I pretty much agree that insurance is the problem, not the solution for healthcare spending. Insurance is not a good fit in paying for day-to-day expenses, all it does is add a layer of middle men.
The republicans didn't "insert" the individual mandate. They had no say in the construction of the healthcare bill, as demonstrated by the vote counts here. www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3590/votes?page=1
I think you *might* mean that the republicans offered a few bills in the late 80s/ early 90s that included an individual mandate, but they couldn't get democrat votes for those plans (ironically).
As for Obama opposing the individual mandate, I think that was a political maneuver to woo moderates away from hillary. I can't prove that, but the speed and ease of his conversion, and the aggressiveness with which he has since supported it makes me think that his original opposition was not sincere.
I didn't enjoy being told to "sit at the back of the bus".
I didn't think it was funny to be told "I don't want the folks who created the mess to do a lot of talking".
I didn't like this "they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
I don't find the "alligator moat" comment presidential.
I don't like the president referring to half the country as "the enemy"
I am offended at this comment "If the Republicans had been around in Christopher Columbus' time, they would have been founding members of the Flat Earth Society."
I can't see how this was intended for anything other than to cause offense, "You got their plan, which is, Let’s have dirtier air, dirtier water, [and] less people with health insurance.”
Thing is, he says vituperative things nearly every time he speaks. I know that you're not offended, you are one of his supporters, but I would like to imagine that the president is president of *america*, not the president of just one party. I can't remember a single time that Bush said *anything* so divisive as the things that Obama says *daily*. I would like you to imagine these things coming out of the mouth of W, and tell me that you wouldn't be irked.
As for my "cognitive dissonance", I would like to point out that virtually nothing Obama has instituted has done the thing it was purported to be for. The healthcare law was *supposed* to reduce costs, but it has increased the growth rate dramatically. His energy policy was supposed to wean us off foreign oil, but our oil importation is up since he took office. His economic policies were supposed to bring us out of recession, and despite 2 years with a filibuster proof majority, 3 years on, we're still in the doldrums. He was supposed to "reduce the deficit by half", and yet it is steadily increasing. Etcetera.
And it isn't as though it's hard to predict, because the problems with his policy are obvious on their face, tightening the regulations *will* cause jobs to go overseas. Laws preventing the movement of capital *will* result in the capital staying where it is. Large spending programs *will* increase the deficit. A moratorium on oil drilling *will* drive prices up. All this is *really* basic stuff. That's why I said "cognitive dissonance, because while I am not as enamoured of his brilliance as you, I don't think that he's *stupid*, so I can't believe that he so consistently does the exact thing that will make the problem worse by *accident*.
Nor am I comfortable with him "working under the radar", because the constitution was set up the way it is for a *reason*, specifically so that the president *can't* do that. How would you like it if W were working *his* agenda this far below political scrutiny?
no subject
The republicans didn't "insert" the individual mandate. They had no say in the construction of the healthcare bill, as demonstrated by the vote counts here.
www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3590/votes?page=1
I think you *might* mean that the republicans offered a few bills in the late 80s/ early 90s that included an individual mandate, but they couldn't get democrat votes for those plans (ironically).
As for Obama opposing the individual mandate, I think that was a political maneuver to woo moderates away from hillary. I can't prove that, but the speed and ease of his conversion, and the aggressiveness with which he has since supported it makes me think that his original opposition was not sincere.
I didn't enjoy being told to "sit at the back of the bus".
I didn't think it was funny to be told "I don't want the folks who created the mess to do a lot of talking".
I didn't like this "they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
I don't find the "alligator moat" comment presidential.
I don't like the president referring to half the country as "the enemy"
I am offended at this comment "If the Republicans had been around in Christopher Columbus' time, they would have been founding members of the Flat Earth Society."
I can't see how this was intended for anything other than to cause offense, "You got their plan, which is, Let’s have dirtier air, dirtier water, [and] less people with health insurance.”
Thing is, he says vituperative things nearly every time he speaks. I know that you're not offended, you are one of his supporters, but I would like to imagine that the president is president of *america*, not the president of just one party. I can't remember a single time that Bush said *anything* so divisive as the things that Obama says *daily*. I would like you to imagine these things coming out of the mouth of W, and tell me that you wouldn't be irked.
As for my "cognitive dissonance", I would like to point out that virtually nothing Obama has instituted has done the thing it was purported to be for. The healthcare law was *supposed* to reduce costs, but it has increased the growth rate dramatically. His energy policy was supposed to wean us off foreign oil, but our oil importation is up since he took office. His economic policies were supposed to bring us out of recession, and despite 2 years with a filibuster proof majority, 3 years on, we're still in the doldrums. He was supposed to "reduce the deficit by half", and yet it is steadily increasing. Etcetera.
And it isn't as though it's hard to predict, because the problems with his policy are obvious on their face, tightening the regulations *will* cause jobs to go overseas. Laws preventing the movement of capital *will* result in the capital staying where it is. Large spending programs *will* increase the deficit. A moratorium on oil drilling *will* drive prices up. All this is *really* basic stuff. That's why I said "cognitive dissonance, because while I am not as enamoured of his brilliance as you, I don't think that he's *stupid*, so I can't believe that he so consistently does the exact thing that will make the problem worse by *accident*.
Nor am I comfortable with him "working under the radar", because the constitution was set up the way it is for a *reason*, specifically so that the president *can't* do that. How would you like it if W were working *his* agenda this far below political scrutiny?