice did good for America.

By the time the idiot libs figure it out, it will be too late. Gloat all you want now. It will be fun to watch when you realize what Roberts has dished up for you. Please review Marbury vs Madison if your reading comprehension is up to it.

But for its descent into political posturing and speculation, the article does an excellent job of explaining Chief Justice Robert's reasoning. And regardless of where one sits on the political spectrum, we should all applaud his most insightful opinion.

That said, I suspect many posters here have never really (and fully) read the Affordable Care Act, nor will they read the Chief Justice's opinion.

To the good fortune of those of us who choose to purchase heath insurance (it never really was a mandate in that failure to do so was is not considered illegal), we will no longer be responsible for paying for the uninsured. The non-insured tax will create a default shared risk insurance pool from which payments for their services will be made. As the article correctly points out, the States are not mandated to provide this expanded Medicaid coverage. It remains to be seen how the State's respond, but those that do not offer the coverage (which will paid for out of this risk pool) will simply be shifting the burden back to all taxpayers and reinstating the "free ride."

When voters finally come to this realization, they may not be so quick to call for repeal.

While everyone touts the "2,700 pages line," the reality is that version is published in legislative format - small pages and doubled-spaced. By my estimate, if you published it single-spaced, 10 point font and on 8-1/2 by 11 paper, it would shrink by 90 percent or more.
The ACA's objectives are (1) to reign in healthcare costs by identifying opportunities for cost efficiencies and (2) redistributing liability for the uninsured away from the general population to those individuals who do not have insurance. When we talk about the CBO numbers we talk about changes in total cost. The CBO admits that its numbers have a wide range of uncertainty and we still need to remember the total estimate is just that - total. What isn't discussed is the distribution of those costs. The increased costs are not borne by the already insured, but by the uninsured.
Contrary to popular political pandering, the ACA does not include an individual mandate, a single-payer provision or a mandate for State participation, but it does include provisions for identifying inefficiencies in the healthcare system and addressing them, and for increasing transparency across the healthcare system, a result which will actually enhance competition, not surpress it. I think they call that capitalism.

The answer to the question is.....no, it's not Unconstitutional!
Here's A Romney quote from an op-Ed about RomneyCare that he wrote for USA today in 2009. "First, we established incentives for those who were uninsured to buy insurance. Using tax penalties, as we did, or tax credits, as others have proposed, encourages "free riders" to take responsibility for themselves rather than pass their medical costs on to others".
Among his many issues, his memory may be failing!

Ole Buc: """I have to admit that I have not read the law know as Obamacare" Dick S. is an uninformed blowhard? Shocking. Simply shocking.""

Thank you for the laugh Buc. Nancy Pelosi hasn't read the entire bill to this day. No one in Congress read the entire bill and understood it before the Demcrats shoved Obamacare down our throats and voted for the bill. The justices of the Supreme Court haven't read the entire Obamacare bill, yet the Supreme Court issued a ruling on the constitutionality of Obamacare yesterday.

And Buc criticizes me for not reading the Obamacare bill prior to commenting on it. Shocking. Simply shocking.

If the Obamacare bill was published on a roll of toilet tissue paper, I might have read parts of it. I haven't read Karl Marx's Das Capital either, but I don't need to in order to know that Das Capital should also be published on a roll of toilet tissue paper.

Buc, you just made a fool of yourself.

Ole Buc: "But here, at least, I KNOW, you're a fool."

No, you know that at least I'm honest and have some integrity.

Let me get his straight, once Obamacare is released, we no longer have to pay outrageous premiums because everybody will have insurance? How does that work? The guy who makes low wages, and cannot afford to pay his bills will suddenly buy a policy due to the law? How does this work?

Ole Buc: "It is always gratifying when someone shows care and concern about opinions different from their own. I, however, couldn't care less what you say about anything."

Does Ole Buc bother to read anything that he writes? In one sentence he berates me for not being interested in what he has to say. Then in the very next sentence he says his has no interest in what I've got to say.

The progressive mind is simply too brilliant for us dumb conservatives to comprehend. Based upon the comment above, it would appear that Ole Buc is an advanced form of algae-algae that has developed the skill to post foolish comments on Patch.

OK, Ole Buc, get upset and post another foolish comment on this thread. I can't wait for your next post-you're better than an episode of Seinfeld. Oh, now I get it, you were the model for Kramer.

Progressives always take themselves so seriously.

Richard Schulte wrote:
"The Oracle is, of course, writing in jest. Those of us who have ever had health insurance paid out of their own pocket know that health insurance premiums are not "scaled to income". If they were, health insurers would be giving away health insurance to people who are unemployed and have no income."

Yesterday you admitted you have not actually read the ADA. I suggest you do, particularly the part on what was deemed the penalty (the Court deemed a tax). It is the tax imposed on those who cannot attain coverage (or refuse to do so) that is scaled to income, with a maximum cap equal to the premium he or she would have paid. Thus, someone who otherwise can afford the premiums does not become a free loader by not buying insurance - his coverage is simply provided through the shared risk pool rather than by a private sector provider. For those who cannot afford private sector insurance, they pay into the shared risk pool and coverage is provided via Medicaid. The scaling means everyone gets to pay something.

If you can afford the premiums and want better coverage than the minimum provided through Medicaid, get insurance.

By the way, here is a plain-language version of that notorious "death panel" provision:

Section 1233 of the ADA requires the Medicare program to reimburse doctors if a Medicare beneficiary asks them for consultation on advanced care, end-of-life planning considerations like how to make a living will, assign people to make health care decisions for them (durable power of attorney), and hospice care (which is actually already covered under Medicare).

Maybe it's me, but that doesn't look anything like a "death panel."

Many times Rich is the first off topic and the first to complain when someone else is off topic. The poll is old. The Affordable Care Act is Constitutuional. Thankfully, Americans will be able to afford healthcare. Ole Rich will never take a position that is remotely Democratic. He'll go on to tell you a hundred times that he once was a Democrat, in a land far far away from his humid home in Florida. He will tell us that he does not need the Government too. Just wait till he starts screaming for FEMA to come help him and his neighbors down there.

Dcb: "How about the Amish, will they be required to participate? I heard they were exempt."

Dcb, thanks for the info-thumbs up!

I was just about ready to shave this morning when I read your post. So all I have to do to be exempt is grow a beard, buy a horse and wear a broad brimmed black hat and I'm exempt.

Chief Justice Roberts is brilliant for upholding the A;mish exemption.

Richard Schulte wrote:
"I was just about ready to shave this morning when I read your post. So all I have to do to be exempt is grow a beard, buy a horse and wear a broad brimmed black hat and I'm exempt."
_________________

So let's see: You won't buy insurance and you won't be in the shared risk pool - you'll be completely outside the system.

You'll probably need to keep a mirror around so you can see what you're doing when you do your own coronary bypass surgery.

Sounds like there are quite a few people who listen well to the fools defending this virus called Obamacare. They get five minutes of nonsense, and are sudden experts on health insurance. The bottom line here is that soon there will be more so called deadbeats as companies would rather swallow a fine than pay for even higher premiums. Providers would rather not see Medicaid patients, since the government reimburses them less than half of cost. Too many mouths flapping regurgitated nonsense.

McCloud,
Have you actually read the ADA?

Please expound on your theory that there will be more "deadbeats."

Let's take McCloud for example. His employer decides to stop offering a group policy through the company. McC goes out to look for insurance and discovers he can conveniently shop for insurance and can get an identical individual policy for exactly the same premium his employer deducted from his paycheck under the group policy. Or maybe he finds an insurer that offers a policy even more tailored to his needs.

Being so armed, McC decides he would rather not have life insurance. Before the ACA, he would then use the ER as his primary care provider, displacing patients truly in need of emergency care and forcing the hospital pad its service fees to cover the service provided him since he no longer carries insurance.

Under the ACA, McC will contribute to and be covered by the shared risk pool. He can then go to a doctor and the doctor can be reimbursed from the shared risk pool via Medicaid.

So to sum up, all our insurance premiums include an uninsured cost component to cover what McC calls "deadbeats." Under the ACA, that uninsured cost component is removed from our premiums and the providers costs are paid from the shared risk pool via Medicaid.

Shared risk pool? Are you sure you even know what that is? Find an identical policy for exactly the same premium his employer deducted from his paycheck? Geez, you are in a world of ignorance without a paddle. Rather than continue debating a moron, I'd like to just make a point. The reimbursement schedule from any government program does not allow providers to cover costs. Therefore, there will be less providers, and no change in the providers padding the fully insured guy who walks into their facility. The bill itself is about as useful as reading a phonebook, since comittees will eventually enact their choices.

Sorry, this is just too much fun. Find an insurer that offers a policy even more tailored to his needs. Where? Democrats at the state level have been loading up costs for all of us by passing mandated benefits, google any state and the word mandated heath benefits, there are thousands of them and different for each state. Thats why its all expensive and homogenious. Then the Democrats have the audacity to point fingers at the insurance companies for the increases.

The ADA will dwarf the ill effects of Democrat passed Community Reinvestment act did to cause the housing meltdown. Medicare is bankrupt and evolved into a monsterous pig, social security is a ponzi scheme, all of these programs are used by Democrats from an either or point of view. As if there were no other alternatives. Sorry, all of these programs are causing our country's demise.

A surgeon weighs in on the American Thinker website:

"I've actually had a lot of experience working in all different types of environments," he began. "I've worked in a government-run socialized medical care system, and I saw the waste and inefficiency.

"The longer people worked in that system, the less work they wanted to do, because the more you wanted to do, the more they dumped on you. So after a while you stop doing it, because they're not paying you to do more. Why should you do a difficult case, a difficult surgery that will take you hours and hours to do?"

"Because nobody wanted to work, it would take an hour to turn over the surgical room. In my private practice now, it takes ten minutes."

Source:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/a_surgeon_cuts_to_the_heart_of_the_obamacare_nightmare.html#ixzz1zJwxjdVU

The joys of socialized medicine. . . .progressives are just lazy people-too lazy to actually think.

The Supreme Court's decision on Obamacare was a victory for conservatives:

"Five justices flatly rejected the administration's theory that the Commerce Clause empowered it to force citizens to purchase health care. Since a majority of the justices joined opinions espousing this principle, the lower courts will consider themselves bound to follow it. The court refused to accept the theory that the Commerce Clause allowed the government to regulate "inactivity" in the same way that it could regulate behavior. This is a vindication of a central conservative argument. The court went so far as to cite the now-famous analogy that if the Commerce Clause authorizes the federal government to force people to purchase health care, it would also empower them to force people to buy vegetables. Justice Roberts' opinion adopted the conservatives' most important legal argument nearly verbatim."

As the Dems hoot and holler over their victory in the Supreme Court decision, they miss the fact that the Supreme Court's decision was actually a defeat for Obamacare.

Now the American people will drive a stake through the heart of Obamacare on election day and finish up what the Supreme Court began-the repeal of Obamacare.

Read more:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/turning_obamacares_lemons_into_federalist_lemonade.html#ixzz1zK1IiASZ

Victory in the November election will be even sweeter. Thank you Chief Justice Roberts.

Ole Rich making stuff up again. Regarding your assertion that doctors will stop practicing, here's a few quotes from some healthcare organizations that actually know what they are talking about...
American Medical Association "The AMA does not support initiatives to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Expanding health coverage, insurance market reforms, administrative simplifications and initiatives to promote wellness and prevention are key parts of the new law that reflect AMA priorities."

American Academy of Family Physicians "A repeal of all provisions in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will return our health care system to its previous trends of unsustainable, increasing costs and ever-growing numbers of under- and uninsured Americans. It will have negative consequences on Americans' access to needed health care for years to come."

American College of Physicians "ACP believes that Congress should preserve and - as necessary - improve on these and other important reforms created by the Affordable Care Act, not repeal them."

Dude, the AMA et all are a politically motivated liberal frauds. They don't speak for most doctors. For once just try to digest and think how this law will impact our economy. Stop reading liberal propaganda and think, how was the bill passed, what methods were used to get an OMB score, how have programs in the past worked out. Please liberal.

Part of the cost of Obamacare is the cost of the damage Obamacare has already done to the US economy and the additional damage that it will cause in the future.

"Twenty new or higher taxes across-the-board are bad for economic growth, bad for job hiring, bad for investors, and bad for families."

Source: Kudlow: Obamacare Taxes Bad for Economic Growth — and All Families

http://www.moneynews.com/StreetTalk/Obamacare-Ruling-court-care/2012/06/28/id/443829?s=al&promo_code=F567-1

How many unemployed people will never work again because of Obamacare? How many unemployed people will commit suicide because they can't find work because of the damage that Obamacare has done to the economy?

UVa Study: Surgical Patients on Medicaid Are 13% More Likely to Die Than Those Without Insurance -- http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/231147

At a cost of nearly $100 billion a year, Obamacare adds 16 million people to the rolls of Medicaid. The President and his allies are most proud of this aspect of the new law, as it helps to fulfill a long-held progressive goal of providing government-funded health insurance to all Americans.

Except that Medicaid is broken. Medicaid so severely underpays doctors—reimbursing them at 72 percent of already-stingy Medicare rates—that many physicians refuse to see Medicaid patients. Medicaid patients, in turn, fill up emergency rooms, where they delay the care of the seriously injured.

Now comes word, via a large study by the University of Virginia (h/t Joseph Colletti), that surgical patients on Medicaid are 13% more likely to die than those with no insurance at all, and 97% more likely to die than those with private insurance.

" A senior Senate Republican aide involved in the repeal effort later confirmed to Scribe that the GOP will use the budget reconciliation process to repeal the full law, not just the portion requiring all Americans purchase health insurance."

Source: http://minx.cc/?post=330576

What goes around, comes around.

http://www.lifenews.com/2012/06/20/shock-british-nhs-euthanizes-130000-elderly-patients-annually/ -- Shock: British NHS Euthanizes 130,000 Elderly Patients Annually

Guess the elderly in England are not so well off under socialized healthcare.

NOW we are a tax liability to all of you.....My wife and I have always paid our medical bills in full at the time of treatment. *I* care about MY credit rating so I make sure to keep MY bills paid. We are ZERO liability on the state for medical purposes. Looking at the OboboCare numbers our insurance will run nearly $10,000 a year for the two of us and the TAX PAYERS will subsidize about $7500 of that from what I can tell. ObOzOcArE just turned a couple who WERENT costing the PEOPLE a single dime into a $7500 liabilty....GO OBAMA !!!

Ole Buc: "Second the purpose of his rants is to belittle anyone he disagrees with and to make his very much solitary opinions into the majority by simple dint of shouting the loudest and most often."

The purpose of my posts is to educate people with factual information. Yes, there is actually factual information out there. There is no need to belittle progressives-their opinions are so kooky that belittling progressives is simply unnecessary.

To put it in simpler terms so that even Ole Buc can understand, you belittle yourself every time to speak or write something.

Folks who are confident in their opinions don't get upset when someone disagrees with them-seems like your upset all of the time Ole Buc.

A sign at one of our National Parks:

"Please Do Not Feed the Animals"

"The stated reason for the policy is because the animals will grow dependent on hand-outs and will not learn to take care of themselves."

Courtesy of the internet.

Even the Department of the Interior knows that "hand-outs" are a bad policy and that's all that really needs to be said.

Now this is to way to provide health care for all Americans:

"Thanks to the energy boom, North Dakota has the nation's lowest unemployment rate at just over 3 percent, and Williams County — at the center of the drilling boom — boasts the lowest jobless rate in the country at just 0.7 percent."

It's called a job.

Source: Newsmax

Well if the President of the United States can tell the State of Arizona to go to hell regarding immigration, then can't Governors of various states tell the President of the United States to go to hell regarding the implementation of Obamacare?

If we can have sanctuary cities where local law enforcement will not help enforce Federal immigration laws, can't we have have sanctuary states where Governors refuse to co-operate in implementing Obamacare?

"The Republican governors' message was clear on a morning Republican National Committee conference call, when Jindal and McDonnell stressed their continued defiance of the Affordable Care Act and said they will resist implementing the state-based health insurance exchanges for which the law calls.

"Here in Louisiana, look, we refused to set up the exchange. We're not going to start implementing Obamacare," Jindal said. "We have not applied for the grants, we have not accepted many of these dollars, we are not implementing the exchanges, we don't think it makes any sense to implement Obamacare in Louisiana."

Read more:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/06/gop_governors_stand_fast_against_obamacare.html#ixzz1zNcAUucE

Looks like civil war is about to break-out once again in America-this time it's over a lawless President (i.e. emperor) who thinks he can do whatever he pleases.

Mr. Smith: "I believe you are not only posting as Mr Schulte, but Gary and maybe Joe Nelson. That or either ya'll feed from the same trough."

The progressive mind is a sight worth beholding. Mr. Smith just can't wrap his head around the fact that conservative thought is mainstream in America. Yes, Mr. Smith, there is more than 1 conservative in America.

Now turn your statement above around. It seems to me that most progressives pretty much say the same thing-does that mean that all of the progressive posts under different names are actually the same personn?

Mr. Smith, you might want to take your blinders off. There is a great big world out there and their is diverse opinion. Since conservatism is basically just common sense, there are quite a few Americans who agree and the percentage of Americans who are conservatives grows with age because experience is the best teacher.

Mr. Smith: "Do you understand that Health care companies egregious rejection of applicants with pre-existing conditions is hurting your fellow Americans? Do you have no compassion, no shame?"

Of course, there is a reason why pre-existing conditions are excluded. Why would anybody bother to buy health insurance if pre-existing conditions were covered? Why not just wait until you have a condition to buy insurance?

Imagine if auto insurance companies were required to insure cars with pre-existing conditions? Hey, 8 years ago it hailed and I have hail damage. I think I'll go buy some of that auto insurance now and get that old hail damage fixed. I want to sell the car and I'll get more for the car if the insurance company fixes the hail damage.

Obviously, the auto insurer would go out of business if pre-existing damage to cars was required to be covered. But then again, that's the whole idea-bankrupt the health insurers in order to shepard in a single-payer socialist health care system.

Everything President Obama told us about this wonderful idea of Obamacare turned out not to be true (a lie). Why would you believe anything the President says about Obamacare?

Sarah Palin: "Thank you, SCOTUS. This Obamacare ruling fires up the troops as America’s eyes are opened! Thank God."

Mr. Smith: "It is clear you are against the act; therefore, you are against covering these people, you bigot! I sure as hell know I and others will continue fighting for healthcare coverage for all in the US."

Obamacare will bankrupt the nation. So if you support Obamacare, you support national bankruptcy-turning America into Greece. If opposing national bankruptcy makes you a bigot, then I guess I'm a bigot.

Greece went belly-up; no there is no work for anyone and I assume since there is very little money, there is not much health care in Greece either. Hmmm. . . . sounds like an excellent plan. We need to give this plan a name-let's call it "Poverty".

So Mr. Smith wants everybody in the United States to live in poverty. Sounds like Mr. Smith would be at home in Cuba or North Korea. I keep hearing that Cuba has great health care-why not just immigrate to Cuba-it's closer than North Korea and the winters are not as harsh as in North Korea. Spanish is easier to learn than Korean.

Mr.Smith: "I know your part of the party of no: No healthcare, no taxes, no abortions, prohibition (no alcohol), no immigrants (mainly brown), regulations, no education, no civil rights, no affirmative action, no marijuana, no College odd to vote, only drivers license to supress the young, college students and some elderly to vote! You learned to say yes to war, suffering, coddling the rich, freedom, and falsely faux responsibility, why not say yes for 2 decent things ( besides freedom)?"

No healthcare? How about catastrophic health care insurance for everyone with a $5,000 annual deductible instead. Does that sound like no health care for anyone?

No taxes? Hardly. How about lower taxes to stimulate the economy. Stimulating the economy will generate more economic activity, hence, increased tax revenues. Sounds like common sense to me.

No abortions? Which is worse abortion or slavery? In 1860, Democrats thought slavery was fine. Today, Democrats support abortion. Whatever happened to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"? How does an aborted child pursue "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"? Compared with slavery, abortion is far worse.

Prohibition? We already tried that-didn't work.

No immigrants? My former wife was a legal immigrant from Asia. Does that sound like I'm against legal immigration.

No education? In our big cities, the educational system is miserable. Who controls the big cities? Democrats.

Mr. Smith: "Yes freedom for the rich, corporations, and the privileged -- that is the Republican party! Any responses besides no?"

I'm not wealthy. I'm not even middle class anymore-not after the economic destruction that President Obama wrought on this county. Even so, I'm still a conservative.

I don't need government's help, nor do I want government's help. Government help just enslaves people. Of course, the Democrats were the party of slavery in the 1850's and Democrats are still the party of slavery. It's just a little different type of slavery, but it's still slavery.

Throw off you shackles-conservatism will set you free.

Richard wrote:
"Of course, there is a reason why pre-existing conditions are excluded. Why would anybody bother to buy health insurance if pre-existing conditions were covered? Why not just wait until you have a condition to buy insurance?
________________________
Since we all have a pre-existing condition called Life, by Richard's theory we should all be excluded. Personally, I'd like to extend mine by availing myself of modern medicine, but I lack the infinite financial resources needed without insurance. That's why I already have it.

There are probably some Americans with less financial resources than most of us here, who likewise aspire to extend their pre-existing conditions but cannot afford to do so. Allowing them that opportunity is what the ACA is all about.

Mr. Smith: "Surely, the republicans are for the rich and corporations, so this is a class war -- not a ethnic or race war necessarily. They don't want it publicized as a class war, because that would empower those of us who live paycheck to paycheck and those hurting; the poor and the hungry, would revolt. It is the republicans god damn egregious injustice would be exposed. They try to squash talk of the 1% and reality of living in the United States." "

Mr. Smith, you seem like a highly educated person. Did you know that President Abraham Lincoln, the "Great Emancipator" was a Republican and that the reason he is known as the "Great Emancipator" is because he issued a proclamation which in essence outlawed the practice of slavery in territories in rebellion against the United States controlled by the Union Army?

Did you know that the Klu Klux Klan (KKK) was started by Demcrats in the 1860's?

Did you know that Democrats institued Jim Crow in states which were part of the Confederacy after Reconstruction was over?

Did you know that the segrationist policies enacted in the South were both enacted and enforced by Democrats?

Did you know that the worst public schools in America today are located in cities controlled by Democrats?

If Democrats are so concerned about the plight of the poor, why are Democrats always involved in oppressing the poor and down-trodden?

Sully: ""Holy cr-p, Richard is still here posting his nonsense? Well, I guess I'll try again in a few more months."

Sully, I'm so glad to hear from you. I was very worried about you.

Sully has been in North Korea mourning the death of Kim since January. Access to the internet is limited in the People's Republic of Korea (North Korea). That's what the second sentence of his note means. Either that, or the battery on Sully's laptop has run down and there is no electricity in North Korea to recharge the battery. Isn't socialism grand.

How's the weather there north of the 38th parallel? How much weight have you lost on the North Korean starvation diet? I hear that the North Korean starvation diet really works great.

The Oracle is not confused one bit.
Due to advances neo-natal medicine, many more children who would never have survived in past times live amazingly productive lives today. And genetic screening allows even pre-natal care. But in Richard's world, children with genetic disorders should not be allowed to survive (read: abortion) because they have a pre-existing condition upon which insurance companies should be allowed to deny coverage in utero. That's really compassionate isn't it!
_________
Richard writes further:
"If you take care of yourself, there is little need for medical care prior to your 60's for most people. I don't carry medical insurance-sometimes I can't afford to buy food. If I can't afford to by food, how would I be able to afford to have health insurance."

So the truth comes out that you don't carry medical insurance. If it is because you are willing to gamble on your need for it, please sign a waiver absolving the rest of us from having to pay for your treatments. You are exactly the person we want to cure - the one who uses the ER as a free clinic.

If however you cannot afford insurance and need to decide between insurance and food, my heart goes out to you, and I hope the food bank and other support systems in your community are able to help. In this case, the ACA is designed exactly for you - you will be able to get insurance at a price you can afford even if you are unable to pay full premiums.

It sounds like you have a large lack of understanding. Health insurance is merely a financial instrument, the purpose of it is to protect you from financial loss from an illness or accident. The insurance companies would rather allow the consumer have a choice as to benefits they wish to have covered, but Democrats took that option away. We do not need Obamacare for people who have pre-existing conditions, they can be covered by the state plan, should they be denied by a company. There are huge gaps of information you show to be lacking, amidst all your liberal uneducated hogwash you just heard and attempt to recycle here.

Now McCloud is insulting "hogwash".

The state plan is very reasonable, you can see the rates at IPXP Illinois pre-ex plan. As for the other states you mention, why upset the entire economy, as Obamacare has already done, when cost effect measures can be implemented to address the issues in a straightforward manner. Instead we get a goliath unknown program with enormous implications placed on a fragile economy, passed into law with questionable practices including ficticious cost projections, and uncertain taxes, as they now call them.

RB: "Someone like Rich will end up running up bills he can't pay and we all end up paying, but he is dead set against buying affordable insurance."

Of course, Richard wouldn't be in this situation if it wasn't for Obama and Obamacare. Obama and Obamacare caused the economic situation we find ourselves in now. (The building construction industry has been pretty much destroyed. Millions of Americans in the construction industry are pretty much in the same boat.) Business has never been better for bankruptcy attorneys. Don't blame me for what President Obama did to the American economy.

(Canada is doing fine because Canada is developing its energy industry. America could be doing the same thing, except our dear progressive friends won't let us. Our dear progressive friends would rather see American construction workers starve to death. Shades of Josef Stalin.)

RB, could you tell me what affordable health insurance means when your annual incomes is $7 thousand? I moved to Florida because there is no work in Illinois. Between Obama and Quinn, the Illinois economy is dead. Open your eyes and look around. Of course, people like you can't see it-take your blinders off.

Oh, and one more thing, I just had cancer surgery before I moved to Florida. I paid for it out of my own pocket, the same as if I was covered by catastrophic insurance. Don't worry RB, it didn't cost you or your Government one dime. Your arrogance knows no bounds.

General Sandra Sims: ". . . you are one of those parasites that sucks up taxpayer dollars! Do you get food stamps?"

Sorry to disappoint you Sandra Sims, but no I do not take any government assistance-not one dime. I don't need the government to take care of myself. Government assistance is for Democrats-you know the people who can't fend for themselves.

Now, it's time for you to explain how someone who doesn't use government benefits is a parasite. Once again, Sims puts here foot in her mouth.

During the Great Depression, my grandfather didn't have a job, but he wasn't on relief either.

And what's the problem with employment-I've been self-employed since 1988. (That's 24 years Sims-I know you can't add or subtract-Chicago Public School graduate.) The president/CEO of the firm, Richard Schulte, has no problem with what I post here at Patch. I don't expect that the president of the firm (me) will ever have a problem with what I post.

Sims, since I don't own a television and work out of my home, I have plenty of time to think and write. I don't sit in traffic for 2 hours everyday and don't sit in front of the television for 4 hours every night. I'm quite a prolific writer and an internationally known engineer.

Note to Sandra Sims: Self-employed people are not eligible for unemployment insurance.

Damn you're smart. . . .

If you want to understand what Obamacare is all about, then this book should be of interest:

"That book, titled The Communist: Frank Marshall Davis, The Untold Story of Barack Obama's Mentor, just came off the press this week, with an official release date of July 17."

Read more:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/07/supreme_court_helps_obama_fulfill_dreams_from_his_communist_mentor.html#ixzz1zSjG25ka

RB: "Richard, that's just wrong. People that voted for Obama did nothing to make life worse for you or others. You may stress about it, so I guess that's worse, but the economy sucked before he took office, Romney's trickle down idea has been tried before and it did not work..."

Well RB, I respectfully disagree with your comment that the voters who voted for Barack Obama did not harm their fellow Americans. Anyone who would vote for someone simply because of the color of the man's skin, without considering President Obama's record, exercised their right to vote frivolously.

You may recall that Barack Obama's spiritual mentor was the Reverend Jerimiah "God damn America" Wright. How could anybody vote for someone for the office of the president of the United States who does not take exception to the sentiment "God damn America".

As the 4th of July approaches, discussing the sentiment "God damn America" is fitting. (The Declaration of Independence was actually signed on the 2nd of July, that's today.)

RB: "Secondly, you call me arrogant? How is wanting to bring full healthcare to the population arrogant?"

RB: "Someone like Rich will end up running up bills he can't pay and we all end up paying, but he is dead set against buying affordable insurance. I won't understand. I will try, but I don't get it."

RB just can't figure it out. He assumes "someone like Rich" won't pay his medical bills. How arrogant. Just recently I had cancer surgery-my surgeon was paid in full less than 5 minutes after the surgery was completed. Please don't make assumptions and then assign them to your opponents in a discussion.

Sandra Sims, I do hope that you read the article about Frank Marshal Davis and Barack Obama. I know the article is pretty lengthy for you to read with your CPS education, but give it a try. Since you have difficulty with both reading and comprehension, let me just excerpt one sentence:

"They called themselves "progressives," but in truth, they were hardcore communists trying to advance Marxism, with a government takeover of health care as a crucial step."

Castro, Chavez and Obama. . . .all the same. Sandra Sims, are you a marxist too?

Sandra Sims: "And as "president" of your own company, if your yearly income is 7 grand, all I can say is....you truly suck at business."

Sandra Sims, my firm was more successful than General Motors. We actually posted a profit, while GM lost billions and was bankrupt. Also note that my firm never received a bail-out. No bankruptcy, no bail-out-sounds like success to me, particularly given that many small businesses no longer exist.

Also note that the United States Government is bankrupt and has to print dollars to stay in business. It is illegal for me to print money. So I guess you could say that my firm is more successful than the US Government.

If your business performs better than General Motors and the US Government, I guess you could say it's a pretty successful operation.

Where does all the venom come from Sandra Sims? You must be a joy to live with. I think I'll start calling you Ms. Negative. You are the most negative person that I've ever had the displeasure of encountering.

Now, don't go away mad (again), just go away.

Richard,

Just be glad tou are not married to some of these people. It doe not sound as if you are going to convince the libs of anything with any argument or fact or reading. They will not see anything but their own bias until of course the law of unintended consequences bites them.

Sandy, you sound like a lovely tolerant and enlightened liberal who is happy with your life.

"Obama admits Individual Health Insurance Mandate will NOT work"
=========================================================
""...but she (Hilary Clinton) mandates that everybody buy healthcare. She'd have the government force every individual to buy insurance and I dont have such a mandate because I don't think that the problem is that people don't want insurance it's that they can't afford it.......if things were that easy I could mandate that everybody buy a house and that would solve the problem of homelessness"
=========================================================
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUdr3vWIQZM&feature=player_detailpage

Robert Myers: "I think Sandra is to witty for you, and I have a hunch you are uncomfortable with a women that stands up to you. High five to Sandra for dishing it out !!!"

Mr. Myers, if you think that making fun of other's misfortune is witty, then I would say that you are a sorry excuse for a human being. There is little doubt that Sandra Sims is a sorry excuse for a human being. Sims is using Alinskey tactics-sorry Sims, your hateful comments don't bother me in the least.

With regards to my re-marriage, only a liberal would to ask that sort of question in this type of forum. What I learned from my first marriage is that the court system in America is biased against men. Any male who is divorced and gets re-married is a slow learner.

Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.

Robert Myers: "Socialism is often used synonymously with Communism; however, they are not the same at all; Communism abolishes the concept of private property and that is its calling card."

The calling card of communism is terror and mass murder to force the population into submission. Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Kim and Pol Pot were mass murders.

The Berlin Wall was not put up to keep West Germans from immigrating to East Germany, but to terrorize East Germans. If communism is so wonderful, why don't people want to live in communist countries? Communism is socialism enforced by the hand of government around every citizens throat choking the life out of everyone.

Socialism also chokes the life out of the people who live under it-socialists use the threat of imprisonment to enforce their ideology.

Robert Myers: "No government policy past or present has "upset the entire economy". That was some of the line during the new deal, i.e. we are doomed if we are regulated."

Surely you jest, Mr. Myers. Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Ireland are all examples of government policies upsetting the entire economy.

In this country, Detroit, the State of California and the State of Illinois are examples of government policies upsetting the entire economy. Oh yes, you can throw the City of Chicago in there too.

robert myers
A side note is, now the power to repeal shouted by Romney is little more than a fund raising tactic. Only the two houses of Congress can pass a repeal motion, and then, and only then the President can sign this motion repealing a law. I hope you haven't sent any money to Romney on the belief he alone can repeal if elected?
===============================================

By making this a tax...well, exposing it for what we already knew it was...the SCOTUS has enraged a nation of people who were entirely asleep at the wheel. People like my wife, sisters, mother, cousins, a LOT of my friends...some who even voted for Obama. They are pretty much all pissed as hell now that this has been shown to BE a tax after they heard Obama himself say he wouldnt raise taxes. ALL of them but one now is voting the man out. I have to hear about this every time I see them now. Previous to the SCOTUS ruling politics rarely ever even came up in a discussion with any of them but one.

"If you get hit by a bus, are we supposed to pay for your medical care?"
==================

Jesus you liberals are stupid.
YOU ARE PAYING FOR OUR HEALTH CARE, idiot.

When you are INSURED do you pay for everyone elses healthcare?
Do you even understand how insurance works?
The insurer is playing the odds that only a certain percentage of members will use their policy during any given time frame and that the rest wont.
When you DONT use your health insurance in such a way as to at least break even EVERY MONTH you ARE PAYING for someone elses healthcare.

And now with ObozoTax YOUR tax dollars will go to pay SUBSIDIES to pay for MY health insurance premiums...to the tune of approximately $7500 a year.

So NOW you get to pay TWO ways. The first is the subsidy...thanks a ton, btw....and secondly by paying your own insurance premiums with end up in the pool to pay MY health costs (assuming I get medical attention).

You idiots who think that anything has changed as far as YOU paying for everyone elses health care really need a reality check. Did you think you can get blood from a stone? The people who COULDNT afford health insurance before CANT afford it now....YOU WILL pay for their health care still....youve just been duped into paying more TAXES for it.

Before the law was passed, Pelosi and the rest of the crooks were so concerned about the uninsured, who they claimed were dying by the thousands each minute due to lack of health insurance. Now, after the supreme court decision, they are calling the uninsured freeloaders, this from the party of freeloaders.

"Don’t think Obamacare can be repealed? Think AGAIN!"

http://csteventucker.wordpress.com/2010/09/11/dont-think-obamacare-can-be-repealed-think-again/

News item today about companies considering giving lump sums to employees to manage their own health costs instead of defined benefit plans. That way the employers will wash their hands of the whole mess. It should work out well especially if the employee spends the money on booze or a new car. But then the libs will call for taking over the businesses and runing them efficiently and fairly like the post office or the energy department. Then the businesses will go out of business and the fired employees can get their health costs paid by the taxpayer. The libs will then be happy. The point is that the law of unintended consequences is at work here and it is a giant leap of faith to assume that things will turn out well. But as one wag said, trying to convince some poeople is like trying to pick up a turd from the clean end.

This just uses Independence Day as an excuse for defending Obamacare. The only way it would be fair to compare its cost to the war in Afghanistan would be if that war never ends because there is no "exit strategy" for Obamacare. It's not designed to end except possibly to end in Single-Payer Medicare-for-all. So the cost of it is as if the cost of our fighting in Afghanistan will be added to perpetually. Think of it as the hugest expense yet, added to the already huge cost of the Federal war on poverty that never ends and has resulted in more poverty than when it started.

Do any of you who complain about Obamacare as shorthand for Affordable Healthcare Act, know what was the formal title of the act creating the Bush Tax Cuts? Have fun looking it up. I can't find mention of it anywhere, even in the Obama extention of it, as anything but "Bush Tax Cuts". Have you ever thought that unfair or indicating biased reporting? If not, then who then is truly displaying a bias; the one who uses the term Obamacare, or the one who complains about its use?

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/07/03/happy-birthday-america-gifts-for-the-country-that-has-everythi/?ncid=webmail13

By "this" I meant this article, which I forgot to copy into the text. Apologies.

To the guy who was recently on a trip, did you not ask the folks who have government sponsored healthcare why their countries, Greece, Germany, UK, France, were going broke?

After the Supreme Court ruling last week, the power given to th efederal government is without limitations. The Constitution was written by people who experienced oppresive governments, and was intended to protect the individual from his government. America will never be the same again.

The GDP for the last 4 years has been micriscopic, many times faux numbers after releasing the numbers and corrected 2 quaters after. There is nothing in this law that will help GDP, or for that matter the cost of healthcare. The GDP has been straggled by this law,basically because nobody knows what taxes (as they now are called) really are. Needless cost increasing by insurance companies is a byproduct of state mandated benefits, more people getting older, more medicare patients whom the physicians have to overcompensate the fully insured to stay in practice, and more uncertan economic conditions brought about by class warfare political BS from Obama. The bottom line here is there are many different ways to reason why obamacare is wrong, but the most disturbing is the way the Supreme Court ruled. The Constitution was meant to protect individuals from an oppresive government, and now we have an open door to tyranny.

McC, I'm really sorry you seem to live your life in such a dark, hopeless state. I'm NOT saying what has been passed is the answer but to think THE PRESIDENT is such an evil person trying to ruin the country boarders on Nutty! He's been Pres for 3 1/2 years----the sun still rises, babys are born, life goes on.----It will be that way regardless of who wins. I simply say we have to look at healthcare in a different way & SOME of the ideas in other countrys may be a starting point----Mainly we don't need healthcare Ins Co's to make alot of $$$ to just pay our bills.---Think about it.

Lennie, I'm trying to not make it political----I'm saying we need to make changes & now there is a start. I'm very against healthcare ins co's---all they do is collect premiums---hold the $$$ for a while & then hopefully pay our med bill---keeping a nice profit---look at their stocks. McC twisted my point that most other countries pay a much lower % of their GDP on healthcare with reasonably good results. I commented on his dark outlook on our country in his words "make more uncertain eco conditions brought about by class warfare political BS from Obama." It sounds so Faux Newsy!

@Bruce, lol on not making it political. You said Faux News and you said he called Obama evil, which he did not. Again, you will never be able to have an HONEST debate when you make stuff up and use politically charged names. You are exactly what is wrong with our political discourse and why we are so divided. If we want to work together to find real solutions, we need to debate honestly. Think about that and let us know when you want to talk honestly.

What has the Big-O, as you call him, done to benefit us? The results are in on reckless 5 trillion dollar spending, sustained high unemployment, record foreclosures, record debt. This healthcare thing has already reared its ugly head, and the virus will soon start to mature into record debt and enormous problems we have yet to experience. If you didn't read about it, I suggest you read how they cooked the books to get an OMB score favorable to morons in the house to vote for it. The new approach is more of the same failed policies from the 1930s.

Lennie & McC, You are right. McC didnot call him evil---that was my inference from all the prior verbage. I entered the thread to tell what I learned from speaking to many people from many countries to see if they felt the way we have been told here in the US. The major difference I learned is a very different approach to the whole problem, mainly that they don't believe that people should get rich on getting health care to citizens--they laughed at us paying huge $$$ for health insurance. And for the most part they said they had good care from people who really cared for them. One Welsh lady said her doc came to her home after her surgery to check on her!! I truly wonder what Pres Obama could possibly do to change all the apparent strong (to put it mildly) dislike!! I hope it's not change color!

Quite interesting-the posts from this morning have been removed, including the posts quoting the Declaration of Independence. Imagine deleting the Declaration of Independence on July 4th.

More censorship by Democrats.

Deleted Comment:

5:15 pm on Wednesday, July 4, 2012

Senator Barack Obama on Chief Justice John Roberts nomination to the Supreme Court:

"I will be voting against John Roberts' nomination. I do so with considerable reticence. I hope that I am wrong. I hope that this reticence on my part proves unjustified and that Judge Roberts will show himself to not only be an outstanding legal thinker but also someone who upholds the Court's historic role as a check on the majoritarian impulses of the executive branch and the legislative branch."

Hmmmm. . . looks like the Chief Justice didn't fulfill Barack Obama's expectation.

Another Deleted Comment:

4:12 pm on Wednesday, July 4, 2012

“Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law,” Roberts wrote. “We possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments. Those decisions are entrusted to our Nation’s elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them. It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.”

In 4 months, it will be the people's turn to voice their opinion on Obamacare.

A vote for Obama is a vote for Obamacare; a vote for Romney is a vote against Obamacare. It's as simple at that.

Another deleted comment:

11:21 am on Wednesday, July 4, 2012

From the Declaration of Independence:

"In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people."

Obamacare was "shoved down out throats". Obama is a Tyrant.

11:12 am on Wednesday, July 4, 2012

Bill Clinton: "I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky."
Al Gore: "I invented the internet."
Barack Obama: "I killed Osama Bin Laden."
Typical Liberal: "You can't trust Republicans. They lie."

Yup, Republicans are just liars. Who would you trust to tell the truth about Obamacare-Obama and Pelosi or Republicans?

11:14 am on Wednesday, July 4, 2012

The above was courtesy of the internet: LiberalLogic101.com

Ask a diabetic if he's glad to have insulin and he'll ask you why ask such a silly question. Ask him whether he'd rather not be a diabetic and you'll get the same response.

It is the same when asking people whether they're glad to receive government largesse, but that question is never followed up by asking whether they would prefer not to be dependent on government largesse. Which do you suppose is easier to cure: diabetes or dependency of government largesse?

Ask someone who is not a diabetic ( or close to one,) whether he thinks the care of diabetics is adequate and he'll likely say yes. That is the same as what will result from asking at random people under socialized healthcare whether they're happy with it and for the same reason.

Another deleted post:

8:46 am on Wednesday, July 4, 2012

Javier: "Everyone likes freeloaders? How about standing up for personal responsibility?. . . . Sometimes people need to be told to do the right thing."

Ahhh, finally after 50 years, the Democrats have called for an end to the War on Poverty. Imagine that, Democrats talking about personal responsibility.

Don't you just despise those free-loaders, you know like people on Food Stamps, welfare, unemployment, social security, Medi-Care, Medi-Caid, etc. Democrats are the party of free-loaders.

Democrats talking about free-loaders is amusing. The latest Democrat line about free-loading is just more b.s. Actually, everything that Democrats say is b.s.

Another deleted post:

8:54 am on Wednesday, July 4, 2012

Another excellent article from the American Thinker titled "Six Weeks That Saved America". Here is just an excerpt:

"However, the intention of American left, as personified by the ascendancy of Barack Obama and his radical cohorts, is to establish this monolithic and omnipotent entity. This has been their singular goal since the 1930s, and in 2008 they thought their moment had come. Thus the mad dash to pass legislation such as ObamaCare, setting up the EPA as a bludgeon to enforce their green agenda, initiating a quasi-fascist relationship with those in the private economy willing to pledge allegiance and be subservient to the cause, and transforming the Justice Department among other cabinet departments into the enforcement arm of their 1960s radicalism."

Read more:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/07/six_weeks_that_saved_america.html#ixzz1zf4Px9hq

Chief Justice Roberts did America a big favor with his ruling on Obamacare. I have never seen conservatives more energized. Yes, conservatives are going to take America back.

The Supreme Court ruling on Obamacare is like the iceberg that sunk the Titanic. The Obama Administration just hit the iceberg and now President Obama and his merry band of Democrats are sinking.

Patch Editor: Please note that a number of posts from earlier today were removed for no reason. Once again, we have Democrats removing posts that they disagree with.

Enough of this censorship and of all days, July 4th.

To quote Hillary Clinton: "We are Americans and we have a right to debate."

Ooops, please accept my apologies. It appears that the above posts were not deleted from this thread-there are two similar threads on Patch.

With respect to my comment regarding Democrats and censorship, that statement was not in error. Democrats do their best to suppress anyone who doesn't agree with them.

With respect to the "good" things in this law, there is no indication of how it will be implemented other than political rhetoric. For example, the elimination of the pre-existing conditions criteria sounds great, but when the guy who has Diabetes has to pay $10,000 a month for coverage, theory falls to reality. What company can exist insuring people with Diabetes at cost projections potentially over $250,000 each at merely $500 a month? Looking at this thing on real terms has never been the intent of its authors.

Once the financial reality and access limitations and quality issues kick in for the public who think that this is all just terriffic, there are going to be some very disappointed folks. But of course they will try to get the government to do even more.

Now that the uninsured have transformed from innocent victims to freeloaders, just wait until after the election if Pelosi takes over the house. Taxes with the threat of more taxes will fundamentally change America into Havanna.

Bruce,
These excerpts contradict your experience. My previous remarks presumed your random sampling left you with the correct impression. I'll try to clarify that later.

http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba649

Fact No. 7: People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand and British adults say their health system needs either "fundamental change" or "complete rebuilding."

http://freemarketcure.com/whynotgovhc.php

Consider: in 2000, a survey involving 1,500 people suggested that a full 8 out of 10 Canadians consider their health care system "in crisis." [4] Since then, polls consistently show health care as the top concern of voters.

These days, Britain's NHS doesn't seem like much of a model for anything - except, perhaps, frustration. ..... So overstretched is the system that horror stories litter British papers.

I toured D.C. General in Washington with an Englishman by the name of Tim Evans (now president of a European think tank). D.C. General was in such dire straights that it was eventually closed, an embarrassment to local administrators. Dr. Evans commented to me: "This is nicer than any British hospital I've visited."

http://freemarketcure.com/whynotgovhc.php

A common question people ask: why don't their systems serve their citizens better? In a way, they do what they are supposed to - most people (and thus most voters) have access to the care they need (simple primary care) and at a relatively low cost. It's true that these systems tend to fall short on more complicated treatments. But how many voters suffer from cancer in any given year? How many people are concerned about access to sub-specialists or high-tech diagnostic tests? Public systems ultimately serve the interests of the majority of voters - who tend to be healthy. Americans should remember that - and beware.

********
Bruce,
People not involved in a treatment (diabetes) will tend to see that treatment as being adequate. That was my second analogy of healthcare overall to diabetes.

In the first I was using insulin as an analogy to any largesse. A diabetic is glad to have insulin but of course would rather not need it. Likewise, people are of course glad to receive largesse when they believe they can't get along without it.

This is the misrepresentation of asking people if they like Medicare. Of course they like it because they need it or are sure they're going to. That answer is cynically repeated all the time. The system is designed so that everyone who lives long enough will need it. Given a like it or lump it choice, people will say they like it.

Let's ask a different question: "Would you rather not have to depend on Medicare?" (Or for that matter any program administered by government.) How many do you think will answer: "No thanks. I prefer to be dependent on government whenever possible." We may safely assume very few will give that answer once Medicare is no longer fundable which is where it's headed. Isn't it?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15353534

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5bsz_oewDA

http://www.ncpa.org/healthcare

http://www.consumerdrivenhealthcare.us/

Two more questions:
1) Can any of this work as well here as in Switzerland?
2) Does Obamacare make question #1 entirely moot?

Although I hate to say so but there is just no reasoning with some of these idiots most of whom don't know anything about the health care system and like to fantasize. Wait until the hospitals go broke and cannot wash the sheets and needles are used more than once. Those same people still will not be able to figure it out

http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/1303881

"What the hell?" then-Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina wrote in a Jan. 10, 2010, email to the top lobbyist for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, or PhRMA. "This wasn't part of our deal."

Didn't you tell me that is YOUR industry, Robert? I don't work in any healthcare field nor for lobbyists, think-tanks, any political party, or anything of the kind, not even remotely. So if I'm a shill it would seem I must be as you said, an "unwilling" one.

Though didn't you mean to say "unwitting"?

You'll need to pull your head out. Still stuck on stupid, the slogans about profit and the middleman. Fear and misinformation? More like critical thinking. Decade long cost factors? Try for the last 40 years costs have increased in the medical market. The main factors have been state level Democrats loading up insurance policies with mandated benefits, companies cannot offer choices, its all the same. Other factors include people getting older, Bush's fault of course. Technological advancements, certainly that will stop with this virus. Bottom line based on your commentary, you are sold on a concept, and no real critical thought that bluntly makes sense will alter your ficticious belief. Cause it makes you feel good, just like any other liberal monstrocity.

The right questions are not being asked to the authors of this law. I would like to know, in 2014 when the pre-existing criteria is eliminated, and you have Diabetes, Cancer, how much premium it will cost per month to buy insurance. Did these guys think that an insurance company can just roll over and charge them $500 per month when their claims exceed several hundred thousand a year?

The folks who think that this is a wonderful law to improve quality and access, reduce cost and get just desserts to the evil insurance companies, doctors and hospitals, evil pharma and device vendors are in for some rude surprises. 60% of healthcare is currently paid for by governmental agencies. Insurance companies reimburse using Medicare as the standard. Medicaid even less. Doctors who see lots of Medicare and/or Medicaid either have to churn or go out of business. Even those who don't see Medicare and Medicaid patients have to see patients for 12 minutes or less and/or charge a concierge fee to pay their malpractice premiums and overhead costs to deal with mandated regulations and paper work. For OB doctors in any metro area, malpractice costs are $1000 per baby. As far as death panels are concerned, 40% of Medicare is spent in the last year of life. You know someone is going to try to figure out when the last year of your life will begin and say we will pay for this but not that. If you disagree and think that maybe it is difficult to predict when the last year of your life will begin, you can pay for whatever you want. Call it what you may, but it is rationing for the elderly based on some statistic. Good luck. The chief ethicist ay NIH, Zeke Emmanuel (Rahm's brother and advisior to Obama) has written that health care resources should be concentrated on those in youth and young adulthood and limited for infants and the elderly. Remember that what your benevolent-------

We could start with repealing it. Right now we Americans are staring down an unfunded liability for medicare in the next 20 years as estimated between 120 and 125 trillion. Passing this law in the middle of a recession, with unquantifiable costs that would dwarf the medicare liability, means the people responsible for its passage need to be voted out of office.

McC, That wasn't the exact AMEN I was hoping for.----what part of "between the two poles" didn't you get? In my experience nothing on earth is all good or all bad. I'm sure Atilla's Mom loved him!!

To answer your question, none of it. Was there something about dwarfing 125 trillion dollars that you are having difficulty with? The Amen part is that we are all Americans, and we need to recognize the magnitude of damage that we have as part of our laws. Record high levels of unemployment, foreclosures and debt are the reality, and this law will mature in different stages of damage.

Wow, What dark hole do you live in? We've been thru wars,depressions,heat waves and Cub losses---trust me it will somehow all work out. However your "my way or highway" approach is exactly what The President is facing every day---I am so much better off today then in 2008 it's a joke. Stk market was 6,700 it's now 12,700. In my world everything is rosey & the goose hangs high (Shakespere I think!) Have a drink & try to lighten up. Barak's got it all under control.

McC, PS: Do you really think that if Mitty wins, things will be great again----like in Bushs day? This mess will just roll along no matter who gets in----except if its me!!

I'm sorry, I thought I was the one living in a dark hole. To be honest, we need more than a win for Mitty, we also need super majorities in both parts of congress. The way Batack had things back when he was elected. You remember back then, Barack had things under control when he passed stimulus bills, jobs bills, bank regulations and a failed attempt at carbon tax bill. I'll just relax and be more stable with the knowledge that voters like you have a blind loyalty to a guy who is a failure in the white house. Record deficit spending, resulting in record high sustained unemploment. an anemic GDP, record foreclosures. But nothing on this earth is ever all bad, we have Obamacare virus ready for maturity.

Mcc, How can you seeming totally pick on things YOU find so bad (most people now agree the stimulus bill & auto bailout, which has largely been paid back did work at a time we were close to sinking) & not see anything good that has happened (jobs slowly growing, stock market at 12,700, gas prices down significantly, No bin laden, out of Iraq,etc. You seem to see all as (pardon the pun) BLACK and white!!!

McC, Actually part of me wants to see Mitty win that I can sit back & laugh while we still say "WHERE ARE THE JOBS" I thought the 2010 House takeover was to put jobs on the front burner-----some how birth control & gay marriage became more important!!! I wonder where Mitty will put the effort---maybe we can start working on the Book of Mormon & how to open Swiss bank accounts. Oh don't forget buy stock in Humana.

robert myers: "Your symantics as to the president killing in the first person, is more sour grapes and an inability to recognize President Obamas' leadership and commitment to carry out an extremely bold plan to Kill Bin Laden. That is fact, your inference above is dishonest in relationship with the other persons quoted."

Mr. myers: I'll ask you again, when did you stop beating your wife?

President Obama's leadership? Surely, you jest. President Obama is too busy playing golf and flying around on Air Force One to provide any leadership. Why do you think that this recession has dragged on for so long?

Some examples of President Obama's leadership-last September, President Obama proposed a new jobs bill. To date, Obama's jobs bill has not been introduced in the Senate-can't find any Democrats to sponsor Obama's bill.

President Obama submitted a budget blueprint to Congress-not one Democrat voted for the President's budget proposal. President Obama's budget proposal was unanimously defeated.

That's leadership? Can't blame President Bush for those two bloopers.

The Democrat plan is to blame President Bush for every thing that goes wrong on Obama's watch, but take credit for anything that goes right. If Obama was a CEO in the private sector, the Board of Director would have fired him 2 years ago.

As for OBL, the credit for getting OBL goes to our intelligence organizations and the US Navy. BHO was an innocent bystander as far as OBL goes.

And this just in from the Obama campaign:

"Romney and the Republicans announced yesterday that they brought in more than $100 million in June," Messina writes. "For context, that's about what we raised in April and May combined. We're still tallying our own numbers, but this means their gap is getting wider, and if it continues at this pace, it could cost us the election."

Well imagine that. President Obama is having trouble raising money. I wonder why? Guess Americans don't think too much of Obama getting Osama.

"It's the economy, stupid."

http://www.fff.org/freedom/0194b.asp

Lately, intimidated by the Left's scoffing apparently, certain conservatives have taken to calling it "statism". Dictionaries even will define socialism as state ownership of the means of production. That may be a classical Marxist definition but why defer to Marx? The term is attributed to Henri Saint-Simon who advocated a planned economy -- whatever that means exactly.

Those here who have accused others of not knowing what socialism is have thus betrayed their own ignorance. Compare Bismarck's State Socialism to the wide assortment of similar programs enacted in the United States over the last 100 years and see plainly that saying they're socialist is not a false statement. Showing that FDR came closer to fulfilling the platform of rival socialist candidate Thomas than fulfilling his own, as his former advisor James Paul Warberg did in a book, was not a display of ignorance of the socialist party platform but rather awareness of it.

Upton Sinclair on his run for governor of California:

"The American People will take Socialism, but they won't take the label. I certainly proved it in the case of EPIC. Running on the Socialist ticket I got 60,000 votes, and running on the slogan to 'End Poverty in California' I got 879,000. I think we simply have to recognize the fact that our enemies have succeeded in spreading the Big Lie. There is no use attacking it by a front attack, it is much better to out-flank them."
Spartacus Educational: "Socialist Party of America," Upton Sinclair, letter to Norman Thomas (25th September, 1951)

He had been a member of the socialist party since 1902. We could suppose he had a new outlook by 1934 except for that letter where he confesses that he ran as a Democrat because he couldn't get elected as a socialist. Today that legacy lives on in the likes of Jan Schakowsky, just to name one convenient example.

Now if anyone dares suggest something seems socialist, the whiff of it detected from either party (but normally Democrat,) that person is accused of not knowing what socialism is; of being an ignoramus. Which is why some now call it "statism" instead. To avoid the inevitable brow-beating.

Ever so often an attempt to sell it by its name is brazenly attempted: http://sweetness-light.com/archive/newsweek-we-are-all-socialists-now
The name is run up the flagpole and when Americans don't salute it, it's put away again until the time seems rife for another try.

I'm sorry but this myth about the auto bailout continues to be told. The money that the taxpayers paid into the UAW bailout is no longer counted against auto company profits. Bankrupcy would have been the better option, restructuring UAW contracts would have led to stronger earnings and less taxpayer waste. But, like everything else, fighting the bias in tv and newpapers is mostly a waste of time.

Claims made by Obama that the stimulus needed to be passed right away and that unemployment would be 5.5% as predicted by his team of expert economists, are now able to be evaluated. With an anemic GDP and yesterday's job numbers showing real unemployment at 16%, tv and media outlets continue to polish and evade the real issues.

Another briliant article on the American Thinker website:

"Before Castro was prime minister of Cuba, he was a revolutionary with radical ideas. He lived the Marxist-Leninist ideology -- all the while publicly denying being a communist -- and fought to overthrow the dictator Batista. He promised the Cuban people they would have a multi-party political system with fair elections, but in truth, he seized more and more autocratic control."

Read more:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/07/dictators_arent_just_born_overnight.html#ixzz1zxO4mLta

Sounds a lot like BHO.

Bruce Harvey: ""Richard, It's too bad your outright hatred of President Obama has clouded your probably usual good judgement. For years I was a staunch Rep. (since Barry Goldwater) but this out right unwarrented hatred from the day he was elected turned me away (I hope to return so day when calmer, saner, people get control). I heard Rush L. on his radio show On Obama's first day say "I WANT TO SEE HIM FAIL" Unfortunately that set the tone for the Rep Party----Our main job is to see he is a one term president----How do you do that----screw the people for 4 years & blame him. Hope you somehow see what is going on."

Mr. Harvey, I was in full agreement with Rush Limbaugh 3-1/2 years ago. You may recall one of BHO's mentors was the Reverend Jerimiah "Goddam America" Wright. Our President said that he could not disown Reverend "Goddam America" Wright, regardless of what the Reverend Wright had to say. So we can only conclude that BHO agrees with the Reverend Wright-"Goddam America".

Any President who sits in a church and listens to a preacher say "Goddam America" does not have America's interests at heart. Once again, Rush is right.

Let's hope that BHO fails in his mission to destroy America.

Medicare and it's destruction by PPACA/Obamacare:

1.) According to the Chief Medicare Actuary Obamacare will cut $4.95 TRILLION from Medicare and reduce the amount that the Government reimburses to doctors who take Medicare to less than what it pays to doctors who take Medicaid. Medicaid surgical patients are ALREADY 97% more likely to DIE after surgery than those with private health insurance and this is BEFORE Obamacare adds 25 Million more people on to our bankrupt Medicaid rolls. READ > http://www.nationalreview.com/critical-condition/231147/uva-study-surgical-patients-medicaid-are-13-more-likely-die-those-without-

Clearly there will be at least two and probably more tiers of system and care. The wealthy and upper middle will buy what they want. The lower middle and poor will have limited access and quality and the overall cost will continue to go up. We are unlike other systems in the sense that we are less homogenous on many levels and used to unfettered freedoms. Everyone who was around in 1965 knew that Medicare would break the bank and wasn't necessary but the pols wanted votes so this is what we got. Societies have to go through these cycles . Human nature at work and very few learn from history.

Please guys just tell me in a few words has Obama done anything good in the 3 1/2 yrs. Frankly, I'm hard pressed. I usually don't look for the good in a person in the wake of severe and possibly unchangeable wreckage. I will admit the fun thats about to start when he gets all smarmy on a failed presidential record.

If thats the case, he should win in a landslide. You probably will need some coffee after you wake up.

RB must be delusional. Set the precedent for bailouts and government run industries, wasted billions on a stimulus which didn't do anything, is an embarrassment with world leaders, followed up on Bin Laden info Bush started, fulfilled the ACA dreams of the lefties for years, lost control of Congress, picked a VP who is -----------. How about cash for clunkers. Wow, that was really helpfu. Solyndra and four or five others. Great business savy with the taxpayers money. More golf and Air Force One time than any other president. Terriffic! Sort of Jimmy Carter lite. Never had a job, never ran anything, devotee of Aaul Alinsky who was trained by Fran Nitti, friend of Bill Ayers and Bernadine dohrn but says he wasn't, sat in Wright's church for 20 years and says he had no idea what Wright preached. Can't be too bright. Says that 8.2% unemployment is move in right direction. Boy, I am sold!

I think he's a bit angy too. Carrying Obama's baggage must be trying, and this heat isn't helping matters.

Mr. Schulte... I am sorry to learn of your business going down the tubes...about your foreclosure...about your cancer. Regardless who is this country's figurehead successful business...home ownership...and radiant health is not, nor ever has been, guaranteed to any soul who has walked...is walking...will walk this planet. Sincerely...I hope you find some peace in what remains of your life. You said that you think I have mistaken your confidence for anger. I do not believe I have. I can not speak to your confidence for I do not know you...however...the personal comments you make to others belie anger. Perhaps you are not self aware. Perhaps you are in denial. Perhaps you do not care. But seriously, your angry disrespect for others in thread really detracts from any point you make. This goes for others here as well. Raise your personal standards...it will assist others in raising theirs.

RB... Up north you commented that everything changes. That is the only truth that can be counted on. I am curious why you keep banging your head against the wall here? Things are changing and this crowd creaks with fear and resistance. I am more than sure you could spend your energies on more pleasurable pursuits. Unless, ofcourse, you find pleasure in wearing these people out with frustration!