Obamacare: Shoved Down Everyone's Throat

[epicSocialism4tw]

...unless you are a labor union.


"Labor unions continued to receive the overwhelming majority of waivers from the president’s health care reform law since the Obama administration tightened application rules last summer.

Documents released in a classic Friday afternoon news dump show that labor unions representing 543,812 workers received waivers from President Barack Obama‘s signature legislation since June 17, 2011.

By contrast, private employers with a total of 69,813 employees, many of whom work for small businesses, were granted waivers."



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/06/labor-unions-primary-recipients-of-obamacare-waivers/#ixzz1iq5yN5Ak



Incredible hypocrisy.

[The Lone Bolt]

Pfft. You're just pissed because the Repubs fumbled the ball and the Dems picked it up.

Obamacare is just Romneycare taken to a national level. The repubs had a HC system that worked, but instead of promoting it they fumbled it away. Tough luck. You have nobody to blame but the RNC.

[pricejj]

Pfft. You're just pissed because the Repubs fumbled the ball and the Dems picked it up.

Obamacare is just Romneycare taken to a national level. The repubs had a HC system that worked, but instead of promoting it they fumbled it away. Tough luck. You have nobody to blame but the RNC.

Romneycare doesn't work.

Massachusetts is the most indebt state (as a % of GDP), with the fastest increasing debt.

Try again, you fail. Obamacare, not only doesn't work, it's also unconstitutional.

All you Democrat Euro-wannabee's promoting failed policies that don't even adhere to U.S. Constitutional law would be downright amusing, if it wasn't so disgusting.

[The Lone Bolt]

Romneycare doesn't work.

Massachusetts is the most indebt state (as a % of GDP), with the fastest increasing debt.

Try again, you fail. Obamacare, not only doesn't work, it's also unconstitutional.


Really? So when is the Massachusetts Legislature overturning it? Where's the MA public opinion clamoring for it's removal?

You fail.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Romneycare doesn't work.

Massachusetts is the most indebt state (as a % of GDP), with the fastest increasing debt.

Try again, you fail. Obamacare, not only doesn't work, it's also unconstitutional.

All you Democrat Euro-wannabee's promoting failed policies that don't even adhere to U.S. Constitutional law would be downright amusing, if it wasn't so disgusting.

The constitution is nothing but a problem to these clowns.

It was put there to protect the citizens against people like them.

[Spider]

All you Democrat Euro-wannabee's promoting failed policies that don't even adhere to U.S. Constitutional law would be downright amusing, if it wasn't so disgusting.

LOL Drama queen ....... you couldnt be more pathetic even if you put on a dress ....

[epicSocialism4tw]

LOL Drama queen ....... you couldnt be more pathetic even if you put on a dress ....

He's so pathetic that his comment hit the nail on the head and got right under your skin.

[W*GS]

Seeing as how Obamacare is Romneycare with some tweaks, and Romneycare was the instantiation of what the hard-right Heritage Foundation folks had been pushing for years (but are now lamely disavowing any connection), I don't see what epicFail is so outraged about.

As usual. He has his panties in a twist over something his ideology created and installed.

[Rohirrim]

Seeing as how Obamacare is Romneycare with some tweaks, and Romneycare was the instantiation of what the hard-right Heritage Foundation folks had been pushing for years (but are now lamely disavowing any connection), I don't see what epicFail is so outraged about.

As usual. He has his panties in a twist over something his ideology created and installed.

Yep. Obama's military plan is Rumsfeldcare and his health care plan is Heritage Foundationcare. But the Right keeps whining. Why? Because what the Right Wing is truly squealing about, under all their inflammatory rhetoric is this: "There's a dadgum nigra in the White House!" Yikes!

[W*GS]

Yep. Obama's military plan is Rumsfeldcare and his health care plan is Heritage Foundationcare. But the Right keeps whining. Why? Because what the Right Wing is truly squealing about, under all their inflammatory rhetoric is this: "There's a dadgum nigra in the White House!" Yikes!

Bingo.

[Atwater 27]

Come on liberals of the mane. Can you answer me one simple question with an ounce of intellectual honesty? If Obamacare is so good, why are the unions begging for and receiving waivers for it? And is this fair to the rest of the American people? Any takers?

[Atwater 27]

Yep. Obama's military plan is Rumsfeldcare and his health care plan is Heritage Foundationcare. But the Right keeps whining. Why? Because what the Right Wing is truly squealing about, under all their inflammatory rhetoric is this: "There's a dadgum nigra in the White House!" Yikes!

Ima start calling you Robert Byrd.



Our nation’s top historians reveal that the Democratic Party gave us the Ku Klux Klan, Black Codes, Jim Crow Laws and other repressive legislation which resulted in the multitude of murders, lynchings, mutilations, and intimidations (of thousands of black and white Republicans). On the issue of slavery: historians say the Democrats gave their lives to expand it, the Republicans gave their lives to ban it.

The Democrats:
◦Democrats fought to expand slavery while Republicans fought to end it.
◦Democrats passed those discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws.
◦Democrats supported and passed the Missouri Compromise to protect slavery.
◦Democrats supported and passed the Kansas Nebraska Act to expand slavery.
◦Democrats supported and backed the Dred Scott Decision.
◦Democrats opposed educating blacks and murdered our teachers.
◦Democrats fought against anti-lynching laws.
◦Democrat Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, is well known for having been a “Kleagle” in the Ku Klux Klan.
◦Democrat Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, personally filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for 14 straight hours to keep it from passage.
◦Democrats passed the Repeal Act of 1894 that overturned civil right laws enacted by Republicans.
◦Democrats declared that they would rather vote for a “yellow dog” than vote for a Republican, because the Republican Party was known as the party for blacks.
◦Democrat President Woodrow Wilson, reintroduced segregation throughout the federal government immediately upon taking office in 1913.
◦Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s first appointment to the Supreme Court was a life member of the Ku Klux Klan, Sen. Hugo Black, Democrat of Alabama.
◦Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s choice for vice president in 1944 was Harry Truman, who had joined the Ku Klux Klan in Kansas City in 1922.
◦Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt resisted Republican efforts to pass a federal law against lynching.
◦Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt opposed integration of the armed forces.
◦Democrat Senators Sam Ervin, Albert Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd were the chief opponents of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
◦Democrats supported and backed Judge John Ferguson in the case of Plessy v Ferguson.
◦Democrats supported the School Board of Topeka Kansas in the case of Brown v The Board of Education of Topeka Kansas.
◦Democrat public safety commissioner Eugene “Bull” Connor, in Birmingham, Ala., unleashed vicious dogs and turned fire hoses on black civil rights demonstrators.
◦Democrats were who Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the other protesters were fighting.
◦Democrat Georgia Governor Lester Maddox “brandished an ax hammer to prevent blacks from patronizing his restaurant.
◦Democrat Governor George Wallace stood in front of the Alabama schoolhouse in 1963, declaring there would be segregation forever.
◦Democrat Arkansas Governor Faubus tried to prevent desegregation of Little Rock public schools.
◦Democrat Senator John F. Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil rights Act.
◦Democrat President John F. Kennedy opposed the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King.
◦Democrat President John F. Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI.
◦Democrat President Bill Clinton’s mentor was U.S. Senator J. William Fulbright, an Arkansas Democrat and a supporter of racial segregation.
◦Democrat President Bill Clinton interned for J. William Fulbright in 1966-67.
◦Democrat Senator J. William Fulbright signed the Southern Manifesto opposing the Supreme Court’s 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education decision.
◦Democrat Senator J. William Fulbright joined with the Dixiecrats in filibustering the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1964.
◦Democrat Senator J. William Fulbright voted against the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
◦Southern Democrats opposed desegregation and integration.


Democrats opposed:
1.The Emancipation Proclamation
2.The 13th Amendment
3.The 14th Amendment
4.The 15th Amendment
5.The Reconstruction Act of 1867
6.The Civil Rights of 1866
7.The Enforcement Act of 1870
8.The Forced Act of 1871
9.The Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871
10.The Civil Rights Act of 1875
11.The Freeman Bureau
12.The Civil Rights Act of 1957
13.The Civil Rights Act of 1960
14.The United State Civil Rights Commission


Republicans gave strong bi-partisan support and sponsorship for the following
legislation:

1.The Civil Rights Act of 1964
2.The Voting Rights Act of 1965
3.The 1968 Civil Rights Acts
4. The Equal Opportunity Act of 1972
5.Goals and Timetables for Affirmative Action Programs
6.Comprehensive Employment Training Act of 1973
7.Voting Rights Act of Amendment of 1982
8.Civil Rights Act of 1983
9.Federal Contract Compliance and Workforce Development Act of 1988

The Republicans:
◦Republicans enacted civil rights laws in the 1950’s and 1960’s, over the objection of Democrats.
◦Republicans founded the HBCU’s (Historical Black College’s and Universities) and started the NAACP to counter the racist practices of the Democrats.
◦Republicans pushed through much of the ground-breaking civil rights legislation in Congress.
◦Republicans fought slavery and amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom, citizenship and the right to vote.
◦Republicans pushed through much of the groundbreaking civil rights legislation from the 1860s through the 1960s.
◦Republican President Dwight Eisenhower sent troops into the South to desegregate the schools.
◦Republican President Eisenhower appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the Supreme Court, which resulted in the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education decision.
◦Republican Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois, not Democrat President Lyndon Johnson, was the one who pushed through the civil rights laws of the 1960’s.
◦Republican Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois wrote the language for the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
◦Republican Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing.
◦Republican and black American, A. Phillip Randolph, organized the 1963 March by Dr. King on Washington.
http://realdemocrathistory.wordpress.com/category/kkk/

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Fifteen Differences Between Democrats And Republicans


http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/01/08/fifteen-differences/

Republicans fear that the government has too much control over corporations.
Democrats fear that corporations have too much control over our government.

Democrats believe it benefits all of us to help the weakest and the poorest among us. Republicans believe it benefits all of us to help the wealthiest and most powerful among us.

Republicans believe large corporations will always do what is best for the American people if the government stays out of the way. Democrats believe large corporations would disembowel you and sell your organs to the highest bidder if the government didn’t stop them.

Democrats believe everyone is entitled to health care regardless of their ability to pay. Republicans believe everyone is entitled to jack squat if they can’t pay for health care.

Democrats believe too much of our money goes to crooked corporate executives who take government subsidies and pay themselves $80 million salaries. Republicans believe too much of our money goes to teachers who make $30,000 a year.

Democrats believe anything that helps the American people during a recession or a time of crisis is the true essence of patriotism. Republicans believe anything that helps the American people during a recession or a time of crisis is the true essence of communism.

Democrats believe that we need to set high standards for clean air and drinking water. Republicans believe that standards for clean air and water are burdensome over-regulation.

Democrats believe the President and Congress need to work together to create jobs during a weak economy. Republicans believe that Congress should do nothing to create jobs and then blame the President.

Democrats believe that corporate polluters should be made to pay for the cleanup of their pollution. Republicans believe that making corporations clean up their pollution is burdensome over-regulation.

Democrats believe our health care system exists solely for the purpose of making people healthy. Republicans believe our health care system exists solely for the purpose of making a healthy profit.

Democrats believe Congress should be of the people, by the people and for the people. Republicans believe corporations are the people.
[
B]Democrats [/B]believe that corporations have too much influence over Congress due to their lobbyists and huge campaign contributions. Republicans believe the middle class has too much influence over Congress due to their voting and paying taxes.

Democrats believe we need to protect victims of corporate negligence by allowing Americans to file lawsuits against corporations. Republicans believe we need to protect large corporations from lawsuits by Americans who’ve been victimized by them.

Democrats believe that the rich should be taxed more than the poor and middle class. Republicans believe that the rich should be allowed to keep all their wealth, except for the millions in campaign contributions they give to politicians.

Democrats believe that too much money in politics produces corruption and destroys the American way of life. Republicans believe that money and corruption in politics are the American way of life.

[pricejj]

Ima start calling you Robert Byrd.



Our nation’s top historians reveal that the Democratic Party gave us the Ku Klux Klan, Black Codes, Jim Crow Laws and other repressive legislation which resulted in the multitude of murders, lynchings, mutilations, and intimidations (of thousands of black and white Republicans). On the issue of slavery: historians say the Democrats gave their lives to expand it, the Republicans gave their lives to ban it.

The Democrats:
◦Democrats fought to expand slavery while Republicans fought to end it.
◦Democrats passed those discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws.
◦Democrats supported and passed the Missouri Compromise to protect slavery.
◦Democrats supported and passed the Kansas Nebraska Act to expand slavery.
◦Democrats supported and backed the Dred Scott Decision.
◦Democrats opposed educating blacks and murdered our teachers.
◦Democrats fought against anti-lynching laws.
◦Democrat Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, is well known for having been a “Kleagle” in the Ku Klux Klan.
◦Democrat Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, personally filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for 14 straight hours to keep it from passage.
◦Democrats passed the Repeal Act of 1894 that overturned civil right laws enacted by Republicans.
◦Democrats declared that they would rather vote for a “yellow dog” than vote for a Republican, because the Republican Party was known as the party for blacks.
◦Democrat President Woodrow Wilson, reintroduced segregation throughout the federal government immediately upon taking office in 1913.
◦Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s first appointment to the Supreme Court was a life member of the Ku Klux Klan, Sen. Hugo Black, Democrat of Alabama.
◦Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s choice for vice president in 1944 was Harry Truman, who had joined the Ku Klux Klan in Kansas City in 1922.
◦Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt resisted Republican efforts to pass a federal law against lynching.
◦Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt opposed integration of the armed forces.
◦Democrat Senators Sam Ervin, Albert Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd were the chief opponents of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
◦Democrats supported and backed Judge John Ferguson in the case of Plessy v Ferguson.
◦Democrats supported the School Board of Topeka Kansas in the case of Brown v The Board of Education of Topeka Kansas.
◦Democrat public safety commissioner Eugene “Bull” Connor, in Birmingham, Ala., unleashed vicious dogs and turned fire hoses on black civil rights demonstrators.
◦Democrats were who Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the other protesters were fighting.
◦Democrat Georgia Governor Lester Maddox “brandished an ax hammer to prevent blacks from patronizing his restaurant.
◦Democrat Governor George Wallace stood in front of the Alabama schoolhouse in 1963, declaring there would be segregation forever.
◦Democrat Arkansas Governor Faubus tried to prevent desegregation of Little Rock public schools.
◦Democrat Senator John F. Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil rights Act.
◦Democrat President John F. Kennedy opposed the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King.
◦Democrat President John F. Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI.
◦Democrat President Bill Clinton’s mentor was U.S. Senator J. William Fulbright, an Arkansas Democrat and a supporter of racial segregation.
◦Democrat President Bill Clinton interned for J. William Fulbright in 1966-67.
◦Democrat Senator J. William Fulbright signed the Southern Manifesto opposing the Supreme Court’s 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education decision.
◦Democrat Senator J. William Fulbright joined with the Dixiecrats in filibustering the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1964.
◦Democrat Senator J. William Fulbright voted against the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
◦Southern Democrats opposed desegregation and integration.


Democrats opposed:
1.The Emancipation Proclamation
2.The 13th Amendment
3.The 14th Amendment
4.The 15th Amendment
5.The Reconstruction Act of 1867
6.The Civil Rights of 1866
7.The Enforcement Act of 1870
8.The Forced Act of 1871
9.The Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871
10.The Civil Rights Act of 1875
11.The Freeman Bureau
12.The Civil Rights Act of 1957
13.The Civil Rights Act of 1960
14.The United State Civil Rights Commission


Republicans gave strong bi-partisan support and sponsorship for the following
legislation:

1.The Civil Rights Act of 1964
2.The Voting Rights Act of 1965
3.The 1968 Civil Rights Acts
4. The Equal Opportunity Act of 1972
5.Goals and Timetables for Affirmative Action Programs
6.Comprehensive Employment Training Act of 1973
7.Voting Rights Act of Amendment of 1982
8.Civil Rights Act of 1983
9.Federal Contract Compliance and Workforce Development Act of 1988

The Republicans:
◦Republicans enacted civil rights laws in the 1950’s and 1960’s, over the objection of Democrats.
◦Republicans founded the HBCU’s (Historical Black College’s and Universities) and started the NAACP to counter the racist practices of the Democrats.
◦Republicans pushed through much of the ground-breaking civil rights legislation in Congress.
◦Republicans fought slavery and amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom, citizenship and the right to vote.
◦Republicans pushed through much of the groundbreaking civil rights legislation from the 1860s through the 1960s.
◦Republican President Dwight Eisenhower sent troops into the South to desegregate the schools.
◦Republican President Eisenhower appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the Supreme Court, which resulted in the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education decision.
◦Republican Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois, not Democrat President Lyndon Johnson, was the one who pushed through the civil rights laws of the 1960’s.
◦Republican Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois wrote the language for the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
◦Republican Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing.
◦Republican and black American, A. Phillip Randolph, organized the 1963 March by Dr. King on Washington.
http://realdemocrathistory.wordpress.com/category/kkk/

Great post.

[Rohirrim]

Teddy Roosevelt created the progressive movement in this country. He was a Republican. Do the Republicans of today support progressivism? Hell, they're only a step or two away from out-and-out fascism. At one time, the Republicans were the party against slavery and they did support civil rights. Now, one of their young turks, Rand Paul, and his father, are opposed to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Democrats were tied to the South and that large voting block which jerked their chain for decades. Once Lee Atwater and Reagan launched the "Southern Strategy" of appealing to racism to get votes, the South moved over to the Republican column, where it remains today. So now it is the Republican chain being jerked by the racist movement. Do you really think the Aryan Brotherhood votes for Obama? Ha!

[Atwater 27]

Do you really think the Aryan Brotherhood votes for Obama? Ha!

Close.... Nazi party endorses occupy wall street.

http://www.newser.com/story/131217/nazi-party-endorses-occupy-wall-street.html

Hilarious!:kiss:

[Kid A]

EPIC EUROPEAN SOCIALIST CONVENTION!!!!!!!!!1!!!1!

http://www.dallasnews.com/incoming/20120109-mavswh04.jpg.ece/ALTERNATES/w440/MAVSWH04.JPG

[epicSocialism4tw]

EPIC EUROPEAN SOCIALIST CONVENTION!!!!!!!!!1!!!1


Dirk is thinking "Smile for the douche...smile for the douche."

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Ima start calling you Robert Byrd.


Funny how the right-wing version of the history of civil rights in America always ends with the Civil Rights Act.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/380559_329825343706004_114270361928171_1115998_145 4268449_n.jpg

[Atwater 27]

Close.... Nazi party endorses occupy wall street.

http://www.newser.com/story/131217/nazi-party-endorses-occupy-wall-street.html

Hilarious!:kiss:

Quoted again so LA can try to ignore it and invent right wing racism again.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

^

Weakest "guilt by association" attempt ever.

(But what more can we expect from an unthinking Fox News lemming like you?)

[epicSocialism4tw]

So...LABF or any other democrat shill...

Can you guys inform us as to why Barack Obama believes that everyone except for Unions needs to pay for Obamacare?

[alkemical]

So...LABF or any other democrat shill...

Can you guys inform us as to why Barack Obama believes that everyone except for Unions needs to pay for Obamacare?

Was it written into their labor agreement? Is it a permanent exemption, or is it on a yr/yr basis?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Pfft. You're just pissed because the Repubs fumbled the ball and the Dems picked it up.

Obamacare is just Romneycare taken to a national level. The repubs had a HC system that worked, but instead of promoting it they fumbled it away. Tough luck. You have nobody to blame but the RNC.

Spot on.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Spot on.

So why is it that Obama exempted these unions from Obamacare?

[pricejj]

Spot on.

It has been shown that Romneycare only escalates healthcare costs, while driving the people of Massachusetts deeper into the abyss of debt.

Unabated and inefficient government spending in the healthcare industry is the primary driver behind escalating healthcare costs, not just in the U.S., but worldwide.

[W*GS]

Unabated and inefficient government spending in the healthcare industry is the primary driver behind escalating healthcare costs, not just in the U.S., but worldwide.

Explain this, then, from the OECD. If what you say is true, then these other countries, in which healthcare is run far more by the government than it is here, should have greater increases in health care costs between 1980 and 2008, than the US has experienced.

[Atwater 27]

Come on liberals of the mane. Can you answer me one simple question with an ounce of intellectual honesty? If Obamacare is so good, why are the unions begging for and receiving waivers for it? And is this fair to the rest of the American people? Any takers?

Bumped because everyone is afraid to answer the question. Come on. Rigs? Rohirrim? LA? Spidey? I'm dead serious, I need an answer on this.

[Rohirrim]

Bumped because everyone is afraid to answer the question. Come on. Rigs? Rohirrim? LA? Spidey? I'm dead serious, I need an answer on this.

Huh? I was always opposed to this half-assed plan. I wanted a single payer, universal system. And that's what we'll have when everybody gets their head out of their asses and starts reacquainting themselves with reality.

[Arkie]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/380559_329825343706004_114270361928171_1115998_145 4268449_n.jpg

Who cares what Jesus taught? Biology teaches that life begins at conception.

[El Minion]

Right-Wing Media's Newest Waiver Attack Falls Flat (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201201090006)

January 09, 2012 12:56 pm ET by Justin Berrier

It's been nearly two years since the passage of President Obama's health care reform bill, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), and the right-wing media's apocalyptic predictions (http://mediamatters.org/research/201103230005) ("the end of America as you know it") have still failed to be realized. In response, the brunt of most attacks have focused on minor issues, such as the temporary (http://mediamatters.org/research/201101270037) waivers (http://mediamatters.org/research/201101060007) that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) have issued to employers who have found the pace of the transition too rapid.
The newest line of attacks on the waivers came after HHS issued a series of reports on PPACA implementation last Friday. The conservative website The Daily Caller reacted (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fdailycaller.com%2F2012%2F01%2F0 6%2Flabor-unions-primary-recipients-of-obamacare-waivers%2F) to the document release last Friday, alleging that "[l]abor unions [were the] primary recipients of Obamacare waivers." From The Daily Caller:
Labor unions continued to receive the overwhelming majority of waivers from the president's health care reform law since the Obama administration tightened application rules last summer.

Documents released in a classic Friday afternoon news dump show that labor unions representing 543,812 workers received waivers from President Barack Obama's signature legislation since June 17, 2011.

By contrast, private employers with a total of 69,813 employees, many of whom work for small businesses, were granted waivers.
The allegations were picked up quickly by Big Government (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fbiggovernment.com%2Fwhall%2F201 2%2F01%2F08%2Fobamacare-waiver-tally-543812-for-union-members-69813-for-private-employees%2F), who called the high number of waivers going to labor unions "crony capitalism," and by Fox & Friends who this morning called it a "sweetheart deal." Fox Business host Stuart Varney further claimed that "96 [waiver applications] were rejected, and I believe it was mostly private enterprise companies that were rejected." Watch:

<object width='320' height='240' > <param name='movie' value='http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/flash/pl55.swf'> </param> <param name='wmode' value='transparent'> </param> <param name='flashvars' value='config=http://mediamatters.org/embed/cfg3?f=/static/clips/2012/01/09/22302/fnc-ff-20120109-varneywaivers.flv'></param><param name='allowscriptaccess' value='always'></param><param name='allownetworking' value='all'></param><embed src='http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/flash/pl55.swf' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' flashvars='config=http://mediamatters.org/embed/cfg3?f=/static/clips/2012/01/09/22302/fnc-ff-20120109-varneywaivers.flv' allowscriptaccess='always' wmode='transparent' allowfullscreen='true' width='320' height='240'></embed></object>

</object> </p> But even a cursory look at the documents (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fcciio.cms.gov%2Fresources%2Ffil es%2Fapproved_applications_for_waiver.html) released by HHS tells a different story. The waivers, which temporarily excuse a health care plan from following regulations that remove annual limits on benefits, were issued to about 1,200 plans as of January 6, 2012. Those are broken down into self-insured employers, which are largely private businesses, multi-employer plans and non-Taft Hartley Union plans, both of which are offered by labor unions, and a few others. The update by HHS shows that of the 1,200 plans currently approved for waivers, more than 60 percent (772) are self-insured employers (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fcciio.cms.gov%2Fresources%2Ffil es%2FFiles2%2F01062012%2FEmployer_01062012.pdf), while 451 went to labor (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fcciio.cms.gov%2Fresources%2Ffil es%2FFiles2%2F01062012%2FMultiEmployer_01062012.pd f) unions (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fcciio.cms.gov%2Fresources%2Ffil es%2FFiles2%2F01062012%2FnonTaftHartleyUnion_01062 012.pdf). The number of employees granted waivers does favor labor unions, but only because those plans simply cover far more people than any specific private business plan that has sought a waiver. It's not that labor unions are favored, simply that plans representing more insured individuals have applied.

Where the allegations of "sweetheart deals" and "crony capitalism" really fall apart, however, is in the list of denied applications (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fcciio.cms.gov%2Fresources%2Ffil es%2Fdenials_01062012.pdf). While Varney claims that "mostly private enterprise companies" were denied applications, the list of denials shows that only 20 of the 96 ultimately denied plans represented private business; the majority of rejected plans were actually from labor unions. In fact, of the 1,019,810 enrollees in plans that were denied and were not subsequently approved, fewer than 11,000 were enrolled in self-insured employer plans.

[epicSocialism4tw]

You know its bad when Obama exempts his closest allies from it. Unions are his closest allies.

[barryr]

If Obamacare is so great, why is anyone getting waivers? The liberals are left to complain about who is getting the most waivers or not, but the real story is why they are getting them, which is obviously a story they would rather ignore. This is the same bill done behind closed doors with deals made with certain states if they agreed to it, all the while Obama promising a transparent administration. What BS!

[epicSocialism4tw]

If Obamacare is so great, why is anyone getting waivers? The liberals are left to complain about who is getting the most waivers or not, but the real story is why they are getting them, which is obviously a story they would rather ignore. This is the same bill done behind closed doors with deals made with certain states if they agreed to it, all the while Obama promising a transparent administration. What BS!

...and they get to pick and choose who to "punish" by denying them waivers.

This whole thing stinks and I cant imagine that something so fraught with injustice will be allowed by the supreme court.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

It has been shown that Romneycare only escalates healthcare costs, while driving the people of Massachusetts deeper into the abyss of debt.

"Shown" by whom?

In any case, how does it feel knowing you're probably going to have to vote for this guy? Ha!

Unabated and inefficient government spending in the healthcare industry is the primary driver behind escalating healthcare costs, not just in the U.S., but worldwide.

:crazy:

You left out "ignorance is strength" and "freedom is slavery." :wave:

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Biology teaches that life begins at conception.

Biology as taught where?

Some evangelical Christian diploma mill?

[epicSocialism4tw]

Biology as taught where?

Some evangelical Christian diploma mill?

He said that "life begins at conception", which is absolutely 100% true as biologists define life.

Get educated.

The properties of life are all fulfilled by everthing following the cortical reaction.

1) Find out what the properties of life are.

2) Find out what basic growth and development are at the moment of fertilization and beyond.

3) Apply 1 to 2.

4) Come back understanding what it means to be a living thing.

[Atwater 27]

NIce try, El Minion, but Media Matters is just below the enquirer for factual accuracy. NEXT.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

NIce try, El Minion, but Media Matters is just below the enquirer for factual accuracy. NEXT.

Actually, you have it bass-ackwards:

Exposing right-wing disinformation and lies, e.g., the kind spewed on a daily basis by Fox News, is Media Matters business.....and business is booming!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

He said that "life begins at conception", which is absolutely 100% true as biologists define life.



But not in the way religious flat-earthers like you define it, i.e., such that a fertilized egg = a "person."

[Atwater 27]

Actually, you have it bass-ackwards:

Exposing right-wing disinformation and lies, e.g., the kind spewed on a daily basis by Fox News, is Media Matters business.....and business is booming!
Please... You want to talk business, google Fox news ratings...
If Media Matters was a business it would go bankrupt without donations from the liberal 1 %. Like Air America. :sunshine: A little daylight disinfectant for you. Now go back to your propaganda website for your next marching orders like a good little soldier.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Please... You want to talk business, google Fox news ratings...
If Media Matters was a business it would go bankrupt without donations from the liberal 1 %. Like Air America. :sunshine: A little daylight disinfectant for you. Now go back to your propaganda website for your next marching orders like a good little soldier.

Um, it's obvious that you're too thick to realize I was speaking metaphorically, i.e., the business of debunking Fox News disinfo is (and always will be) booming.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Um, it's obvious that you're too thick to realize I was speaking metaphorically, i.e., the business of debunking Fox News disinfo is (and always will be) booming.

You couldn't debunk a Gaffney conspiracy theory.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

You couldn't debunk a Gaffney conspiracy theory.

There you go stumbling into an exchange about which you know nothing and offering up a non-sequitur.

Well done! Ha!

[Atwater 27]

Um, it's obvious that you're too thick to realize I was speaking metaphorically, i.e., the business of debunking Fox News disinfo is (and always will be) booming.

Please. The only debunking that needs to be done is with your countless whack job lefty websites you keep spamming propaganda from.

[Spider]

Right-Wing Media's Newest Waiver Attack Falls Flat (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201201090006)

January 09, 2012 12:56 pm ET by Justin Berrier

It's been nearly two years since the passage of President Obama's health care reform bill, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), and the right-wing media's apocalyptic predictions (http://mediamatters.org/research/201103230005) ("the end of America as you know it") have still failed to be realized. In response, the brunt of most attacks have focused on minor issues, such as the temporary (http://mediamatters.org/research/201101270037) waivers (http://mediamatters.org/research/201101060007) that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) have issued to employers who have found the pace of the transition too rapid.
The newest line of attacks on the waivers came after HHS issued a series of reports on PPACA implementation last Friday. The conservative website The Daily Caller reacted (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fdailycaller.com%2F2012%2F01%2F0 6%2Flabor-unions-primary-recipients-of-obamacare-waivers%2F) to the document release last Friday, alleging that "[l]abor unions [were the] primary recipients of Obamacare waivers." From The Daily Caller:
Labor unions continued to receive the overwhelming majority of waivers from the president's health care reform law since the Obama administration tightened application rules last summer.

Documents released in a classic Friday afternoon news dump show that labor unions representing 543,812 workers received waivers from President Barack Obama's signature legislation since June 17, 2011.

By contrast, private employers with a total of 69,813 employees, many of whom work for small businesses, were granted waivers.
The allegations were picked up quickly by Big Government (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fbiggovernment.com%2Fwhall%2F201 2%2F01%2F08%2Fobamacare-waiver-tally-543812-for-union-members-69813-for-private-employees%2F), who called the high number of waivers going to labor unions "crony capitalism," and by Fox & Friends who this morning called it a "sweetheart deal." Fox Business host Stuart Varney further claimed that "96 [waiver applications] were rejected, and I believe it was mostly private enterprise companies that were rejected." Watch:

<object width='320' height='240' > <param name='movie' value='http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/flash/pl55.swf'> </param> <param name='wmode' value='transparent'> </param> <param name='flashvars' value='config=http://mediamatters.org/embed/cfg3?f=/static/clips/2012/01/09/22302/fnc-ff-20120109-varneywaivers.flv'></param><param name='allowscriptaccess' value='always'></param><param name='allownetworking' value='all'></param><embed src='http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/flash/pl55.swf' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' flashvars='config=http://mediamatters.org/embed/cfg3?f=/static/clips/2012/01/09/22302/fnc-ff-20120109-varneywaivers.flv' allowscriptaccess='always' wmode='transparent' allowfullscreen='true' width='320' height='240'></embed></object>

</object> </p> But even a cursory look at the documents (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fcciio.cms.gov%2Fresources%2Ffil es%2Fapproved_applications_for_waiver.html) released by HHS tells a different story. The waivers, which temporarily excuse a health care plan from following regulations that remove annual limits on benefits, were issued to about 1,200 plans as of January 6, 2012. Those are broken down into self-insured employers, which are largely private businesses, multi-employer plans and non-Taft Hartley Union plans, both of which are offered by labor unions, and a few others. The update by HHS shows that of the 1,200 plans currently approved for waivers, more than 60 percent (772) are self-insured employers (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fcciio.cms.gov%2Fresources%2Ffil es%2FFiles2%2F01062012%2FEmployer_01062012.pdf), while 451 went to labor (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fcciio.cms.gov%2Fresources%2Ffil es%2FFiles2%2F01062012%2FMultiEmployer_01062012.pd f) unions (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fcciio.cms.gov%2Fresources%2Ffil es%2FFiles2%2F01062012%2FnonTaftHartleyUnion_01062 012.pdf). The number of employees granted waivers does favor labor unions, but only because those plans simply cover far more people than any specific private business plan that has sought a waiver. It's not that labor unions are favored, simply that plans representing more insured individuals have applied.

Where the allegations of "sweetheart deals" and "crony capitalism" really fall apart, however, is in the list of denied applications (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fcciio.cms.gov%2Fresources%2Ffil es%2Fdenials_01062012.pdf). While Varney claims that "mostly private enterprise companies" were denied applications, the list of denials shows that only 20 of the 96 ultimately denied plans represented private business; the majority of rejected plans were actually from labor unions. In fact, of the 1,019,810 enrollees in plans that were denied and were not subsequently approved, fewer than 11,000 were enrolled in self-insured employer plans.

LOL pwned big time ....... Like a Volkswagen taking on a freight train ...good job minion

[Spider]

NIce try, El Minion, but Media Matters is just below the enquirer for factual accuracy. NEXT.

LOL thats it ? where your proof countering what minion posted ?

[Spider]

Probably tired of getting owned and beat down , so the media matters is national enquirer was used ... Hilarious!

[Atwater 27]

LOL thats it ? where your proof countering what minion posted ?

Since when does Media Matters need to be 'countered'? Everyone but moonbats like you know they are full of ****. NEXT.

[Bronx33]

So...LABF or any other democrat shill...

Can you guys inform us as to why Barack Obama believes that everyone except for Unions needs to pay for Obamacare?


Yes after reading this thread i noticed LA and the posse avoided this question like a case of the crotch crickets they simply drove around it and pretended like it was never asked that's hypocrisy at its finest.

The unions are the dems 1% ers that barry caters to at our expense the exemption is a slap in the face cause they know we cant do anything about it ( its a disgrace) and they could care less.

[barryr]

Yep, there is no good, legit answer for why anyone is getting waivers if Obamacare is so wonderful, so his defenders are left to debate and argue who is getting more waivers. Like that somehow answers the question. Why are unions, much less anybody else, getting them? "Um, oh, well unions aren't getting more than private companies." Wow, I feel so much better and the question was fully answered. Morons.

[Atwater 27]

I can guaran mutha ****ing TEE you that every one of these libs that post here that has decent insurance would be BEGGING for a waiver if they truly knew how much of a dive their quality of healthcare would decline when Obamacare comes knocking. The Unions know this and Obama knows this. He needs Union support and cannot afford to not have them on his side.... Therefore, the waivers. But don't worry your pretty little heads. The time will soon come if Obamacare stands when even the powerful Union lobby will be forced to cave and their members forced to downgrade their healthcare to Ghettocare.

[peacepipe]

...unless you are a labor union.


"Labor unions continued to receive the overwhelming majority of waivers from the president’s health care reform law since the Obama administration tightened application rules last summer.

Documents released in a classic Friday afternoon news dump show that labor unions representing 543,812 workers received waivers from President Barack Obama‘s signature legislation since June 17, 2011.

By contrast, private employers with a total of 69,813 employees, many of whom work for small businesses, were granted waivers."



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/06/labor-unions-primary-recipients-of-obamacare-waivers/#ixzz1iq5yN5Ak



Incredible hypocrisy.that would be because union medical benefits meet or exceed what HCR requires.

[Bronx33]

that would be because union medical benefits meet or exceed what HCR requires.


and is staffed by what????? yes union members so of course they get something different cause the unions dont profit from it.

[Spider]

Since when does Media Matters need to be 'countered'? Everyone but moonbats like you know they are full of ****. NEXT.

LOL in other words you dont have shiat to back up your claims do ya bedwetter ? you just spout out whatever and call it good .......told you before you are a bullshiatter , cant believe a word that you say

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Yes after reading this thread i noticed LA and the posse avoided this question like a case of the crotch crickets they simply drove around it and pretended like it was never asked that's hypocrisy at its finest.

The unions are the dems 1% ers that barry caters to at our expense the exemption is a slap in the face cause they know we cant do anything about it ( its a disgrace) and they could care less.

Sometimes a picture IS worth a thousand words...

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/184678_1876534716524_1335926495_32147920_6947572_n .jpg

This CEO thanks you for being a useful idiot. :wave:

[epicSocialism4tw]

Sometimes a picture IS worth a thousand words...

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/184678_1876534716524_1335926495_32147920_6947572_n .jpg

This CEO thanks you for being a useful idiot.:


Thats funny that you guys are having to adopt the language describing OWS clowns as "useful idiots".

Those kinds of little slips of the tongue are cute,

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Thats funny that you guys are having to adopt the language describing OWS clowns as "useful idiots".

Those kinds of little slips of the tongue are cute,

What's funny is that Fox News sheep like you apparently believe they invented the phrase "useful idiot." Ha!

[epicSocialism4tw]

What's funny is that Fox News sheep like you apparently believe they invented the phrase "useful idiot."

Actually, its a direct reference to Soviet sympathizers in Western countries who use propaganda for goals they do not understand.

It has a specific meaning.

So really you're a pretty good example of a useful idiot.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Actually, its a direct reference to Soviet sympathizers in Western countries who use propaganda for goals they do not understand.

It has a specific meaning.

So really you're a pretty good example of a useful idiot.

You don't seem to understand the difference between etymology and use.

Hence, you would be the idiot.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/375174_358087484216769_108038612554992_1425304_144 6726513_n.jpg

[pricejj]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/375174_358087484216769_108038612554992_1425304_144 6726513_n.jpg

By "free", you mean, "the taxpayers are forced to pay for overpriced, for-profit, health insurance, wether they need it or not".

good one. that is just about the worst solution I can think of.

[epicSocialism4tw]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/375174_358087484216769_108038612554992_1425304_144 6726513_n.jpg

You should be ashamed of yourself.

The only use you have for Jesus is as a cheap one liner in your socialist propaganda.

You aren't kidding anyone.

[barryr]

What aren't the democrats for buying across state lines if this is really only about getting more affordable health care? That would help drive down costs since competition has a funny way of doing such a thing. But the democrats seem content with a monopoly where there is no competition, such as happening with all businesses in this country where the big boys can afford the higher taxes and the small ones can't and go out of business, leaving no competition and prices hardly going down. But anything that favors unions seems the only concern for democrats.

[W*GS]

epicFail, the only use you have for Jesus is as a cheap one liner in your racist/misogynist/hateist propaganda.

You aren't kidding anyone.

[peacepipe]

and is staffed by what????? yes union members so of course they get something different cause the unions dont profit from it.

??? we use the same insurance company as other non union companies. Cigna isn't a union only company.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

By "free", you mean, "the taxpayers are forced to pay for overpriced, for-profit, health insurance, wether(sic) they need it or not".

good one. that is just about the worst solution I can think of.

::)

Yeah, because everyone knows right-wingers and republicans abhor private, for-profit anything.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

You should be ashamed of yourself.

The only use you have for Jesus is as a cheap one liner in your socialist propaganda.

You aren't kidding anyone.

For people like you, Jesus is just the spokesperson for a brand with which you associate yourself.

Nothing about your input on this forum would suggest you either understand or follow Christ's teachings.

You're definitely not fooling anyone on that account.

[epicSocialism4tw]

For people like you, Jesus is just the spokesperson for a brand with which you associate yourself.

Nothing about your input on this forum would suggest you either understand or follow Christ's teachings.

You're definitely not fooling anyone on that account.

Yeah, coming from the guy who runs around here drive by propaganda'ing everyone in the forum with out-and-out propaganda...thats rich.

Quit dragging the name of Jesus into your ridiculous little political propaganda fights.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Quit dragging the name of Jesus into your ridiculous little political propaganda fights.

Maybe you should quit using His "brand" to justify doing the opposite of what He actually preached.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/390273_360189524006565_108038612554992_1431433_151 781581_n.jpg

[pricejj]

::)

Yeah, because everyone knows right-wingers and republicans abhor private, for-profit anything.

I mispelled "whether"...my bad...I thought it looked very wrong.

Democrats force everyone to buy ridiculously expensive insurance (due to the inflationary effects of government spending)...and outlaw inexpensive HSA's...

GENIUS.


Hilarious!

[Paladin]

The Health Insurance Affordability Act was a Repugnican idea. It has saved Seniors money, and allows students to stay on their parent's insurance. It also bans denial of Insurance due to previous health issues, and the companies can provide insurnace for theeior employees at lesser costs through the Insurance Exchanges. And you will not be kicked off the covereage because of claims against the Insurance.

Guess what? The insuranves are still private companies, not Government programs. You can buy insurennce where ever you want. Repugnicans just don't understand their own programs, like the Part D Medication program (that program was developed by Bush to help big Parma counter the Seniors imoprtaing of drugs from Canada; he never funded it).

[Bob]

Pfft. You're just pissed because the Repubs fumbled the ball and the Dems picked it up.

Obamacare is just Romneycare taken to a national level. The repubs had a HC system that worked, but instead of promoting it they fumbled it away. Tough luck. You have nobody to blame but the RNC.

Thats why I dont care for Romney. The only slightly redeeming part of that however, is the state of Mass implimenting it v. the federal government -- regardless it is another example of statism. It is Romney's big weakness, not his strength...and will be used by Obama effectively in the debates.

[Bob]

The Health Insurance Affordability Act was a Repugnican idea. It has saved Seniors money, and allows students to stay on their parent's insurance. It also bans denial of Insurance due to previous health issues, and the companies can provide insurnace for theeior employees at lesser costs through the Insurance Exchanges. And you will not be kicked off the covereage because of claims against the Insurance.

Guess what? The insuranves are still private companies, not Government programs. You can buy insurennce where ever you want. Repugnicans just don't understand their own programs, like the Part D Medication program (that program was developed by Bush to help big Parma counter the Seniors imoprtaing of drugs from Canada; he never funded it).

You bring up some valid points -- and is one reason why the tea party has concerned the R establishment, as many Americans dont want this crap regardless of which party is enslaving us with it.

[SleepingTiger]

Yes after reading this thread i noticed LA and the posse avoided this question like a case of the crotch crickets they simply drove around it and pretended like it was never asked that's hypocrisy at its finest.

The unions are the dems 1% ers that barry caters to at our expense the exemption is a slap in the face cause they know we cant do anything about it ( its a disgrace) and they could care less.

I am wondering the same thing. If Obamacare is so good, why the fight for waivers?

[alkemical]

I am wondering the same thing. If Obamacare is so good, why the fight for waivers?

I asked these ?'s on page one:

Is it exemption permanent? Is the exemption available due to these bene's being paid out in the current contracts agreed upon, etc etc.

Knowing those are a good place to start.

[pricejj]

The Health Insurance Affordability Act was a Repugnican idea. It has saved Seniors money, and allows students to stay on their parent's insurance. It also bans denial of Insurance due to previous health issues, and the companies can provide insurnace for theeior employees at lesser costs through the Insurance Exchanges. And you will not be kicked off the covereage because of claims against the Insurance.

Obamacare seeks to make unaffordable health insurance the status quo. Romneycare is a failure, and is bankrupting Massachusetts.

Obamacare is a lame, all-Democrat attempt at forcing skyrocketing health-care costs on all American citizens, in order to force a single payer healthcare system (which doesn't work).

The Democrats are sticking it to the American people in hopes to gain more money, power, and control...what a fun game.

The individual mandate is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

[Rohirrim]

Really, all the Right cares about is screaming slogans and dogma at the top of their lungs. When it actually comes down to real governance, digging down into the issues and working for a solution, they couldn't give a damn. Their solution to everything is the same - Do nothing and let the magic, invisible hand of the market fix it all.

When it comes to health care, capitalist dogma won't work. Why? Because we have made the moral decision, as a society, that emergency care will be available to all, whether they can pay or not. That's socialism. So, one of the main legs propping up our whole health care system is a socialist solution: We all chip in to make emergency rooms available to all. We also decided that the elderly, who were no longer employed and could no longer pay for their own health insurance, would also have some form of coverage. That's a big cost driver because the elderly require more care than the average, young working person, and more socialism. These are moral decisions we made as a society. And the right decisions, if you ask me (and LABF is entirely right - they are in keeping with traditional, Christian mores). Then, we try to pretend that we can wedge some ideologically pristine free market solution into the remaining structure that will magically fix everything else. Ain't gonna happen.

You're trying to build a giraffe with a lion's body and an elephant's feet. Pick your model. If you believe, as I do, that in a modern, civilized society where we are able to provide health care for all, we should do so, as a right of the people. Single payer, universal coverage. Sure, the insurance tycoons would be out of business and unable to build themselves any more mansions, but we would then be living in a society where no American loses their life savings and/or their homes due to medical costs. No families would be destroyed because of sudden medical disasters. We would be a better society for it, and our country would be that much better of a place to live.

Or, we could go full capitalist. Close the ERs to those who can't pay. Let families take care of their own elderly, if they can. If not, too bad. If you get crippled and can't work. Bummer. Better get out the bowl and find a good street corner. That's another kind of society. I'd rather not live there, but some consider that a vision of utopia.

[SleepingTiger]

Really, all the Right cares about is screaming slogans and dogma at the top of their lungs. When it actually comes down to real governance, digging down into the issues and working for a solution, they couldn't give a damn. Their solution to everything is the same - Do nothing and let the magic, invisible hand of the market fix it all.

When it comes to health care, capitalist dogma won't work. Why? Because we have made the moral decision, as a society, that emergency care will be available to all, whether they can pay or not. That's socialism. So, one of the main legs propping up our whole health care system is a socialist solution: We all chip in to make emergency rooms available to all. We also decided that the elderly, who were no longer employed and could no longer pay for their own health insurance, would also have some form of coverage. That's a big cost driver because the elderly require more care than the average, young working person, and more socialism. These are moral decisions we made as a society. And the right decisions, if you ask me (and LABF is entirely right - they are in keeping with traditional, Christian mores). Then, we try to pretend that we can wedge some ideologically pristine free market solution into the remaining structure that will magically fix everything else. Ain't gonna happen.

You're trying to build a giraffe with a lion's body and an elephant's feet. Pick your model. If you believe, as I do, that in a modern, civilized society where we are able to provide health care for all, we should do so, as a right of the people. Single payer, universal coverage. Sure, the insurance tycoons would be out of business and unable to build themselves any more mansions, but we would then be living in a society where no American loses their life savings and/or their homes due to medical costs. No families would be destroyed because of sudden medical disasters. We would be a better society for it, and our country would be that much better of a place to live.

Or, we could go full capitalist. Close the ERs to those who can't pay. Let families take care of their own elderly, if they can. If not, too bad. If you get crippled and can't work. Bummer. Better get out the bowl and find a good street corner. That's another kind of society. I'd rather not live there, but some consider that a vision of utopia.

Very well thought out. Your right, there is no simple solution for health care. I understand there are many situations where the elderly or cripple need some type of health care. That is fine with me. What I have a problem is that I worked hard for what I got including health care benefits. What is my benefit if some joe schmo who works 20hrs a week at Mcdonalds, collects food-stamps, living on government housing and gets the same health care i get? The same joe schmo needs to see a doctor every week because all he does is smoke, drink, and play world of warcraft every day. On top of that, I can't go see the doctor for weeks because there are hundreds of joe schmo out there taking advantage of the system that couldn't careless for people who worked hard. I know not everybody falls into this situation, but I live in a socialistic government with free health care... its not that great.

[Rohirrim]

Very well thought out. Your right, there is no simple solution for health care. I understand there are many situations where the elderly or cripple need some type of health care. That is fine with me. What I have a problem is that I worked hard for what I got including health care benefits. What is my benefit if some joe schmo who works 20hrs a week at Mcdonalds, collects food-stamps, living on government housing and gets the same health care i get? The same joe schmo needs to see a doctor every week because all he does is smoke, drink, and play world of warcraft every day. On top of that, I can't go see the doctor for weeks because there are hundreds of joe schmo out there taking advantage of the system that couldn't careless for people who worked hard. I know not everybody falls into this situation, but I live in a socialistic government with free health care... its not that great.

A country can't make these kinds of systemic decisions based on the fear of how a minority might abuse the system. Medicare and Medicaid are being abused now by hundreds of doctors and clinics who perpetrate fraud against the system. So, should we dump the systems or catch and prosecute the frauds? Some of the greatest waste takes place in corporations abusing our military procurement systems. Should we nationalize military weapons manufacture, or go after the frauds?

Keep in mind that if America adopted a single payer, universal coverage system, the people who are paying for insurance now would be paying a whole lot less. That money goes back in their pockets. In other words, the working people who now pay for health insurance would see the biggest benefit. So would companies paying for health care. There would no longer be a massive insurance industry (standing between you and your provider) to pay for. Right now, we are on the brink of our healthcare system bankrupting us. Insurance just went up another 20%. Obviously, it has failed miserably. Will a single payer system be utopia? Nope. Will it be better than what we have now? I can't imagine it wouldn't be.

[alkemical]

I asked these ?'s on page one:

Is it exemption permanent? Is the exemption available due to these bene's being paid out in the current contracts agreed upon, etc etc.

Knowing those are a good place to start.

Hey Alkemical! Did you know the exemptions are NOT permanent, are are granted to cover the time for labor contracts that have these bene's included - to be exempt until a new contract is written/approved.

SO, it's not a "if you're in a union, you don't have to pay this" - it's more like "yours is already covered, so until your current "plan" runs out - you're exempt".

I hope this helps!

~Alkemical

[SleepingTiger]

A country can't make these kinds of systemic decisions based on the fear of how a minority might abuse the system. Medicare and Medicaid are being abused now by hundreds of doctors and clinics who perpetrate fraud against the system. So, should we dump the systems or catch and prosecute the frauds? Some of the greatest waste takes place in corporations abusing our military procurement systems. Should we nationalize military weapons manufacture, or go after the frauds?

Keep in mind that if America adopted a single payer, universal coverage system, the people who are paying for insurance now would be paying a whole lot less. That money goes back in their pockets. In other words, the working people who now pay for health insurance would see the biggest benefit. So would companies paying for health care. There would no longer be a massive insurance industry (standing between you and your provider) to pay for. Right now, we are on the brink of our healthcare system bankrupting us. Insurance just went up another 20%. Obviously, it has failed miserably. Will a single payer system be utopia? Nope. Will it be better than what we have now? I can't imagine it wouldn't be.

You might have a good point... but I can't see the reasoning. I came to this great country with nothing other than the clothing on my back and no understanding of english and the American culture. My family adapted, worked their tail bone off using the welfare and education system for what it was intended for. After nearly 30yrs my family has paid back 100 times the amount that we took out. So I can't understand why anyone else who was born here, knows the system, understands the culture yet can't get a decent job and afford health insurance.

I have friend in Australia which is currently under a national health care plan. She tells me that to get any type of decent medical attention, you have to pay for a doctor out of your own pocket. Her son has leukemia and complains the medical attention is horrible. She is a single working mother that had to put out her life savings and pay for decent medical attention. Well, when she ran out of money... she had to go back to the free health care and her son suffered because of that. Again, she worked hard to save up her money, yet had to spend it to save her son. This was back in 2008, so things might of changed or it could of gotten worse. Can you tell me that we wont have these problems with Obamacare?

[The Lone Bolt]

Obamacare seeks to make unaffordable health insurance the status quo. Romneycare is a failure, and is bankrupting Massachusetts.

Supporting evidence for this statement?

Obamacare is a lame, all-Democrat attempt at forcing skyrocketing health-care costs on all American citizens, in order to force a single payer healthcare system (which doesn't work).

In what way is Obamacare "single payer?" Under the PPACA individual health insurance companies are the "payers" as all health insurance is private. Under a single payer system the government pays all costs (and is hence the "single payer")

The individual mandate is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Isn't that up to the SCOTUS to determine and not you right-wingers?

[The Lone Bolt]

You might have a good point... but I can't see the reasoning. I came to this great country with nothing other than the clothing on my back and no understanding of english and the American culture. My family adapted, worked their tail bone off using the welfare and education system for what it was intended for. After nearly 30yrs my family has paid back 100 times the amount that we took out. So I can't understand why anyone else who was born here, knows the system, understands the culture yet can't get a decent job and afford health insurance.

I have friend in Australia which is currently under a national health care plan. She tells me that to get any type of decent medical attention, you have to pay for a doctor out of your own pocket. Her son has leukemia and complains the medical attention is horrible. She is a single working mother that had to put out her life savings and pay for decent medical attention. Well, when she ran out of money... she had to go back to the free health care and her son suffered because of that. Again, she worked hard to save up her money, yet had to spend it to save her son. This was back in 2008, so things might of changed or it could of gotten worse. Can you tell me that we wont have these problems with Obamacare?

Nobody can guarantee that with any system, but it's a completely different one than Australia's. Under the PPACA ("Obamacare") individual insurance companies pay out no differently than they do today. The major difference is that everyone must purchase health insurance through an exchange, which will promote competition and keep prices under control. Plus all companies will be required to offer a standard minimum coverage and be prevented from certain practices that screw over consumers.

PPACA includes numerous provisions to take effect over several years beginning in 2010. Policies issued before the law was promulgated are grandfathered from most federal regulations.

Guaranteed issue and partial community rating will require insurers to offer the same premium to all applicants of the same age and geographical location without regard to most pre-existing conditions (excluding tobacco use).[16]

A shared responsibility requirement, commonly called an individual mandate,[17] requires that all persons not covered by an employer sponsored health plan, Medicaid, Medicare, or other public insurance programs purchase an approved private insurance policy or pay a penalty, unless the applicable individual is a member of a recognized religious sect, exempted by the Internal Revenue Service, or waived in cases of financial hardship.[18]

Medicaid eligibility is expanded to include all individuals and families with incomes up to 133% of the poverty level along with a simplified CHIP enrollment process.[19][20]

Health insurance exchanges will commence operation in each state, offering a marketplace where individuals and small businesses can compare policies and premiums, and buy insurance (with a government subsidy if eligible).[21]

Low income persons and families above the Medicaid level and up to 400% of the federal poverty level will receive federal subsidies[22] on a sliding scale if they choose to purchase insurance via an exchange (persons at 150% of the poverty level would be subsidized such that their premium cost would be of 2% of income or $50 a month for a family of 4).[23]

Minimum standards for health insurance policies are to be established and annual and lifetime coverage caps will be banned.[24]

Firms employing 50 or more people but not offering health insurance will also pay a shared responsibility requirement if the government has had to subsidize an employee's health care.[25]

Very small businesses will be able to get subsidies if they purchase insurance through an exchange.[26]

Insurance companies are required to spend a certain percent of premium dollars on medical care improvement; if an insurer fails to meet this requirement, a rebate must be issued to the policy holder.[27]

Co-payments, co-insurance, and deductibles are to be eliminated for select health care insurance benefits considered to be part of an "essential benefits package"[28] for Level A or Level B preventive care.[29]

Changes are enacted that allow a restructuring of Medicare reimbursement from "fee-for-service" to "bundled payments."[30][31]

Additional support is provided for medical research and the National Institutes of Health.[32]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act

[The Lone Bolt]

‘RomneyCare’ — a revolution that basically worked
The former governor’s health plan is a policy piñata among his rivals. But a detailed Globe review finds the overhaul has achieved its main goals without devastating state finances. The remaining worry is future costs.

--------------

A detailed Globe examination of voluminous health care and financial data, and interviews with key figures in every sector of the health care system, makes it clear that while there have been some stumbles — and some elements of the effort merit a grade of “incomplete’’ — the overhaul has, after five years, worked as well as or better than expected:

■ The percentage of residents without insurance coverage is down dramatically, to less than 2 percent; for children, the figure is a tiny fraction of 1 percent, a state survey shows. These are by far the lowest rates in the nation.

■ Many more businesses are offering insurance to employees than were before the law. The fear going in was that the opposite would happen.

■ The cost of the changes, while large, has proved manageable thus far, though there are some serious warning signs on the horizon, especially as federal stimulus funds, which have helped defray the cost, run out.

■ The plan remains exceptionally popular among state residents — indeed its popularity has only grown with time. There are some unhappy sectors — notably small business owners, who had hoped to see moderating premiums and chafe, in some cases, at the heavy-handed enforcement of the rules by the state. And support for the requirement that individuals obtain insurance is down to a slender majority, a recent poll shows. But there is no significant constituency here for repeal.

■ And while health care costs continue to grow at alarming rates, as they have nationally, the consensus of industry leaders and health care economists is that this trend cannot be fairly traced to the makeover but rather to cost pressures baked into the existing health care payment system. Massachusetts does have the highest health care costs in the nation, but it owned this dubious distinction long before “RomneyCare’’ was born.

http://articles.boston.com/2011-06-26/lifestyle/29706413_1_overhaul-mitt-romney-health-care/2

[SleepingTiger]

Nobody can guarantee that with any system, but it's a completely different one than Australia's. Under the PPACA ("Obamacare") individual insurance companies pay out no differently than they do today. The major difference is that everyone must purchase health insurance through an exchange, which will promote competition and keep prices under control. Plus all companies will be required to offer a standard minimum coverage and be prevented from certain practices that screw over consumers.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act

Under the current system if I needed any major medical procedure, I can get it done through my insurance company. If I need to see a specialist, it is within weeks. With Obamacare, can you tell me their wont be a tiered healthcare where the rich get the best service and the rest get overcrowded waiting rooms and 1yr wait time for specialist?

the plan looks great on paper according to you, lets hope delivers as promised or its you and I who have to pay. Not the rich, not Obama because they have their own private doctors and hospitals.

[The Lone Bolt]

Under the current system if I needed any major medical procedure, I can get it done through my insurance company. If I need to see a specialist, it is within weeks. With Obamacare, can you tell me their wont be a tiered healthcare where the rich get the best service and the rest get overcrowded waiting rooms and 1yr wait time for specialist?

the plan looks great on paper according to you, lets hope delivers as promised or its you and I who have to pay. Not the rich, not Obama because they have their own private doctors and hospitals.

Under PPACA you will still get your procedures done through your insurance company. You can keep the same coverage you have now. That will not change.

And we already have a similar working model for PPACA in the state of Massachusetts, which has been in place for years and has not resulted in any "tiered" system with overcrowded waiting rooms and 1yr wait times. The evidence suggests that your fears are unfounded.

[Bronx33]

Sometimes a picture IS worth a thousand words...

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/184678_1876534716524_1335926495_32147920_6947572_n .jpg

This CEO thanks you for being a useful idiot. :wave:


Drove right around the question with a cartoon i see ( you never fail to amuse us LA) just say you got nothing next time Hilarious!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Drove right around the question with a cartoon i see ( you never fail to amuse us LA) just say you got nothing next time Hilarious!

On the contrary, that cartoon drives right to the heart of your "argument" and skewers it!

You're just too far gone on the Fox Kool-Aid to see it. :spit:

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Under PPACA you will still get your procedures done through your insurance company. You can keep the same coverage you have now. That will not change.

And we already have a similar working model for PPACA in the state of Massachusetts, which has been in place for years and has not resulted in any "tiered" system with overcrowded waiting rooms and 1yr wait times. The evidence suggests that your fears are unfounded.

That's the last thing in the world he wants to hear.

Fear mongering is one of the few arrows left in the right-wing quiver these days.

[Bob]

Obamacare seeks to make unaffordable health insurance the status quo. Romneycare is a failure, and is bankrupting Massachusetts.

Obamacare is a lame, all-Democrat attempt at forcing skyrocketing health-care costs on all American citizens, in order to force a single payer healthcare system (which doesn't work).

The Democrats are sticking it to the American people in hopes to gain more money, power, and control...what a fun game.

The individual mandate is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

I just hope the supreme Court agrees with that assertion...

[Bob]

On the contrary, that cartoon drives right to the heart of your "argument" and skewers it!

You're just too far gone on the Fox Kool-Aid to see it. :spit:

Can you provide an example when you have posted something in your own words that is longer than 250 words? At least others on the left (at times) include something more than the shallow, lame Alinsky tactic to mock the enemy.