Obamacare Architect: We Passed the Law Thanks to the 'Stupidity of the American Voter'

a reply to: butcherguy

Nice cherry picking. I didn't say you were republican I pointed out that the ones who developed the concept are.

I also don't care to debate your personal feelings about the ACA.

a reply to: Gryphon66

right...so as i said before, since "tax" would garner a negative response from the people, they just decided to criminalize personal choice, which then gives them license(entirely of their own making, outside the constitution) to assess a penalty, or fine upon anyone not complying with the mandate....

it's worded in such a way where stupid people believe it's legit.

so it's TECHNICALLY not a "tax"...it's a "fee", "penalty", or "fine", for committing the SIN of making a choice for yourself....

it's complete insanity, and really isn't something the constitution allows for....but that's when they cart in their favorite dead horse; the "general welfare" clause, which they have perverted to allow them to do any damn thing they want, and since the average american really doesn't know jack about the constitution, they don't look any further than "oh, well they said this clause allows for it, so i guess they're telling the truth, and it's all good and legal".

a reply to: Gryphon66

and this is the really slimy, sneaky part of it.....

and again, this is one of the ways it can not be considered a true tax, even though it really is....

the "tax" (as you've described it), of the cost of the policy isn't being paid to the government, it's being paid to private business....the only time the government steals from you, with regard to it, is when you don't buy it. the government does have the authority to levy taxes...they DON'T have the authority to fine you for not buying a product from a private business. there are so many layers of obfuscation on this...it's so goddamn confusing, that i'm actually having a hard time typing this up...so i apologize if this reads like bird cage liner....

a reply to: butcherguy

i'd argue that it's not even really a law...

the federal government does not have the authority to force citizens to purchase a product from a private company...they are exceeding their constitutional authority. and the supreme court has already ruled that any law that either violates the constitution, or functions in excess of the government's constitutional authority, is null, void, and completely unenforceable...

a reply to: butcherguy

Yes, Americans are not taught Critical Thinking skills in school, and are instead shoved into group-sports, group-everything, in order to have a shill in each group to "change the thinking" of the stronger, more suspicious individuals in each group. And keep the group enslaved to this Administration's "media spin" of all subjects.

On the other hand, Obamacare was put up before the national Supreme Court a few years ago. Arguments were in Jan./Feb., with a decision by June. Head of the Court was/is toadie Justice Roberts. He was the swing vote, and initially sided with the conservatives that Obamacare was a bad idea. However, by June he'd reversed his vote, and sided with the liberals allowing Obamacare.

So despite the shallowness of the average American's thought processes, the shenanigans with the Supreme Court just show "politics as usual."

originally posted by: Daedalus
a reply to: ScientiaFortisDefendit

so, then, zero republicans voted in favor of the ACA?

That is correct.

LINK

a reply to: Daedalus

I understand your position on the ACA. I cannot debate the strong feelings you have nor would I even attempt to.

When I first heard about the individual mandate, I knew that this was not the law promised or needed.

What I don't understand, and what perhaps is not important, is why you're focusing on my explanation of "the tax."

I'm just stating the facts of what has happened so far. The only right that government has to make you pay for something is a tax. The Republicans who came up with the idea knew it was a tax, the CBO knew it was a tax, the Democrats who tried to create a bill that they foolishly though would garner some degree of bipartisan support knew was a tax, Dr. Gruber knew it was a tax, the Supreme Court has stated the individual mandate stands because it is a tax ... so it's not just me that's making that claim. Perhaps that's irrelevant, but it does seem personal.

Anyway, I think I've said what I can say; y'all have fun.

a reply to: Gryphon66

didn't mean anything personal...you started this line of discussion, with the mention of "tax", and so, i ran with it...

a reply to: Daedalus

Probably a combination of things. No worries.

I did take it upon myself to try to explain Dr. Gruber's stupid comments; you're right.

Ah well. Always enjoy the chat D; peace out!

A little aside to this subject:

‘People Are Going To Be In For A Shock’: Penalty For Uninsured Not Signing Up For Obamacare To More Than Triple
washington.cbslocal.com...

Uninsured Americans who decide not to enroll will face a penalty of $325 per person, more than tripling the $95 penalty those who did not enroll had to pay the first time around. Children under the age of 18 will be fined $162.50. The maximum amount an uninsured family will be penalized is $975 under the flat-rate method. “The penalty is meant to incentivize people to get coverage,” Laura Adams, senior analyst of InsuranceQuotes.com, told CBS News. “This year, I think a lot of people are going to be in for a shock.”

I'm not shocked.
I'm disgusted!!

a reply to: On the Edge

"Penalty For Uninsured Not Signing Up For Obamacare To More Than Triple"

Well, of course! Tons of people are defaulting on their health insurance monthly payments, and the only part of this boondoggle that works are the urban Medicaid Clinics. So they have to penalize the Uninsured to pay for both the urban Medicaid Clinics AND the health insurers who keep losing money with plans that most people stop paying for.

But it now looks that Obamacare is headed back to the Supreme Court. Let's see how Injustice Roberts votes this time:

www.csmonitor.com...
SUPREME COURT AGREES TO HEAR NEW CHALLENGE TO OBAMACARE
"Of the 7.3 million people who signed up for insurance through a health-care exchange, 5.4 million of them (roughly 74 percent) signed up on an exchange established by the federal government, according to a government brief filed in the case.

"Of those consumers, 9 out of 10 who signed up for coverage on a federal exchange would be unable to afford the insurance premium without government help. The average tax credit paid out covers 76 percent of the cost of the premium, according to the government.

"In the most basic terms, what that means is that if tax credits are only available through state-established health care exchanges (as critics say the ACA requires), 74 percent of existing enrollees will no longer be able to afford health care coverage. And that, in turn, would likely trigger the demise of Obamacare."

Nancy Pelosi was asked about what she thought of Jonathan Gruber's comments.
She claims she never heard of him....
But there is a video of her citing his work on reference to ACA......
reason.com


Is she lying.... Or just senile?

a reply to: butcherguy

I think we should throw her in water and see if she floats or sinks.

a reply to: butcherguy

I would say that she is mentally ill. I honestly believe that Pelosi should be locked in a straight jacket, and thrown into a padded room in some max security mental asylum.

She probably should be medicated daily, but not the meds that she is clearly abusing now. She seems very unstable, and at certain times she has the eyes of a drugged up lunatic. ~$heopleNation

a reply to: SheopleNation

She's a Democrat who represents San Francisco... The mentally ill part is automatically present.

We could always test the chaos theory by putting her into a circular room with a magic mushroom and an aardvark.



/end sarcasm

originally posted by: butcherguy
Nancy Pelosi was asked about what she thought of Jonathan Gruber's comments.
She claims she never heard of him....
But there is a video of her citing his work on reference to ACA......
reason.com

Is she lying.... Or just senile?

I vote lying

originally posted by: butcherguy
Nancy Pelosi was asked about what she thought of Jonathan Gruber's comments.
She claims she never heard of him....
But there is a video of her citing his work on reference to ACA......
reason.com

Is she lying.... Or just senile?

Pathological lying *IS* a mental illness.



Her latest comments are another nail in the Democrats' coffin.

See, here's the thing - You can tell people until you are blue in the face that when they vote for the people who promise to punish the evil rich and big businesses with ever more taxes and penalties and regulations, those costs will only wind up being passed on to you in the form of everything being more expensive, but they don't believe, and when the inevitable happens and the things from those evil big businesses do wind up being more expensive or the businesses in question ship off overseas ... they never connect the two things in their minds. It's just business being evil, so they continue to do more voting for the people they think are "punishing" those evil businesses.

And the cycle continues.

What is the definition of insanity?

a reply to: butcherguy

she is such a f**king idiot, and a lying sack of s**t.....

when what he says, makes what they wanna do look good, it's great, and they'll sing his praises......but when he says something embarassing to them(regardless of how unintentionally, or inadvertently true it may have been), suddenly, they don't know who he is, and "he didn't help write our bill"....goddamn hilarious, but completely unsurprising..

notice how when she was confronted with the question of gruber, and had to come up with a lie on the fly, she stuttered, stammered, and struggled for her words, but then once she finished sidestepping, and was able to return to her comfort zone of prepared lies, and talking points, she was able to speak more smoothly and fluidly?

i'm so tired of fake people like her..

a reply to: butcherguy

"Is (Nancy Pelosi) lying.... Or just senile?"

Like a lot of the long-time Dems in Wash. DC, she's been very duplicitous about Obamacare from the beginning:

www.washingtontimes.com...
(2011) OBAMACARE WAIVER CORRUPTION
"But the political payoffs don’t stop there. The Obama administration didn’t forget its closest friends in the latest round of waivers. Although there are 435 congressional districts across America, nearly 20 percent of the new waivers, amazingly, found their way to a single district - Mrs. Pelosi‘s.

"The priorities of the Obama administration and its Democratic allies are on display with every waiver granted. The list of beneficiaries in Mrs. Pelosi’s district, for example, belongs in an episode of “Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous.” Mrs. Pelosi, champion of the unions and no stranger to hypocrisy, has amassed a fortune as part owner of Napa Valley Auberge du Soleil resort - a luxurious nonunion shop.

"Now her luxury boutique colleagues also can benefit from her “do as I say” politics. The “four-diamond luxury” hotel Campton Place; Tru Spa, Allure magazine’s “best day spa in San Fransisco”; Boboquivari’s and its $59 porterhouse steaks; and Cafe des Amis, “a timeless Parisian style brasserie,” are among her beneficiaries (granted Obamacare waivers)."