Total Posts:54|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Conservatives Vendicated

DoubtingDave
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 9:59:17 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I feel that over the past few days, conservatives have been vindicated in their efforts to delay and defund ObamaCare.

On November 2014, I predict a huge Republican landslide. It will be 1994 all over again. The failed roll out of ObamaCare and the millions of people that'll lose their coverage will rise up against him. "IF YOU LIKE YOUR HEALTH PLAN, YOU CAN KEEP IT." Sadly, that's turning out to be the biggest lie of the Obama admin.

http://www.washingtonpost.com...

From the O'Reilly Factor:

Things are getting very bad for the Obama administration. It's not a partisan statement. That is reality. The President's signature issue, affordable healthcare, not so affordable; and even if you want to sign up, the computer chaos makes it very hard to do so.

But the main problem, the main problem is President Obama himself. For years he has been saying to Americans they are not going to have to undergo pain when the health insurance changes.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: First, if you're one of the more than 250 million Americans who already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance. This law will only make it more secure and more affordable.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'REILLY: Well, for many Americans that's simply not true. The initial data is clear, health insurance premiums are going up for many working Americans and health insurance companies are literally tossing people off the rolls. There is no question that's happening.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HENRY: From that podium will you admit that what the President said if you have a plan you will get to keep it that that was not true?

CARNEY: Let's just be clear. What the President said and what everybody said all along is that there are going to be changes brought about by the Affordable Care Act that create minimum standards of coverage.

So it's true that there are existing healthcare plans on the individual market that don't meet those minimum standards and therefore, do not qualify for the Affordable Care Act.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'REILLY: So even the President's spokesman, Mr. Carney, now admits Mr. Obama was not quite accurate in his previous statements. The question then becomes did the President knowingly mislead the nation?

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

CLARENCE PAGE: Obama knew, even at the time he said it there was no guarantee everybody was going to keep their insurance because people couldn't keep their insurance under the old system.

HUGH HEWITT: So he knew he was lying when he lied?

PAGE: I'm sorry?

HEWITT: He knew he was lying?

PAGE: Probably, probably. But that's one of those political lies, you know.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

O'REILLY: Talking Points is not convinced Clarence Page, a liberal is correct. Here is what I think happened. Mr. Obama brought little critical thinking to the table on Obamacare and pretty much talked himself into a scenario that he wanted. That is that government can control the American health industry with little consumer downside.

Now, I'm not making excuses for the President. His vision clearly has harmed many of us. And he will pay a steep political price for that. But at this point I am not willing to say that he intentionally lied. The evidence says he simply did not want to know the truth nor did he seek it. There's a little bit of difference there, it's subtle. And now even the liberal press is reporting negatively on Obamacare.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BRIAN WILLIAMS, NBC NEWS: For many middle class Americans who buy their own health insurance, there could be another frustration and that is sticker shock. After some learn they must buy new policies that cover more but cost more as well.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That millions will lose or have to change their individual policies is not a surprise to the administration. NBC News senior investigative correspondent Lisa Myers found buried in the 2010 Obamacare regulations language predicting a reasonable range for the percentage of individual policies that would terminate is 40 percent to 67 percent.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'REILLY: Again, the question is did President Obama know about the regulations and the language in the report? I don't believe he did because he didn't read it. He doesn't pay attention to details.

Now before you write any damning letters what I'm saying is far more damaging than you think. If the President of the United States is not paying attention to details, this country is in huge trouble.

As Talking Points said last night and that memo is posted on BillOReilly.com, the President simply answers he doesn't know on far too many occasions. It's your job to know, Mr. President and being ill- informed puts all of us in danger.

One of the weaknesses of liberal philosophy is idealism. Liberals want certain things such as low cost healthcare for everybody. But they don't really calibrate the unintended consequences of what they espoused. For example imposing so-called social justice, a big Obama theme, means somebody is going to have to pay for it. If you go to Cuba you'll see most people are destitute because the government has taken everything away from everybody in order to level the playing field. We will all be poor together.

No government can provide without resources and because the government creates nothing, they have to take the resources away from people who have them. That's what we are seeing with the Obamacare chaos. Working Americans with individual health insurance policies generally pay more for their healthcare in order to subsidize the 30 million uninsured Americans.

President Obama was never, never upfront about that, now millions of Americans are shocked. The bill is due and all hell is breaking lose.

"Talking Points" believes President Obama will not recover from the healthcare debacle and that it will weigh Hillary Clinton down as well as she gets ready for her presidential run. Watch how she distances herself from Mr. Obama because over the next few months the Obamacare situation is going to get worse.

The law never should have been passed. Nobody really understood it, few read it and the Supreme Court upheld the law on faulty reasoning. That is the truth and now all of us are paying the price.

And that is "The Memo."
The Great Wall of Fail

"I have doubts that anti-semitism even exists" -GeoLaureate8

"Evolutionists think that people evolved from rocks" -Scotty

"And whats so bad about a Holy war? By Holy war, I mean a war which would aim to subdue others under Islam." -Ahmed.M

"The free market didn't create the massive wealth in the country, WW2 did." -malcomxy

"Independant federal regulators make our capitalist society possible." -Erik_Erikson
themohawkninja
Posts: 816
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 10:04:12 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
No numbers were asserted, so it's not that very strong of a point. They just say that 'some' Americans were thrown off without asserting a number. That seems very suspicious that they would leave out how many, so it's probably relatively few.

Secondly, affordability != ability to obtain due to website reliability.
"Morals are simply a limit to man's potential."~Myself

Political correctness is like saying you can't have a steak, because a baby can't eat one ~Unknown
DoubtingDave
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 10:04:46 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 10:02:59 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Because ... you know



Fox news is SUCH a reliable source of information right?

Logical fallacies: Poisoning the well and ad hom. Fox News is reliable.
The Great Wall of Fail

"I have doubts that anti-semitism even exists" -GeoLaureate8

"Evolutionists think that people evolved from rocks" -Scotty

"And whats so bad about a Holy war? By Holy war, I mean a war which would aim to subdue others under Islam." -Ahmed.M

"The free market didn't create the massive wealth in the country, WW2 did." -malcomxy

"Independant federal regulators make our capitalist society possible." -Erik_Erikson
DoubtingDave
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 10:05:41 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 10:04:12 AM, themohawkninja wrote:
No numbers were asserted, so it's not that very strong of a point. They just say that 'some' Americans were thrown off without asserting a number. That seems very suspicious that they would leave out how many, so it's probably relatively few.

Secondly, affordability != ability to obtain due to website reliability.

http://hotair.com...
The Great Wall of Fail

"I have doubts that anti-semitism even exists" -GeoLaureate8

"Evolutionists think that people evolved from rocks" -Scotty

"And whats so bad about a Holy war? By Holy war, I mean a war which would aim to subdue others under Islam." -Ahmed.M

"The free market didn't create the massive wealth in the country, WW2 did." -malcomxy

"Independant federal regulators make our capitalist society possible." -Erik_Erikson
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 10:07:51 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 10:04:46 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:02:59 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Because ... you know



Fox news is SUCH a reliable source of information right?

Logical fallacies: Poisoning the well and ad hom. Fox News is reliable.

Uhh no. I never poisoned the well. Poisoning the well is when I piss off the people I'm researching so that no one else can repeat my results.
As for ad hominem, it isn't, it's a statement of fact that Fox news openly supports conservatism. They themselves have admittedly done so.
Try sample bias, fox news viewers are generally older (30+) who lean to the right on the political spectrum.

Also, I like Bill Clinton's take on it:
http://www.occupydemocrats.com...
Thank you for voting!
DoubtingDave
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 10:09:31 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 10:07:51 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:04:46 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:02:59 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Because ... you know



Fox news is SUCH a reliable source of information right?

Logical fallacies: Poisoning the well and ad hom. Fox News is reliable.

Uhh no. I never poisoned the well. Poisoning the well is when I piss off the people I'm researching so that no one else can repeat my results.
As for ad hominem, it isn't, it's a statement of fact that Fox news openly supports conservatism. They themselves have admittedly done so.
Try sample bias, fox news viewers are generally older (30+) who lean to the right on the political spectrum.

Also, I like Bill Clinton's take on it:
http://www.occupydemocrats.com...

Also, here is http://investigations.nbcnews.com...
The Great Wall of Fail

"I have doubts that anti-semitism even exists" -GeoLaureate8

"Evolutionists think that people evolved from rocks" -Scotty

"And whats so bad about a Holy war? By Holy war, I mean a war which would aim to subdue others under Islam." -Ahmed.M

"The free market didn't create the massive wealth in the country, WW2 did." -malcomxy

"Independant federal regulators make our capitalist society possible." -Erik_Erikson
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 10:13:22 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 10:09:31 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:07:51 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:04:46 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:02:59 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Because ... you know



Fox news is SUCH a reliable source of information right?

Logical fallacies: Poisoning the well and ad hom. Fox News is reliable.

Uhh no. I never poisoned the well. Poisoning the well is when I piss off the people I'm researching so that no one else can repeat my results.
As for ad hominem, it isn't, it's a statement of fact that Fox news openly supports conservatism. They themselves have admittedly done so.
Try sample bias, fox news viewers are generally older (30+) who lean to the right on the political spectrum.

Also, I like Bill Clinton's take on it:
http://www.occupydemocrats.com...


Also, here is http://investigations.nbcnews.com...

Yeah so?

They can keep their healthcare. So long as it meets federal standards.
I don't understand what your point is, we have also known this for several years now.. why do you think part of Obamacare was to force insurance companies to no longer reject those with pre-existing conditions? That in and among it's self not indicative of increasing the standard of healthcare? Because quite frankly, you'd be insane to claim otherwise...
Thank you for voting!
DoubtingDave
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 10:16:36 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 10:13:22 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:09:31 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:07:51 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:04:46 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:02:59 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Because ... you know



Fox news is SUCH a reliable source of information right?

Logical fallacies: Poisoning the well and ad hom. Fox News is reliable.

Uhh no. I never poisoned the well. Poisoning the well is when I piss off the people I'm researching so that no one else can repeat my results.
As for ad hominem, it isn't, it's a statement of fact that Fox news openly supports conservatism. They themselves have admittedly done so.
Try sample bias, fox news viewers are generally older (30+) who lean to the right on the political spectrum.

Also, I like Bill Clinton's take on it:
http://www.occupydemocrats.com...


Also, here is http://investigations.nbcnews.com...

Yeah so?

They can keep their healthcare. So long as it meets federal standards.

But that's not what Obama stated!

""That means that no matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health-care plan, you"ll be able to keep your health-care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what." - Obama

"FACT: Nothing in #Obamacare forces people out of their health plans. No change is required unless insurance companies change existing plans." - Valerie Jarrett

I don't understand what your point is, we have also known this for several years now.. why do you think part of Obamacare was to force insurance companies to no longer reject those with pre-existing conditions? That in and among it's self not indicative of increasing the standard of healthcare? Because quite frankly, you'd be insane to claim otherwise...

Yes we have known for years and Obama lied repeatedly. The federal standards basically say "we the government know more than you do about your health. We the government says what you can and cannot have in your healthcare plan." That is socialism!
The Great Wall of Fail

"I have doubts that anti-semitism even exists" -GeoLaureate8

"Evolutionists think that people evolved from rocks" -Scotty

"And whats so bad about a Holy war? By Holy war, I mean a war which would aim to subdue others under Islam." -Ahmed.M

"The free market didn't create the massive wealth in the country, WW2 did." -malcomxy

"Independant federal regulators make our capitalist society possible." -Erik_Erikson
themohawkninja
Posts: 816
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 10:24:43 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 10:05:41 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:04:12 AM, themohawkninja wrote:
No numbers were asserted, so it's not that very strong of a point. They just say that 'some' Americans were thrown off without asserting a number. That seems very suspicious that they would leave out how many, so it's probably relatively few.

Secondly, affordability != ability to obtain due to website reliability.

http://hotair.com...

Oh, it just to meet some basic standards. Okay then, that's not as bad as I thought, especially since the lower costs still appear to hold true for at least half of those people.
"Morals are simply a limit to man's potential."~Myself

Political correctness is like saying you can't have a steak, because a baby can't eat one ~Unknown
themohawkninja
Posts: 816
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 10:28:14 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Yes we have known for years and Obama lied repeatedly. The federal standards basically say "we the government know more than you do about your health. We the government says what you can and cannot have in your healthcare plan." That is socialism!

No, Socialism is <u>much</u> broader than that. Socialism encompasses much more than just healthcare plans.

Read up on your ideologies before calling our president a socialist.

Lastly, when hasn't a president lied repeatedly on some level? I mean really. FDR lied about his health, Nixon lied about Watergate, Clinton about his affair. Welcome to American presidents. They are human too.
"Morals are simply a limit to man's potential."~Myself

Political correctness is like saying you can't have a steak, because a baby can't eat one ~Unknown
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 10:38:21 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 10:13:22 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:09:31 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:07:51 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:04:46 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:02:59 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Because ... you know



Fox news is SUCH a reliable source of information right?

Logical fallacies: Poisoning the well and ad hom. Fox News is reliable.

Uhh no. I never poisoned the well. Poisoning the well is when I piss off the people I'm researching so that no one else can repeat my results.
As for ad hominem, it isn't, it's a statement of fact that Fox news openly supports conservatism. They themselves have admittedly done so.
Try sample bias, fox news viewers are generally older (30+) who lean to the right on the political spectrum.

Also, I like Bill Clinton's take on it:
http://www.occupydemocrats.com...


Also, here is http://investigations.nbcnews.com...

Yeah so?

They can keep their healthcare. So long as it meets federal standards.

"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan... Period." Nothing about federal standards mentioned. The only requirement the president mentioned is that you like your plan. Don't pretend he meant something he didn't mean.

I don't understand what your point is, we have also known this for several years now.. why do you think part of Obamacare was to force insurance companies to no longer reject those with pre-existing conditions? That in and among it's self not indicative of increasing the standard of healthcare? Because quite frankly, you'd be insane to claim otherwise...
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 10:40:00 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 10:02:59 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Because ... you know



Fox news is SUCH a reliable source of information right?

And NBC, and CNN, and Politico.
The source isn't that important, so long has the facts check out. Attacking the source is simply cowardly.
Did I mention Politico?
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 10:43:55 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 10:16:36 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:13:22 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:09:31 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:07:51 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:04:46 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:02:59 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Because ... you know



Fox news is SUCH a reliable source of information right?

Logical fallacies: Poisoning the well and ad hom. Fox News is reliable.

Uhh no. I never poisoned the well. Poisoning the well is when I piss off the people I'm researching so that no one else can repeat my results.
As for ad hominem, it isn't, it's a statement of fact that Fox news openly supports conservatism. They themselves have admittedly done so.
Try sample bias, fox news viewers are generally older (30+) who lean to the right on the political spectrum.

Also, I like Bill Clinton's take on it:
http://www.occupydemocrats.com...


Also, here is http://investigations.nbcnews.com...

Yeah so?

They can keep their healthcare. So long as it meets federal standards.

But that's not what Obama stated!

Yes it is. If he noted that insurance companies cannot reject someone with preexisting conditions, that's forcing insurance companies to come up to federal standards. That was a federal standard set by him. What the hell else is it then if it isn't the implication of a standard?

""That means that no matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health-care plan, you"ll be able to keep your health-care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what." - Obama

"FACT: Nothing in #Obamacare forces people out of their health plans. No change is required unless insurance companies change existing plans." - Valerie Jarrett

Exactly. You just proved my point.
The insurance companies going down because they're not up to federal standards. Not because Obamacare is taking over all the companies for the hell of it.

I don't understand what your point is, we have also known this for several years now.. why do you think part of Obamacare was to force insurance companies to no longer reject those with pre-existing conditions? That in and among it's self not indicative of increasing the standard of healthcare? Because quite frankly, you'd be insane to claim otherwise...


Yes we have known for years and Obama told the truth. The federal standards basically say "we the government know more than you do about the right to life with which we are expected to preserve. We the government says what you can have in your healthcare plan. And expect private entities to do the same" That is just common sense!

^fixed.

And btw, socialism is when the means of production is controlled by the public. Not the state. Try again.
Besides, it was already socialist; you could always get care, it was just really bloated form of socialism. So .. really ... whaaaaaaaa! *sarcastic tone*

Just because healthcare philosophy doesn't match with free-market philosophy doesn't mean you get to denounce everything until they conform to free-markets.
Thank you for voting!
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 10:46:01 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 10:38:21 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:13:22 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:09:31 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:07:51 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:04:46 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:02:59 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Because ... you know



Fox news is SUCH a reliable source of information right?

Logical fallacies: Poisoning the well and ad hom. Fox News is reliable.

Uhh no. I never poisoned the well. Poisoning the well is when I piss off the people I'm researching so that no one else can repeat my results.
As for ad hominem, it isn't, it's a statement of fact that Fox news openly supports conservatism. They themselves have admittedly done so.
Try sample bias, fox news viewers are generally older (30+) who lean to the right on the political spectrum.

Also, I like Bill Clinton's take on it:
http://www.occupydemocrats.com...


Also, here is http://investigations.nbcnews.com...

Yeah so?

They can keep their healthcare. So long as it meets federal standards.

"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan... Period." Nothing about federal standards mentioned. The only requirement the president mentioned is that you like your plan. Don't pretend he meant something he didn't mean.

Right .. so by your logic upping the standards on insurance companies to not dump someone for having a preexisting condition =/= upping federal standards on insurance companies ...

so then .. what the hell is it oh great Donald Keller????

I don't understand what your point is, we have also known this for several years now.. why do you think part of Obamacare was to force insurance companies to no longer reject those with pre-existing conditions? That in and among it's self not indicative of increasing the standard of healthcare? Because quite frankly, you'd be insane to claim otherwise...
Thank you for voting!
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 10:49:48 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 10:40:00 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:02:59 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Because ... you know



Fox news is SUCH a reliable source of information right?

And NBC, and CNN, and Politico.
The source isn't that important, so long has the facts check out. Attacking the source is simply cowardly.
Did I mention Politico?

It's not cowardly, it's being critical.
Furthermore, yeah, my point was mainly that the commentary was whats more bias than anything. I'm not denying the facts (as per my other posts)
Thank you for voting!
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 10:50:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 10:46:01 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:38:21 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:13:22 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:09:31 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:07:51 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:04:46 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:02:59 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Because ... you know



Fox news is SUCH a reliable source of information right?

Logical fallacies: Poisoning the well and ad hom. Fox News is reliable.

Uhh no. I never poisoned the well. Poisoning the well is when I piss off the people I'm researching so that no one else can repeat my results.
As for ad hominem, it isn't, it's a statement of fact that Fox news openly supports conservatism. They themselves have admittedly done so.
Try sample bias, fox news viewers are generally older (30+) who lean to the right on the political spectrum.

Also, I like Bill Clinton's take on it:
http://www.occupydemocrats.com...


Also, here is http://investigations.nbcnews.com...

Yeah so?

They can keep their healthcare. So long as it meets federal standards.

"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan... Period." Nothing about federal standards mentioned. The only requirement the president mentioned is that you like your plan. Don't pretend he meant something he didn't mean.

Right .. so by your logic upping the standards on insurance companies to not dump someone for having a preexisting condition =/= upping federal standards on insurance companies ...

so then .. what the hell is it oh great Donald Keller????

For starters, your Insurance premium is conditioned to you. If they find out you have a condition they weren't aware of, they can drop the coverage and recondition it. Now what does this have to do with Obama claiming no one had to give up their coverage if they liked it, only for the law to actually require your coverage be dropped regardless of if you liked it?


I don't understand what your point is, we have also known this for several years now.. why do you think part of Obamacare was to force insurance companies to no longer reject those with pre-existing conditions? That in and among it's self not indicative of increasing the standard of healthcare? Because quite frankly, you'd be insane to claim otherwise...
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 11:21:48 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 10:50:10 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:46:01 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:38:21 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:13:22 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:09:31 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:07:51 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:04:46 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:02:59 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Because ... you know



Fox news is SUCH a reliable source of information right?

Logical fallacies: Poisoning the well and ad hom. Fox News is reliable.

Uhh no. I never poisoned the well. Poisoning the well is when I piss off the people I'm researching so that no one else can repeat my results.
As for ad hominem, it isn't, it's a statement of fact that Fox news openly supports conservatism. They themselves have admittedly done so.
Try sample bias, fox news viewers are generally older (30+) who lean to the right on the political spectrum.

Also, I like Bill Clinton's take on it:
http://www.occupydemocrats.com...


Also, here is http://investigations.nbcnews.com...

Yeah so?

They can keep their healthcare. So long as it meets federal standards.

"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan... Period." Nothing about federal standards mentioned. The only requirement the president mentioned is that you like your plan. Don't pretend he meant something he didn't mean.

Right .. so by your logic upping the standards on insurance companies to not dump someone for having a preexisting condition =/= upping federal standards on insurance companies ...

so then .. what the hell is it oh great Donald Keller????

For starters, your Insurance premium is conditioned to you. If they find out you have a condition they weren't aware of, they can drop the coverage and recondition it. Now what does this have to do with Obama claiming no one had to give up their coverage if they liked it, only for the law to actually require your coverage be dropped regardless of if you liked it?

For starters, nice non-sequitor. Your first premise rested on the condition of insurance companies doing whatever they pleased. The second one is the law (Obamacare) so you changed up your condition yet tried to continue the syllogism, and you really said nothing here other than reiterating your previous points that your all upset because some insurance company didn't make it to federal standards. They had a couple of years to do so and failed; if their that inefficient why the hell should they stay in business?

Besides, theirs still private entities issuing health insurance. This isn't some giant government takeover your making it out to be. The law forces companies to come up to a federal standard. Part of that standard AS IMPLIED IN THE ACTS OF THE PRESIDENT AND HIS BILL was that no person with preexisting conditions can be dropped. How is that not forcing companies to come up to a federal standard among it's self, if before insurance companies can just drop you and be done with you? That's what I'm asking. Not if your mad that someone got cancelled and switched because some company couldn't handle it.

As such, the president said what was already known: those companies who do not meet federal conditions will be forced to do so. It does not run around to every insurance company and say "Hello! OBAMACARE HAS KICKED IN! OHHH LAWDY! ALL YOU FVCKERS NOW WORK FOR THE GOVMT! ALL PRIVATE INSURANCE IS OWNED BY GOVMT AND ALL YO SH!T IS CANCELLED!"
In short:

he never lied. It was implied. You can keep yo sh!t so long as it fit. The law never went up to blue shield insurance and kicked them out because they felt like it.


I don't understand what your point is, we have also known this for several years now.. why do you think part of Obamacare was to force insurance companies to no longer reject those with pre-existing conditions? That in and among it's self not indicative of increasing the standard of healthcare? Because quite frankly, you'd be insane to claim otherwise...
Thank you for voting!
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 11:33:01 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 10:50:10 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:46:01 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:38:21 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:13:22 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:09:31 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:07:51 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:04:46 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:02:59 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Because ... you know



Fox news is SUCH a reliable source of information right?

Logical fallacies: Poisoning the well and ad hom. Fox News is reliable.

Uhh no. I never poisoned the well. Poisoning the well is when I piss off the people I'm researching so that no one else can repeat my results.
As for ad hominem, it isn't, it's a statement of fact that Fox news openly supports conservatism. They themselves have admittedly done so.
Try sample bias, fox news viewers are generally older (30+) who lean to the right on the political spectrum.

Also, I like Bill Clinton's take on it:
http://www.occupydemocrats.com...


Also, here is http://investigations.nbcnews.com...

Yeah so?

They can keep their healthcare. So long as it meets federal standards.

"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan... Period." Nothing about federal standards mentioned. The only requirement the president mentioned is that you like your plan. Don't pretend he meant something he didn't mean.

Right .. so by your logic upping the standards on insurance companies to not dump someone for having a preexisting condition =/= upping federal standards on insurance companies ...

so then .. what the hell is it oh great Donald Keller????

For starters, your Insurance premium is conditioned to you. If they find out you have a condition they weren't aware of, they can drop the coverage and recondition it. Now what does this have to do with Obama claiming no one had to give up their coverage if they liked it, only for the law to actually require your coverage be dropped regardless of if you liked it?


I don't understand what your point is, we have also known this for several years now.. why do you think part of Obamacare was to force insurance companies to no longer reject those with pre-existing conditions? That in and among it's self not indicative of increasing the standard of healthcare? Because quite frankly, you'd be insane to claim otherwise...

Besides, even if it were true (it isn't but let's suppose it is) who really cares? If it improves the health of the community -- as per the job of government in the first place -- while maintaining the same standard of health coverage to those who already had it, what does it matter if people who were not insured are suddenly insured?
Thank you for voting!
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 11:35:33 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 11:21:48 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:50:10 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:46:01 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:38:21 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:13:22 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:09:31 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:07:51 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:04:46 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:02:59 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Because ... you know



Fox news is SUCH a reliable source of information right?

Logical fallacies: Poisoning the well and ad hom. Fox News is reliable.

Uhh no. I never poisoned the well. Poisoning the well is when I piss off the people I'm researching so that no one else can repeat my results.
As for ad hominem, it isn't, it's a statement of fact that Fox news openly supports conservatism. They themselves have admittedly done so.
Try sample bias, fox news viewers are generally older (30+) who lean to the right on the political spectrum.

Also, I like Bill Clinton's take on it:
http://www.occupydemocrats.com...


Also, here is http://investigations.nbcnews.com...

Yeah so?

They can keep their healthcare. So long as it meets federal standards.

"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan... Period." Nothing about federal standards mentioned. The only requirement the president mentioned is that you like your plan. Don't pretend he meant something he didn't mean.

Right .. so by your logic upping the standards on insurance companies to not dump someone for having a preexisting condition =/= upping federal standards on insurance companies ...

so then .. what the hell is it oh great Donald Keller????

For starters, your Insurance premium is conditioned to you. If they find out you have a condition they weren't aware of, they can drop the coverage and recondition it. Now what does this have to do with Obama claiming no one had to give up their coverage if they liked it, only for the law to actually require your coverage be dropped regardless of if you liked it?

For starters, nice non-sequitor. Your first premise rested on the condition of insurance companies doing whatever they pleased. The second one is the law (Obamacare) so you changed up your condition yet tried to continue the syllogism, and you really said nothing here other than reiterating your previous points that your all upset because some insurance company didn't make it to federal standards. They had a couple of years to do so and failed; if their that inefficient why the hell should they stay in business?

No I didn't. Show me where I said they could do whatever they wanted. Point out that statement right now.


Besides, theirs still private entities issuing health insurance. This isn't some giant government takeover your making it out to be. The law forces companies to come up to a federal standard. Part of that standard AS IMPLIED IN THE ACTS OF THE PRESIDENT AND HIS BILL was that no person with preexisting conditions can be dropped. How is that not forcing companies to come up to a federal standard among it's self, if before insurance companies can just drop you and be done with you? That's what I'm asking. Not if your mad that someone got cancelled and switched because some company couldn't handle it.

I didn't say it was a Government takeover. It was a bombardment of regulations that Obama knew would force cancellations. It was even written in the White House Regulations for Obamacare.


As such, the president said what was already known: those companies who do not meet federal conditions will be forced to do so. It does not run around to every insurance company and say "Hello! OBAMACARE HAS KICKED IN! OHHH LAWDY! ALL YOU FVCKERS NOW WORK FOR THE GOVMT! ALL PRIVATE INSURANCE IS OWNED BY GOVMT AND ALL YO SH!T IS CANCELLED!"

Please point out me saying it was a government takeover. You are putting words in my month that I never said or implied.

In short:

he never lied. It was implied. You can keep yo sh!t so long as it fit. The law never went up to blue shield insurance and kicked them out because they felt like it.

Wrong! He said you can keep it if you like it. It wasn't implied. And even if it was implied, it was hidden with heavy semantics, which is basically him being able to say "technically I didn't lie." But it wasn't implied at all. "You can keep approved plans if you like them" would have implied some may be lost. He was very specific about how not one plan would be cancelled because of the new Healthcare law.

"And if you like your insurance plan, you will keep it. No one will be able to take that away from you. It hasn"t happened yet. It won"t happen in the future."

"FACT: Nothing in #Obamacare forces people out of their health plans. No change is required unless insurance companies change existing plans."
Hint: the regulations in the law forced people out of their plans

"That means that no matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health-care plan, you"ll be able to keep your health-care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what."

THAT WORD... period. He said it there, YOU WILL KEEP YOUR PLAN, PERIOD. No ifs ands or buts. If you like the plan, DONE. Stop pretending it was ever implied that this was conditional.

Fact-Checker gave all of Obama's claims four Pinocchios. http://www.washingtonpost.com...



I don't understand what your point is, we have also known this for several years now.. why do you think part of Obamacare was to force insurance companies to no longer reject those with pre-existing conditions? That in and among it's self not indicative of increasing the standard of healthcare? Because quite frankly, you'd be insane to claim otherwise...
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 11:38:11 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 11:33:01 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:50:10 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:46:01 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:38:21 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:13:22 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:09:31 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:07:51 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:04:46 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 10/31/2013 10:02:59 AM, TheHitchslap wrote:
Because ... you know



Fox news is SUCH a reliable source of information right?

Logical fallacies: Poisoning the well and ad hom. Fox News is reliable.

Uhh no. I never poisoned the well. Poisoning the well is when I piss off the people I'm researching so that no one else can repeat my results.
As for ad hominem, it isn't, it's a statement of fact that Fox news openly supports conservatism. They themselves have admittedly done so.
Try sample bias, fox news viewers are generally older (30+) who lean to the right on the political spectrum.

Also, I like Bill Clinton's take on it:
http://www.occupydemocrats.com...


Also, here is http://investigations.nbcnews.com...

Yeah so?

They can keep their healthcare. So long as it meets federal standards.

"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan... Period." Nothing about federal standards mentioned. The only requirement the president mentioned is that you like your plan. Don't pretend he meant something he didn't mean.

Right .. so by your logic upping the standards on insurance companies to not dump someone for having a preexisting condition =/= upping federal standards on insurance companies ...

so then .. what the hell is it oh great Donald Keller????

For starters, your Insurance premium is conditioned to you. If they find out you have a condition they weren't aware of, they can drop the coverage and recondition it. Now what does this have to do with Obama claiming no one had to give up their coverage if they liked it, only for the law to actually require your coverage be dropped regardless of if you liked it?


I don't understand what your point is, we have also known this for several years now.. why do you think part of Obamacare was to force insurance companies to no longer reject those with pre-existing conditions? That in and among it's self not indicative of increasing the standard of healthcare? Because quite frankly, you'd be insane to claim otherwise...

Besides, even if it were true (it isn't but let's suppose it is) who really cares? If it improves the health of the community -- as per the job of government in the first place -- while maintaining the same standard of health coverage to those who already had it, what does it matter if people who were not insured are suddenly insured?

Improves? At what cost? The US already had universal health coverage in the form of the Emergency Room system. Besides, you can't make that claim... Nothing has improved yet. Wait a year from now to make that claim.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 1:10:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 11:38:11 AM, donald.keller wrote:

Improves? At what cost? The US already had universal health coverage in the form of the Emergency Room system.

One of the main parts of universal health care is being able to have problems identified and taken care of BEFORE they become an emergency and BEFORE they result in a bill that essentially bankrupts the patient. There exists no medical condition that is easier to treat when it is left unidentified for a long time or when treatment is procrastinated upon. Now, the ACA actually helps with this by having insurance cover preventative care, including many things from doctor visits to cancer screenings. This results in lower overall health care costs, since people can get checked out if they have any worrying symptoms and not worry too much about the cost of having a screening. If you wish to dispute this, bring evidence to the table.

Besides, you can't make that claim... Nothing has improved yet. Wait a year from now to make that claim.

And you can't really make the claim that things will end up worse in the end, either. A good chunk of the bill hasn't even been rolled out yet, and it is quite difficult to say that something most definitely won't work until it has been attempted.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 1:17:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 1:10:10 PM, drhead wrote:
At 10/31/2013 11:38:11 AM, donald.keller wrote:

Improves? At what cost? The US already had universal health coverage in the form of the Emergency Room system.

One of the main parts of universal health care is being able to have problems identified and taken care of BEFORE they become an emergency and BEFORE they result in a bill that essentially bankrupts the patient. There exists no medical condition that is easier to treat when it is left unidentified for a long time or when treatment is procrastinated upon. Now, the ACA actually helps with this by having insurance cover preventative care, including many things from doctor visits to cancer screenings. This results in lower overall health care costs, since people can get checked out if they have any worrying symptoms and not worry too much about the cost of having a screening. If you wish to dispute this, bring evidence to the table.

I think you fail to understand the system we had... It didn't have to be an emergency... You could go there over a tummy ache if you chose to.


Besides, you can't make that claim... Nothing has improved yet. Wait a year from now to make that claim.

And you can't really make the claim that things will end up worse in the end, either. A good chunk of the bill hasn't even been rolled out yet, and it is quite difficult to say that something most definitely won't work until it has been attempted.

I'm didn't say anything related to that. I said Obama lied about no one being drop. Nothing about how things weren't going to work out in the end. Obama said you can keep a policy if you liked (period)... Turned out you couldn't. Therefore Obama lied. That was the conversation. Nothing about whether or not Obamacare would end badly.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 1:26:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I fail to see where in that drawling transcript with the drawl-master himself the absolute 100% iron-clad proof exists that 2014 will be a sweep for Republicans. The fact is that both the GOP and the Dems/Obama have their issues. It's going to depend more on what people forget first.
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 1:38:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 1:26:49 PM, Volkov wrote:
I fail to see where in that drawling transcript with the drawl-master himself the absolute 100% iron-clad proof exists that 2014 will be a sweep for Republicans. The fact is that both the GOP and the Dems/Obama have their issues. It's going to depend more on what people forget first.

On one note, most people polled said they didn't miss the Government during the Shutdown, and if Obamacare continues to bomb, it'll be more long term, lasting into 2014. That's all hypothetical, though.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
inferno
Posts: 10,549
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 1:41:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 9:59:17 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
I feel that over the past few days, conservatives have been vindicated in their efforts to delay and defund ObamaCare.

On November 2014, I predict a huge Republican landslide. It will be 1994 all over again. The failed roll out of ObamaCare and the millions of people that'll lose their coverage will rise up against him. "IF YOU LIKE YOUR HEALTH PLAN, YOU CAN KEEP IT." Sadly, that's turning out to be the biggest lie of the Obama admin.

http://www.washingtonpost.com...

From the O'Reilly Factor:

Things are getting very bad for the Obama administration. It's not a partisan statement. That is reality. The President's signature issue, affordable healthcare, not so affordable; and even if you want to sign up, the computer chaos makes it very hard to do so.

But the main problem, the main problem is President Obama himself. For years he has been saying to Americans they are not going to have to undergo pain when the health insurance changes.


(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: First, if you're one of the more than 250 million Americans who already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance. This law will only make it more secure and more affordable.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'REILLY: Well, for many Americans that's simply not true. The initial data is clear, health insurance premiums are going up for many working Americans and health insurance companies are literally tossing people off the rolls. There is no question that's happening.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HENRY: From that podium will you admit that what the President said if you have a plan you will get to keep it that that was not true?

CARNEY: Let's just be clear. What the President said and what everybody said all along is that there are going to be changes brought about by the Affordable Care Act that create minimum standards of coverage.

So it's true that there are existing healthcare plans on the individual market that don't meet those minimum standards and therefore, do not qualify for the Affordable Care Act.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'REILLY: So even the President's spokesman, Mr. Carney, now admits Mr. Obama was not quite accurate in his previous statements. The question then becomes did the President knowingly mislead the nation?

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

CLARENCE PAGE: Obama knew, even at the time he said it there was no guarantee everybody was going to keep their insurance because people couldn't keep their insurance under the old system.

HUGH HEWITT: So he knew he was lying when he lied?

PAGE: I'm sorry?

HEWITT: He knew he was lying?

PAGE: Probably, probably. But that's one of those political lies, you know.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

O'REILLY: Talking Points is not convinced Clarence Page, a liberal is correct. Here is what I think happened. Mr. Obama brought little critical thinking to the table on Obamacare and pretty much talked himself into a scenario that he wanted. That is that government can control the American health industry with little consumer downside.

Now, I'm not making excuses for the President. His vision clearly has harmed many of us. And he will pay a steep political price for that. But at this point I am not willing to say that he intentionally lied. The evidence says he simply did not want to know the truth nor did he seek it. There's a little bit of difference there, it's subtle. And now even the liberal press is reporting negatively on Obamacare.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BRIAN WILLIAMS, NBC NEWS: For many middle class Americans who buy their own health insurance, there could be another frustration and that is sticker shock. After some learn they must buy new policies that cover more but cost more as well.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That millions will lose or have to change their individual policies is not a surprise to the administration. NBC News senior investigative correspondent Lisa Myers found buried in the 2010 Obamacare regulations language predicting a reasonable range for the percentage of individual policies that would terminate is 40 percent to 67 percent.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'REILLY: Again, the question is did President Obama know about the regulations and the language in the report? I don't believe he did because he didn't read it. He doesn't pay attention to details.

Now before you write any damning letters what I'm saying is far more damaging than you think. If the President of the United States is not paying attention to details, this country is in huge trouble.

As Talking Points said last night and that memo is posted on BillOReilly.com, the President simply answers he doesn't know on far too many occasions. It's your job to know, Mr. President and being ill- informed puts all of us in danger.

One of the weaknesses of liberal philosophy is idealism. Liberals want certain things such as low cost healthcare for everybody. But they don't really calibrate the unintended consequences of what they espoused. For example imposing so-called social justice, a big Obama theme, means somebody is going to have to pay for it. If you go to Cuba you'll see most people are destitute because the government has taken everything away from everybody in order to level the playing field. We will all be poor together.

No government can provide without resources and because the government creates nothing, they have to take the resources away from people who have them. That's what we are seeing with the Obamacare chaos. Working Americans with individual health insurance policies generally pay more for their healthcare in order to subsidize the 30 million uninsured Americans.

President Obama was never, never upfront about that, now millions of Americans are shocked. The bill is due and all hell is breaking lose.

"Talking Points" believes President Obama will not recover from the healthcare debacle and that it will weigh Hillary Clinton down as well as she gets ready for her presidential run. Watch how she distances herself from Mr. Obama because over the next few months the Obamacare situation is going to get worse.

The law never should have been passed. Nobody really understood it, few read it and the Supreme Court upheld the law on faulty reasoning. That is the truth and now all of us are paying the price.

And that is "The Memo."

Perhaps. But it has done more harm than good. And the Liberal establishment is still more accepted and appreciated which gives them political advantage heading into the 2014 and 2016 Elections.
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 2:19:14 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 1:17:32 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/31/2013 1:10:10 PM, drhead wrote:
At 10/31/2013 11:38:11 AM, donald.keller wrote:

Improves? At what cost? The US already had universal health coverage in the form of the Emergency Room system.

One of the main parts of universal health care is being able to have problems identified and taken care of BEFORE they become an emergency and BEFORE they result in a bill that essentially bankrupts the patient. There exists no medical condition that is easier to treat when it is left unidentified for a long time or when treatment is procrastinated upon. Now, the ACA actually helps with this by having insurance cover preventative care, including many things from doctor visits to cancer screenings. This results in lower overall health care costs, since people can get checked out if they have any worrying symptoms and not worry too much about the cost of having a screening. If you wish to dispute this, bring evidence to the table.

I think you fail to understand the system we had... It didn't have to be an emergency... You could go there over a tummy ache if you chose to.

...which could be a symptom of anything from food poisoning to appendicitis to any of a vocabulary of life-threatening conditions. All emergency rooms have a priority system - if you're dying and need immediate intervention, you get immediate attention - this is ESI level 1. If you shouldn't wait (e.g. active chest pain, hospital worker accidentally stuck self with a needle, severe pain of any kind), then you get moved to the front of the line, and may or may not have to actually wait - this is ESI level 2. Other patients are presumed stable and further prioritization is done by resource needs - people who show symptoms which typically require more resources are put in ESI level 3, and their vital signs are checked in consideration of moving them to level 2. Simpler conditions like urinary tract infections typically require few resources and are put in level 4, since not many people die from that. Your hypothetical example of a person who went to the emergency room for a tummy ache would appropriately be put in the back of the queue at level 5 unless they were experiencing a truly excruciating tummy ache. This should give you a good idea of how things are done in emergency rooms:

http://www.ahrq.gov...

Besides, you can't make that claim... Nothing has improved yet. Wait a year from now to make that claim.

And you can't really make the claim that things will end up worse in the end, either. A good chunk of the bill hasn't even been rolled out yet, and it is quite difficult to say that something most definitely won't work until it has been attempted.

I'm didn't say anything related to that. I said Obama lied about no one being drop. Nothing about how things weren't going to work out in the end. Obama said you can keep a policy if you liked (period)... Turned out you couldn't. Therefore Obama lied. That was the conversation. Nothing about whether or not Obamacare would end badly.

I'm not really interested in arguing about that claim, though I will say that I interpreted that statement as saying that the majority of people with coverage would not have to go out of their way to get themselves up to code, since most of the burden is on the insurer.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2013 2:31:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 2:19:14 PM, drhead wrote:
At 10/31/2013 1:17:32 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 10/31/2013 1:10:10 PM, drhead wrote:
At 10/31/2013 11:38:11 AM, donald.keller wrote:

Improves? At what cost? The US already had universal health coverage in the form of the Emergency Room system.

One of the main parts of universal health care is being able to have problems identified and taken care of BEFORE they become an emergency and BEFORE they result in a bill that essentially bankrupts the patient. There exists no medical condition that is easier to treat when it is left unidentified for a long time or when treatment is procrastinated upon. Now, the ACA actually helps with this by having insurance cover preventative care, including many things from doctor visits to cancer screenings. This results in lower overall health care costs, since people can get checked out if they have any worrying symptoms and not worry too much about the cost of having a screening. If you wish to dispute this, bring evidence to the table.

I think you fail to understand the system we had... It didn't have to be an emergency... You could go there over a tummy ache if you chose to.

...which could be a symptom of anything from food poisoning to appendicitis to any of a vocabulary of life-threatening conditions. All emergency rooms have a priority system - if you're dying and need immediate intervention, you get immediate attention - this is ESI level 1. If you shouldn't wait (e.g. active chest pain, hospital worker accidentally stuck self with a needle, severe pain of any kind), then you get moved to the front of the line, and may or may not have to actually wait - this is ESI level 2. Other patients are presumed stable and further prioritization is done by resource needs - people who show symptoms which typically require more resources are put in ESI level 3, and their vital signs are checked in consideration of moving them to level 2. Simpler conditions like urinary tract infections typically require few resources and are put in level 4, since not many people die from that. Your hypothetical example of a person who went to the emergency room for a tummy ache would appropriately be put in the back of the queue at level 5 unless they were experiencing a truly excruciating tummy ache. This should give you a good idea of how things are done in emergency rooms:

http://www.ahrq.gov...

Besides, you can't make that claim... Nothing has improved yet. Wait a year from now to make that claim.

And you can't really make the claim that things will end up worse in the end, either. A good chunk of the bill hasn't even been rolled out yet, and it is quite difficult to say that something most definitely won't work until it has been attempted.

I'm didn't say anything related to that. I said Obama lied about no one being drop. Nothing about how things weren't going to work out in the end. Obama said you can keep a policy if you liked (period)... Turned out you couldn't. Therefore Obama lied. That was the conversation. Nothing about whether or not Obamacare would end badly.

I'm not really interested in arguing about that claim, though I will say that I interpreted that statement as saying that the majority of people with coverage would not have to go out of their way to get themselves up to code, since most of the burden is on the insurer.

If you weren't going to argue about that claim, than why did you reply to an argument about that claim. And no. Obama was pretty straightforward.
"...If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health-care plan, you"ll be able to keep your health-care plan, period. No one will take it away." Like I said... Pretty straightforward, and no room for interpretation.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
Graincruncher
Posts: 2,799
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2013 9:05:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/31/2013 10:04:46 AM, DoubtingDave wrote:
Fox News is reliable.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Oh, wait; you're serious. How sad.