Obamacare May Not Be the Big Fight of 2014

[ClydeR]

Republican candidates have begun to retreat in recent weeks from their all-out assault on the Affordable Care Act in favor of a more piecemeal approach, suggesting they would preserve some aspects of the law while jettisoning others.

More... (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gop-candidates-show-signs-of-retreat-on-full-obamacare-repeal-as-midterms-approach/2014/05/30/3c175b30-e5ab-11e3-8f90-73e071f3d637_story.html)

Mitch McConnel has been leading the retreat, saying that his plan to repeal Ob amacare "root and brach" would have an exception for Kentucky's popular federally funded insurance exchange, which was created by the Obamacare act. Not that the Republican primaries are ending, many GOP candidates say they would keep the Medicaid expansion and the exemption for pre-existing conditions.

[cwolff]

Mitch McConnel has been leading the retreat, saying that his plan to repeal Ob amacare "root and brach" would have an exception for Kentucky's popular federally funded insurance exchange, which was created by the Obamacare act. Not that the Republican primaries are ending, many GOP candidates say they would keep the Medicaid expansion and the exemption for pre-existing conditions.

No shit.

All the doom and gloom predictions, sky is falling, government shutdown right wing Bullshit is coming to an end. Too bad they wasted so much fucking money on it.

[~Rocktar~]

Until the bill comes due.

[cwolff]

Until the bill comes due.

If it comes due. It's still projected to lower the deficit. I know the right doesn't believe that because the numbers come from the CBO but given their poor predictions to date I'm feeling pretty good about it.

[Dwaar]

Before Obamacare: 30 million uninsured.

After Obamacare: 30 million uninsured.

Working as intended.

[Thondalar]

I still don't see why insurance is such a big deal. The very poorest in our nation have free or at least heavily subsidized insurance through Medicaid....the vast majority of the working class has health insurance through their employers, and the wealthy don't need health insurance.

Remind me again why this "overhaul" was so vital?

Also, has anyone paid attention to how many States are now going to go broke over the increased Medicaid payouts?

[Parkbandit]

If it comes due. It's still projected to lower the deficit. I know the right doesn't believe that because the numbers come from the CBO but given their poor predictions to date I'm feeling pretty good about it.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

I honestly didn't think there was anyone dumb enough to believe this except Backlash.

Obamacare will lower the deficit... that's fucking awesome.

The Backwolff is strong in you.

And the Democrats seriously need to trot out all this great news and use it in their re-election campaigns this year. Not just the ones guaranteed to win, but every Democrat that voted "YES" to this terrible law.

[~Rocktar~]

If it comes due. It's still projected to lower the deficit. I know the right doesn't believe that because the numbers come from the CBO but given their poor predictions to date I'm feeling pretty good about it.

RIIIIIIGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHTTTTTTTT

And I am 185 pound ex-special forces delta marine recon commando married to Morgan Fairchild. That's the ticket, yeahhhhhhhh.




NOT!

[Dwaar]

1 OCT 2013 to 1 FEB 2014 - White House says 3 million have signed up.

1 FEB 2014 to 31 MAR 2014 - White House says 7.5 million have signed up, but they can't provide the official data because the numbers are still being crunched. Oddly 7.5 million was what the administration said they needed by 31 MAR 2014, for Obamacare to be deemed a success.

31 MAR 2014 to 15 MAY 2014 - White House says 8.1 million have signed up, but they will no longer release monthly enrollment numbers from that point on.

Interesting how that works out isn't it.

[cwolff]

1 OCT 2013 to 1 FEB 2014 - White House says 3 million have signed up.

1 FEB 2014 to 31 MAR 2014 - White House says 7.5 million have signed up, but they can't provide the official data because the numbers are still being crunched. Oddly 7.5 million was what the administration said they needed by 31 MAR 2014, for Obamacare to be deemed a success.

31 MAR 2014 to 15 MAY 2014 - White House says 8.1 million have signed up, but they will no longer release monthly enrollment numbers from that point on.

Interesting how that works out isn't it.

There have been 0 enrollments since 5/15. Does that help?

[Dwaar]

There have been 0 enrollments since 5/15. Does that help?

If you don't find the fact that the administration will no longer release the data for those enrolled disingenuous, then I'm not sure what to say. If you don't find it odd, that the magical 7.5 million was somehow reached, with them actually saying the data was not complete, then I'm not sure what to say.

Look at real data instead of just blindly thinking "healthcare for all is good!". Everyone having a million dollars is a good thing too, but there is a difference between working for it and earning it, and simply walking into a bank and stealing it. You end up with a million either way, but it doesn't mean it was obtained the right way.

[Dwaar]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/white-house-delay-obamacare-implementation-report-article-1.1710455

Because his law is so good.

[cwolff]

If you don't find the fact that the administration will no longer release the data for those enrolled disingenuous, then I'm not sure what to say. If you don't find it odd, that the magical 7.5 million was somehow reached, with them actually saying the data was not complete, then I'm not sure what to say.

Look at real data instead of just blindly thinking "healthcare for all is good!". Everyone having a million dollars is a good thing too, but there is a difference between working for it and earning it, and simply walking into a bank and stealing it. You end up with a million either way, but it doesn't mean it was obtained the right way.

Enrollment is over. Enrollment will re-open in the fall of 2014 for policies that begin Jan. 1, 2015.

[Dwaar]

Enrollment is over. Enrollment will re-open in the fall of 2014 for policies that begin Jan. 1, 2015.

If that fact doesn't bother you, it should. Why suspend enrollment till the end of 2014? Oh, elections are coming up, that's right.

The ACA included some good ideas, everything that went along with those ideas and the way it has been implemented, is horrendous.

How people continue to overlook the flat out lies told to them, is really amazing. I could link 20+ transcripts of the President speaking about the ACA and then what he actually did, flatly proving him a liar using his own words, but somehow people just seem to not care.

If the law had been crafted correctly and not altered singlehandedly by the President over 25+ times I would care less. What Obama has done though is flat out lie. Why that doesn't seem to phase you, really intrigues me. I doubt you like someone lying to you in your day to day dealings with others, but our President lies repeatedly and it's overlooked somehow.

I don't care what his position on things are, everyone is entitled to them, and he was elected and has the full right to try to implement that vision. I do have a problem with him continually lying though, as should people from whatever side of the political spectrum you fall on.

[Warriorbird]

If that fact doesn't bother you, it should. Why suspend enrollment till the end of 2014? Oh, elections are coming up, that's right.

The ACA included some good ideas, everything that went along with those ideas and the way it has been implemented, is horrendous.

How people continue to overlook the flat out lies told to them, is really amazing. I could link 20+ transcripts of the President speaking about the ACA and then what he actually did, flatly proving him a liar using his own words, but somehow people just seem to not care.

If the law had been crafted correctly and not altered singlehandedly by the President over 25+ times I would care less. What Obama has done though is flat out lie. Why that doesn't seem to phase you, really intrigues me. I doubt you like someone lying to you in your day to day dealings with others, but our President lies repeatedly and it's overlooked somehow.

I don't care what his position on things are, everyone is entitled to them, and he was elected and has the full right to try to implement that vision. I do have a problem with him continually lying though, as should people from whatever side of the political spectrum you fall on.

It's certainly a cute Republican story, this line. Unfortunately after over a year of Obama bending over backwards in negotiations and giving everything away and leading TO this current implementation, Republicans don't really get that right.

[Kembal]

If that fact doesn't bother you, it should. Why suspend enrollment till the end of 2014? Oh, elections are coming up, that's right.



I think you need to learn how private health insurance works. Open enrollment periods are standard. After the open enrollment period ends, only way you can make changes or enroll in a plan is through a qualifying life event (birth, death, marriage, divorce, employment, unemployment).

I'm not even sure the last two are qualifying life events under the ACA, but I haven't researched that.

[Parkbandit]

Unfortunately after over a year of Obama bending over backwards in negotiations and giving everything away and leading TO this current implementation, Republicans don't really get that right.

That is a very cute Democrat story right there.

[Dwaar]

It's certainly a cute Republican story, this line. Unfortunately after over a year of Obama bending over backwards in negotiations and giving everything away and leading TO this current implementation, Republicans don't really get that right.

It's not a story. So Obama bent over backwards in negotiations and gave it away? Seriously? I guess people are just supposed to do what he wants then. That is the art of governing and being the leader of something. Why have a Congress then, or hell even a Supreme Court. If the President thinks its for the best and people are just to dumb to realize it, I suppose he should just be able to bypass the system of government in place and the laws on the books.

So your point is Obama did what he had to, because he could not effectively govern or lead, in our current legal framework. Or maybe you are saying something different?

Also it is not a Republican or Democrat story. People like you enjoy trying to make it that.

I am speaking solely to Obamas statements and his actions. He repeatedly says things, then does something else or changes it along the way. Flat out. That is not Republican or Democrat, that is what he said and did. If he were a Republican President which had done these things, I would say the same thing about him.

I could care less what political party or idea you have, but the way we should all go about achieving those goals should be done by the framework our government is established on, in a TRUTHFUL manner. I wish our elected leaders were required to adhere to something similar to the UCMJ while they are on Federal Service. Fight for what you believe, but do it honestly and with the understanding that misleading the people of the US could actually result in severe consequences, as opposed to the bullshit that our (yes OUR, you and me) politicians participate in.

I would think rational people could at least agree upon that. But you are right, it's a lot easier to just say it's a "cute story".

[Dwaar]

I think you need to learn how private health insurance works. Open enrollment periods are standard. After the open enrollment period ends, only way you can make changes or enroll in a plan is through a qualifying life event (birth, death, marriage, divorce, employment, unemployment).

I'm not even sure the last two are qualifying life events under the ACA, but I haven't researched that.

I think you may need to research every single change that the President has done unilaterally to the ACA since it was fully implemented. Let me relink something I posted earlier.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/poli...icle-1.1710455

That's just one example, there are 25+ more Executive Orders altering or delaying the implementation of the law he wanted, and got, signed into law. And again, they wanted the law passed. They passed it. Then immediately began changing it through unilateral action, bypassing the checks and balances built into our system of government.

What amazes me is that should scare everyone, regardless of what your political stance is. Either the laws we have and the system by which we enact them is the law of the land, or we might as well not have them at all. Power is an ever evolving thing, and if you think it's okay for the President to do whatever he wants, just because you agree with him.... You should be very careful and realize eventually there will be someone in that position of power that you do not agree with.

[Candor]

While I am not a supporter of Obamacare, it is not the main reason I am likely to vote Republican the next election.

It's not that I think Republicans are a bastion of everything that's right either, BTW...

[Dwaar]

While I am not a supporter of Obamacare, it is not the main reason I am likely to vote Republican the next election.

It's not that I think Republicans are a bastion of everything that's right either, BTW...

I'm not sure if I'll vote Democrat or Republican myself, I have to see who the individual candidate is. Voting by party line is a sad by-product of the two-party system unfortunately.

I also tend not to vote based upon social issues, and believe the federal government should focus on the economy, international relations and defense. I just wish I felt like I could actually trust they'll do what they say and adhere to, and enforce, the laws of the land fairly.

[Thondalar]

While I am not a supporter of Obamacare, it is not the main reason I am likely to vote Republican the next election.

It's not that I think Republicans are a bastion of everything that's right either, BTW...

Lesser of two evils, amirite?

6606

[Warriorbird]

It's not a story. So Obama bent over backwards in negotiations and gave it away? Seriously? I guess people are just supposed to do what he wants then. That is the art of governing and being the leader of something. Why have a Congress then, or hell even a Supreme Court. If the President thinks its for the best and people are just to dumb to realize it, I suppose he should just be able to bypass the system of government in place and the laws on the books.

So your point is Obama did what he had to, because he could not effectively govern or lead, in our current legal framework. Or maybe you are saying something different?

Also it is not a Republican or Democrat story. People like you enjoy trying to make it that.

I am speaking solely to Obamas statements and his actions. He repeatedly says things, then does something else or changes it along the way. Flat out. That is not Republican or Democrat, that is what he said and did. If he were a Republican President which had done these things, I would say the same thing about him.

I could care less what political party or idea you have, but the way we should all go about achieving those goals should be done by the framework our government is established on, in a TRUTHFUL manner. I wish our elected leaders were required to adhere to something similar to the UCMJ while they are on Federal Service. Fight for what you believe, but do it honestly and with the understanding that misleading the people of the US could actually result in severe consequences, as opposed to the bullshit that our (yes OUR, you and me) politicians participate in.

I would think rational people could at least agree upon that. But you are right, it's a lot easier to just say it's a "cute story".

You're the liberal aimed part of his trolling effort. It's cool. Good try.

[Dwaar]

You're the liberal aimed part of his trolling effort. It's cool. Good try.

What's sad is you hide behind name calling, instead of actually replying to my points. I understand taking the time to read something and respond with a counter argument is hard, but at least give it a try.

Instead of trolling, why don't you actually try to provide points to support your position. The insult game is a very shallow rebuttal.

But, from your reaction, I guess you think the US public should not expect honesty and adherence to the law from our elected leaders? I didn't think someone would disagree with that, but /shrug.

[Warriorbird]

What's sad is you hide behind name calling, instead of actually replying to my points. I understand taking the time to read something and respond with a counter argument is hard, but at least give it a try.

Instead of trolling, why don't you actually try to provide points to support your position. The insult game is a very shallow rebuttal.

But, from your reaction, I guess you think the US public should not expect honesty and adherence to the law from our elected leaders? I didn't think someone would disagree with that, but /shrug.

You ignored a simple and obvious counterpoint and babbled on about the UCMJ. You're not real. You get your jollies off posting from two accounts. It's cool. Carry on.

[Dwaar]

You ignored a simple and obvious counterpoint and babbled on about the UCMJ. You're not real. You get your jollies off posting from two accounts. It's cool. Carry on.

**It's certainly a cute Republican story, this line. Unfortunately after over a year of Obama bending over backwards in negotiations and giving everything away and leading TO this current implementation, Republicans don't really get that right.**

You consider that your "obvious counterpoint"? Calling it a "cute Republican story". Saying that Obama tried, and gosh darn, it was so hard because he had to talk to people and actually negotiate.

To refute your point though, Republicans have every right to make the argument against the ACA. Not one voted for it's implementation. The only people Obama had to "bend over backwards in negotiations" with was his fellow Democrats who were pushing it. Oh, and BTW roughly 70 Democrats voted against it as well.

So Obama wanted it. He got it without one single Republican vote. So the fact that people continue to support their arguments against the ACA should not come as a surprise.

Then Obama went on to unilaterally change the law, the same law that he wanted in the first place.

I didn't babble about the UCMJ, I said I wish that there were tougher rules applied to our elected leaders to ensure that the public is informed of the truth. That is me getting my jollies off? I would think everyone could agree on something as simple as that, but I suppose a person so jaded by partisan feelings can't even acknowledge a statement as simple as that. And I am not posting from 2 accounts, I think you just are to simpleminded to believe that someone can actually not care about Republican or Democrat.

I guess without the ability to just call someone a name and think you win an argument, it would cause issues for you.

[Kembal]

I think you may need to research every single change that the President has done unilaterally to the ACA since it was fully implemented. Let me relink something I posted earlier.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/poli...icle-1.1710455

That's just one example, there are 25+ more Executive Orders altering or delaying the implementation of the law he wanted, and got, signed into law. And again, they wanted the law passed. They passed it. Then immediately began changing it through unilateral action, bypassing the checks and balances built into our system of government.

What amazes me is that should scare everyone, regardless of what your political stance is. Either the laws we have and the system by which we enact them is the law of the land, or we might as well not have them at all. Power is an ever evolving thing, and if you think it's okay for the President to do whatever he wants, just because you agree with him.... You should be very careful and realize eventually there will be someone in that position of power that you do not agree with.

There have been multiple changes enacted by Executive Order since passage. No question. Some are in direct conflict with the law.

However, the closure of open enrollment until the end of the year is not one of them. That's been part of the law since the beginning. There are zero political motivations to that. Insurance companies require such enrollment periods so that they can accurately project premiums and claims for the year.

As far as the EOs that have been issued, I'll say this: If this were a business undertaking a major implementation project, the amount of deadline changing would be very normal. (I've got an ERP implementation going on at my company for almost 3 years now. It was supposed to be completed in 6 months, but the initial deadline was unrealistic.) The difference is that part of Congress is unwilling to legislate changes in the law, and thus the President has to resort to EOs in order to adjust to whatever issues come up.

If you say the President isn't following the law like he's supposed to (which I agree with, in a technical sense), then Congress isn't upholding its obligations either.

[Warriorbird]

**It's certainly a cute Republican story, this line. Unfortunately after over a year of Obama bending over backwards in negotiations and giving everything away and leading TO this current implementation, Republicans don't really get that right.**

You consider that your "obvious counterpoint"? Calling it a "cute Republican story". Saying that Obama tried, and gosh darn, it was so hard because he had to talk to people and actually negotiate.

To refute your point though, Republicans have every right to make the argument against the ACA. Not one voted for it's implementation. The only people Obama had to "bend over backwards in negotiations" with was his fellow Democrats who were pushing it. Oh, and BTW roughly 70 Democrats voted against it as well.

So Obama wanted it. He got it without one single Republican vote. So the fact that people continue to support their arguments against the ACA should not come as a surprise.

Then Obama went on to unilaterally change the law, the same law that he wanted in the first place.

I didn't babble about the UCMJ, I said I wish that there were tougher rules applied to our elected leaders to ensure that the public is informed of the truth. That is me getting my jollies off? I would think everyone could agree on something as simple as that, but I suppose a person so jaded by partisan feelings can't even acknowledge a statement as simple as that. And I am not posting from 2 accounts, I think you just are to simpleminded to believe that someone can actually not care about Republican or Democrat.

I guess without the ability to just call someone a name and think you win an argument, it would cause issues for you.

Simple legislative history shows you're living in a dreamland. Rage on though, Republican half. Somebody might listen.

[Dwaar]

There have been multiple changes enacted by Executive Order since passage. No question. Some are in direct conflict with the law.

However, the closure of open enrollment until the end of the year is not one of them. That's been part of the law since the beginning. There are zero political motivations to that. Insurance companies require such enrollment periods so that they can accurately project premiums and claims for the year.

As far as the EOs that have been issued, I'll say this: If this were a business undertaking a major implementation project, the amount of deadline changing would be very normal. (I've got an ERP implementation going on at my company for almost 3 years now. It was supposed to be completed in 6 months, but the initial deadline was unrealistic.) The difference is that part of Congress is unwilling to legislate changes in the law, and thus the President has to resort to EOs in order to adjust to whatever issues come up.

If you say the President isn't following the law like he's supposed to (which I agree with, in a technical sense), then Congress isn't upholding its obligations either.

Finally someone other than Warriorbird with his silly comments.

1. We agree on your first point fully.

2. I take the point of the open enrollment period and stand corrected. I should have been more clear, and focused on the numerous delays he implemented with regards to employer mandates and requirements.

3. I agree in a general sense. The sad part is that they pushed through the law, without really looking at it. Now when it is not working, as they SOLD it to the American people, they are band aid fixing it unilaterally. For the initial negotiations, they could have implemented parts of the law piece by piece and allowed the markets to adjust accordingly. Meanwhile they could have been discussing the other parts of the law and made adjustments as necessitated, prior to burdening the whole country with it.

4. I do think the President has overstepped his bounds with regards to using EO's to make huge changes to the law he wanted passed. I do agree with you that Congress is not upholding their obligations in many ways, but it is not their obligation to just sign off on whatever the President wants to do. It is to act as a check and balance, and the Presidents job is to negotiate and unify people in the legislature on the best way to proceed. Just because he is ineffective doing so, doesn't mean he should say screw it and do whatever he wants.

[Warriorbird]

Finally someone other than Warriorbird with his silly comments.

1. We agree on your first point fully.

2. I take the point of the open enrollment period and stand corrected. I should have been more clear, and focused on the numerous delays he implemented with regards to employer mandates and requirements.

3. I agree in a general sense. The sad part is that they pushed through the law, without really looking at it. Now when it is not working, as they SOLD it to the American people, they are band aid fixing it unilaterally. For the initial negotiations, they could have implemented parts of the law piece by piece and allowed the markets to adjust accordingly. Meanwhile they could have been discussing the other parts of the law and made adjustments as necessitated, prior to burdening the whole country with it.

4. I do think the President has overstepped his bounds with regards to using EO's to make huge changes to the law he wanted passed. I do agree with you that Congress is not upholding their obligations in many ways, but it is not their obligation to just sign off on whatever the President wants to do. It is to act as a check and balance, and the Presidents job is to negotiate and unify people in the legislature on the best way to proceed. Just because he is ineffective doing so, doesn't mean he should say screw it and do whatever he wants.

You have a pattern of posting as two separate troll accounts. I'm not the only one aware.

[cwolff]

You have a pattern of posting as two separate troll accounts. I'm not the only one aware.

At least he's fairly topical now but it's disturbing to see someone go to such lengths to get noticed on a forum.

[Dwaar]

Simple legislative history shows you're living in a dreamland. Rage on though, Republican half. Somebody might listen.

/yawn

And you're back to just tossing insults. Waiting for something new.

[Warriorbird]

At least he's fairly topical now but it's disturbing to see someone go to such lengths to get noticed on a forum.

Yeah. I have to give it credit... as bipolar as it is.

[Dwaar]

You have a pattern of posting as two separate troll accounts. I'm not the only one aware.

What? More name calling and trying to claim something that is not happening. So who am I supposed to be? Because I have no idea who you think I am.

I guess actually responding to the points being made is to difficult for you then, with your what.. 4th or 5th post just claiming "troll! troll!". Seems you are the troll from your posts and actions, not me.

[Wrathbringer]

Finally someone other than Warriorbird with his silly comments.

...the Presidents job is to negotiate and unify people in the legislature on the best way to proceed. Just because he is ineffective doing so, doesn't mean he should say screw it and do whatever he wants.

qft

[Warriorbird]

What? More name calling and trying to claim something that is not happening. So who am I supposed to be? Because I have no idea who you think I am.

I guess actually responding to the points being made is to difficult for you then, with your what.. 4th or 5th post just claiming "troll! troll!". Seems you are the troll from your posts and actions, not me.

Over the past several months we've had somebody doing forum roleplaying with two different accounts that oppose each other. You and the most recent iteration of Elantari fit the bill perfectly. First were a series of attempts to troll various GS folders, now politics. The obvious choice is to make one account a "liberal" and the other a "conservative."

[Dwaar]

At least he's fairly topical now but it's disturbing to see someone go to such lengths to get noticed on a forum.

I didn't realize commenting on a topic of discussion was going "to such lengths to get noticed on a forum". What is with this forum, when about half of you can only say "troll!", instead of actually holding a conversation on the topic. In the other thread, I did toss some insults, because someone did towards me. Should I not have? Is it okay for people to just insult others, and not expect a reply?

[Candor]

Lesser of two evils, amirite?

Pretty much. I have complaints with both parties.

[Dwaar]

Over the past several months we've had somebody doing forum roleplaying with two different accounts that oppose each other. You and the most recent iteration of Elantari fit the bill perfectly. First were a series of attempts to troll various GS folders, now politics. The obvious choice is to make one account a "liberal" and the other a "conservative."

I am my own person, and not "RP'ing" two sides of an issue. The Elantari guy is who I was referring to just a moment ago in my last post. He insulted me (trolling) and I replied, because I don't like people who think it's okay for them to talk trash, and think no reply will be given. Other than that douche, I've tried to stay solely on topic and voice an opinion. You sadly being the other person I have to waste time explaining that I'm not a "troll", just because you call me one.

You seem intent on just saying "troll" and not actually reading, or responding, to my actual thoughts. Lovely welcome to these forums and next time simply ask, before going off thinking you know something and making random comments about "trolls".

[Warriorbird]

I am my own person, and not "RP'ing" two sides of an issue. The Elantari guy is who I was referring to just a moment ago in my last post. He insulted me (trolling) and I replied, because I don't like people who think it's okay for them to talk trash, and think no reply will be given. Other than that douche, I've tried to stay solely on topic and voice an opinion. You sadly being the other person I have to waste time explaining that I'm not a "troll", just because you call me one.

You seem intent on just saying "troll" and not actually reading, or responding, to my actual thoughts. Lovely welcome to these forums and next time simply ask, before going off thinking you know something and making random comments about "trolls".

I hope you are a real person. I welcome people who completely disagree with me, whether they all believe it or not. People are just a bit wary after a series of suspicious new accounts.

[Wrathbringer]

I am my own person, and not "RP'ing" two sides of an issue. The Elantari guy is who I was referring to just a moment ago in my last post. He insulted me (trolling) and I replied, because I don't like people who think it's okay for them to talk trash, and think no reply will be given. Other than that douche, I've tried to stay solely on topic and voice an opinion. You sadly being the other person I have to waste time explaining that I'm not a "troll", just because you call me one.

You seem intent on just saying "troll" and not actually reading, or responding, to my actual thoughts. Lovely welcome to these forums and next time simply ask, before going off thinking you know something and making random comments about "trolls".

Do yourself a favor and put him on your ignore list like I did.

[Dwaar]

I hope you are a real person. I welcome people who completely disagree with me, whether they all believe it or not. People are just a bit wary after a series of suspicious new accounts.


Well now that we that out of the way. I'd be happy to hear your thoughts on it, but just keep it to the conversation and hey, you might make a point that I hadn't considered. Kembal actually made some excellent ones earlier, and hopefully we'll keep that conversation going.

[Warriorbird]

Do yourself a favor and put him on your ignore list like I did.

Or for added dramatic effect he can lie about it like you did.

[Dwaar]

Or for added dramatic effect he can lie about it like you did.

You people are crazy. Just talk about the topic and there would not be this silly back and forth.

Warriorbird, are you now calling me a liar? Who the fuck do you think you are? You might want to really examine how you act towards others, before just randomly talking shit about them. And now another post wasted, because you won't stay on topic.

And before you say it, I'm not trolling, I'm responding to your inferred comment that I'm a liar.

[waywardgs]

You people are crazy. Just talk about the topic and there would not be this silly back and forth.

Warriorbird, are you now calling me a liar? Who the fuck do you think you are? You might want to really examine how you act towards others, before just randomly talking shit about them. And now another post wasted, because you won't stay on topic.

And before you say it, I'm not trolling, I'm responding to your inferred comment that I'm a liar.

He was talking to wrathbringer...

you ok?

[Dwaar]

He was talking to wrathbringer...

you ok?

No idea, you all are confusing me with this random, "you're a troll" back and forth. Totally lost.

Guess I'll just read them and only respond to actual posts, as you all seem to enjoy this back and forth about nothing.

[Tenlaar]

Guess I'll just read them and only respond to actual posts, as you all seem to enjoy this back and forth about nothing.

Most people here have been posting and bickering with each other for years and years. If you don't want to be seen as a poorly executed troll maybe cut back on the shitty, condescending attitude and comments.

[Dwaar]

Most people here have been posting and bickering with each other for years and years. If you don't want to be seen as a poorly executed troll maybe cut back on the shitty, condescending attitude and comments.

This forum is amazing. Thanks for letting me know you all bicker so much.

As for "cut back on the shitty, condescending attitude and comments"? What comment have I made like that? I have stated my opinions on things you all are talking about, then someone like you comes along and makes a "shitty, condescending comment".... but I'm the jerk for replying?

Do you think it's shitty to call someone out on their bullshit when they start it? You just couldn't help yourself could you. Excellent troll attempt on your part though, you got me to reply to a "shitty" off topic post once again.

[waywardgs]

This forum is amazing. Thanks for letting me know you all bicker so much.

As for "cut back on the shitty, condescending attitude and comments"? What comment have I made like that? I have stated my opinions on things you all are talking about, then someone like you comes along and makes a "shitty, condescending comment".... but I'm the jerk for replying?

Do you think it's shitty to call someone out on their bullshit when they start it? You just couldn't help yourself could you. Excellent troll attempt on your part though, you got me to reply to a "shitty" off topic post once again.

You're picking it up fast!

[Warriorbird]

You people are crazy. Just talk about the topic and there would not be this silly back and forth.

Warriorbird, are you now calling me a liar? Who the fuck do you think you are? You might want to really examine how you act towards others, before just randomly talking shit about them. And now another post wasted, because you won't stay on topic.

And before you say it, I'm not trolling, I'm responding to your inferred comment that I'm a liar.

I was talking to Wrathbringer. You can tell by the tags on quotes.

[Dwaar]

You're picking it up fast!

LOL... thanks for offering some levity. :)

[Dwaar]

I was talking to Wrathbringer. You can tell by the tags on quotes.

I apologize then for my reply Warriorbird. Thanks for the clarification.

[Kembal]

Finally someone other than Warriorbird with his silly comments.

1. We agree on your first point fully.

2. I take the point of the open enrollment period and stand corrected. I should have been more clear, and focused on the numerous delays he implemented with regards to employer mandates and requirements.

3. I agree in a general sense. The sad part is that they pushed through the law, without really looking at it. Now when it is not working, as they SOLD it to the American people, they are band aid fixing it unilaterally. For the initial negotiations, they could have implemented parts of the law piece by piece and allowed the markets to adjust accordingly. Meanwhile they could have been discussing the other parts of the law and made adjustments as necessitated, prior to burdening the whole country with it.

4. I do think the President has overstepped his bounds with regards to using EO's to make huge changes to the law he wanted passed. I do agree with you that Congress is not upholding their obligations in many ways, but it is not their obligation to just sign off on whatever the President wants to do. It is to act as a check and balance, and the Presidents job is to negotiate and unify people in the legislature on the best way to proceed. Just because he is ineffective doing so, doesn't mean he should say screw it and do whatever he wants.

I think you're underestimating the degree of political polarization in Congress. The House has been doing an absurd job of oversight....everything seems to be about riling up the conservative base as opposed to actually fixing problems. Of course, that political incentive is due to gerrymandering and the result that everything seems to be decided in the primary election. A real test of whether this is going to change is how they handle the VA scandal....if they don't propose any serious reforms now that Shineski's resigned, then I'm going to be pissed. The problems at the VA are real and systemic, and are only partly due to limited funding.

One thing about ACA: The only piecemeal implementations that could have occurred is the separation of the individual insurance exchange from the small business insurance exchange, and the delay of the employer mandate. (which is what exactly ended up happening) Most of the reforms are tightly linked, and if you don't put them all together, you'll send the health insurance market into a death spiral. (if the secret plan was to force the country to go to single-payer, then they would have simply removed the individual mandate at some point. In 3 to 5 years, every insurance company would've gone bankrupt and we'd all have Medicare.)