Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MSNBC)   Romney's first term agenda. Much like King Joffrey, he will crush his opponents and place their heads on spikes. He truly is history's greatest monster   (firstread.msnbc.msn.com ) divider line
    More: Unlikely, Mitt Romney, political agenda, human beings, debt limit, borders, Tom Brokaw, President Obama, Morning Joe  
•       •       •

2238 clicks; posted to Politics » on 02 Jul 2012 at 11:45 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



96 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-07-02 12:30:23 PM  

clambam: A little bit of whistling past the graveyard as things keep looking better and better for Obama and worse and worse for Romney. I'd be more interested to hear the discussions undoubtedly going on in high level repub circles about what they'll do if and when Romney loses. Do you think they'll discuss the possibility of bipartisan action in the face of the American people' clear preference for Democratic policies? Or will they be discussing ways to punish the American voter for his temerity in voting for that awful black man?


Dude, you're talking about a party that had six members in Congress vote against a bill to reduce the deficit that they co-sponsored solely because Obama supported it. It's obviously the latter.
 
2012-07-02 12:31:15 PM  
FOX News reporting in bullet points:

* The middle class should pay more taxes for... stuff.

* The question is not should we be at war, but how many countries should we invade?

* The Republican is always right

* Revaluing rich taxes is madness. Keep charging more taxes to the rich and force them to cut jobs. Smart. That is what smart people think.

* The Tea Party is not fraud

* Contrary to anything you can see with your own eyes, the GOP only passed jobs bills since 2010.

* Libertarians are unelectable

* Democratics are demon worshipping, white woman enslaving ni*blahs who want to force Real Americans to pay for everything! Also, Libertarians are aliens.
 
2012-07-02 12:31:50 PM  

lemurs: CrackpipeCardozo: Why does the "Repeal & Replace" manta always seem to be lauded with absolutely no emphasis on the latter part? Why not just run on the platform of "Repeal," seeing that you have no desire to offer any sort of replacement?

Since Obama implemented the Republican health care plan, they have no idea on what to possibly replace it with. So the response is always "a plan to be detailed later", which is why it's such a losing argument. Whatever problems mainstream voters may have with the plan, it's still better than no plan at all as far as they're concerned.


I've said before, I think the idea is to repeal it, then replace it with an almost identical bill. Only this time they'll call it something like the Freedom and Liberty Patriotism Healthy Families Act. Sure, it'll have all of the same things in it as the PPACA, but it'll be better. And by better, I mean it'll also make the Bush tax cuts permanent. For freedom.
Then they'll take credit for 'fixing health care.'
 
2012-07-02 12:33:15 PM  

lemurs: Since Obama implemented the Republican health care plan, they have no idea on what to possibly replace it with. So the response is always "a plan to be detailed later", which is why it's such a losing argument. Whatever problems mainstream voters may have with the plan, it's still better than no plan at all as far as they're concerned.


Actually, there's a couple things in their platform which I think would be nice to add to Obamacare.

1) Allow individuals to join into sort of co-ops to purchase group health insurance at a lower rate
2) Allow people to purchase health insurance across state lines
 
2012-07-02 12:35:33 PM  

the_geek: 2) Allow people to purchase health insurance across state lines


Why do people keep insisting that this will make any difference instead of BCBS and the like consolidating all of their insurance companies in the state most friendly to insurance companies (CT for one)?
 
2012-07-02 12:36:15 PM  

clambam: A little bit of whistling past the graveyard as things keep looking better and better for Obama and worse and worse for Romney. I'd be more interested to hear the discussions undoubtedly going on in high level repub circles about what they'll do if and when Romney loses. Do you think they'll discuss the possibility of bipartisan action in the face of the American people' clear preference for Democratic policies? Or will they be discussing ways to punish the American voter for his temerity in voting for that awful black man?


According to the official Republican playbook, If they hold onto the House, they will open up impeachment proceedings. If they lose the House (unlikely but not impossible) they will whine about how unDemocratic it is to not have a party control at least 1 branch of the government.
 
2012-07-02 12:37:34 PM  

Eapoe6: MSNBC reporting in bullet points:



deadcrickets: FOX News reporting in bullet points:



CNN reporting in bullet points:

* Please watch.

* Pretty please.

* What do YOU want us to report? It doesn't even have to be factual, just say it, and we'll report it!!!

* Please watch?

* Hello?
 
2012-07-02 12:37:56 PM  

the_geek: Actually, there's a couple things in their platform which I think would be nice to add to Obamacare.

1) Allow individuals to join into sort of co-ops to purchase group health insurance at a lower rate
2) Allow people to purchase health insurance across state lines



1 is already in Obamacare.
2 would trample States Rights by making it impossible for states to regulate insurance.
 
2012-07-02 12:41:40 PM  

EyeballKid: Eapoe6: MSNBC reporting in bullet points:

deadcrickets: FOX News reporting in bullet points:

CNN reporting in bullet points:

* Please watch.

* Pretty please.

* What do YOU want us to report? It doesn't even have to be factual, just say it, and we'll report it!!!

* Please watch?

* Hello?


LOL
 
2012-07-02 12:42:53 PM  

Mrtraveler01: Why do people keep insisting that this will make any difference instead of BCBS and the like consolidating all of their insurance companies in the state most friendly to insurance companies (CT for one)?


I don't really care if insurance companies incorporate in a state that charges them the least tax or has fewer other hurdles. Corporations (the real customers) will still demand similar benefits to their employees.. if it's sold out of CT then so be it. It probably won't make much different to the private citizen purchasing insurance, but it may help corporations providing insurance to their employees.
 
2012-07-02 12:44:15 PM  
The thing is, even if by some miracle Romney does get elected and the Republicans win majorities in the House and Senate, if they repeal Obamacare and replace it with a Massachusets-style Romneycare, the Democrats will still have won. They'll have succeeded in forcing the Republicans to finally do something for the good of Joe Sixpack instead of just their cronies at their country club and polo grounds.
 
2012-07-02 12:44:49 PM  

the_geek: lemurs: Since Obama implemented the Republican health care plan, they have no idea on what to possibly replace it with. So the response is always "a plan to be detailed later", which is why it's such a losing argument. Whatever problems mainstream voters may have with the plan, it's still better than no plan at all as far as they're concerned.

Actually, there's a couple things in their platform which I think would be nice to add to Obamacare.

1) Allow individuals to join into sort of co-ops to purchase group health insurance at a lower rate
2) Allow people to purchase health insurance across state lines


Co-ops will only work as long as they achieve a critical mass that allows them to negotiate for preferential reimbursement rates with health care providers. If you don't hit that point, your only other option is to lease another insurer's network from them, and that's going to drive the cost of being in the co-op above that of just purchasing insurance from said insurer. Beyond that, the co-op would have to establish a brand name, recruit people that have actuarial experience, figure out how to meet state regulatory guidelines, and build up a sufficient reserve fund. It is not very easy to do. There's a reason there are only two functioning health insurance co-ops in the country today, and those basically function like every other insurance company in the country.

Selling insurance across state lines is a disaster waiting to happen unless you're also willing to give the federal government strong oversight. Take a look at what happened with the credit card industry in the wake of Marquette v. First of Omaha and tell me how that situation would not happen to the health insurance industry (or be even worse in many respects).
 
2012-07-02 12:45:06 PM  

the_geek: I don't really care if insurance companies incorporate in a state that charges them the least tax or has fewer other hurdles. Corporations (the real customers) will still demand similar benefits to their employees.. if it's sold out of CT then so be it. It probably won't make much different to the private citizen purchasing insurance, but it may help corporations providing insurance to their employees.


It is simply -adorable- that you think insurance works that way.
 
2012-07-02 12:45:34 PM  

Lost Thought 00: 2 would trample States Rights by making it impossible for states to regulate insurance.


It wouldn't trample states rights to regulate insurance sold within their state. I'm purchasing insurance from *another* state. So I've got interstate commerce clause on my side.
 
2012-07-02 12:46:25 PM  

Eapoe6: MSNBC reporting in bullet points:

* We have to pay more taxes for...stuff.

* The question is not should we be at war, but how much should we spend?

* The democrat is always right

* Revaluing healthcare is madness. Keep charging $50 bucks for an aspirin and force the population to pay insurance companies. Smart. That is what smart people think.

* The stock market is not fraud.

* Contrary to anything you can see with your own eyes, we are in economic recovery.

* Ron Paul is unelectable.

* Republicans R baaaaaaaaaaad.


*This is what Paultards actually think*
 
2012-07-02 12:47:25 PM  

the_geek: I'm purchasing insurance from *another* state.


Health insurance? Are you sure about that?
 
2012-07-02 12:48:16 PM  
Alternative Media in Bullet points:

* AHHHHHHHHH, the government is run by satan!

* The secret club of Saturn is going to eat your babies.

* Buy filters to get the Fluoride out of your water.

* You have to get madder. Don't do anything with that rage, just get madder.

* Panic and buy gold.

* Panic and horde food.

* Spam, Spam, Spam, Panic and Spam

* Lizard Aliens are doing stuff with Romney AND Obama.
 
2012-07-02 12:48:47 PM  

JokerMattly: It is simply -adorable- that you think insurance works that way.


You don't believe that corporations shop around for insurance plans to be able to give their employees a plan that meets certain medical needs while balancing that against the cost?
 
2012-07-02 12:49:33 PM  

Mrtraveler01: Health insurance? Are you sure about that?


It was a hypothetical, the context was talking about the idea of allowing people to purchase health insurance across state lines.
 
2012-07-02 12:53:09 PM  

Serious Black: Co-ops will only work as long as they achieve a critical mass that allows them to negotiate for preferential reimbursement rates with health care providers. If you don't hit that point, your only other option is to lease another insurer's network from them, and that's going to drive the cost of being in the co-op above that of just purchasing insurance from said insurer. Beyond that, the co-op would have to establish a brand name, recruit people that have actuarial experience, figure out how to meet state regulatory guidelines, and build up a sufficient reserve fund. It is not very easy to do. There's a reason there are only two functioning health insurance co-ops in the country today, and those basically function like every other insurance company in the country.


I own a 1 employee corporation and have to purchase private health insurance. If I had 1 additional employee I could get group health insurance. It only takes 2 people forming a co-op to be able to purchase group health insurance which has very different (usually more favorable) rules for the purchasers. Now in order to really drive the cost down you have to get critical mass, sure.. but you would immediately get these things sprouting up so that small business owners like myself could get a group discount. Also, there's a few large lobbying organizations which I'm sure would start offering associated health insurance co-ops.
 
2012-07-02 12:54:03 PM  

the_geek: You don't believe that corporations shop around for insurance plans to be able to give their employees a plan that meets certain medical needs while balancing that against the cost?


I don't believe that corporations influence what companies will offer, no.
I fully believe the Insurance companies offer the minimum they can for the most they can given the market they sell to.

To be slightly more specific, I don't think BCBS alters its coverage because Google calls them up and asks, any more than Kellog will sell a no sugar added, vitamin fortified cereal to California because they asked. A much larger market share has to ask for those things than a single company.
 
2012-07-02 12:56:38 PM  

vinniethepoo: The thing is, even if by some miracle Romney does get elected and the Republicans win majorities in the House and Senate, if they repeal Obamacare and replace it with a Massachusets-style Romneycare, the Democrats will still have won. They'll have succeeded in forcing the Republicans to finally do something for the good of Joe Sixpack instead of just their cronies at their country club and polo grounds.


If you think there will be assistance for poor people to pay for their health insurance or a cap on insurance company profits or any regulation on increase in premiums in a Republican replacement plan, you're dreaming.
 
2012-07-02 12:56:53 PM  

the_geek: Serious Black: Co-ops will only work as long as they achieve a critical mass that allows them to negotiate for preferential reimbursement rates with health care providers. If you don't hit that point, your only other option is to lease another insurer's network from them, and that's going to drive the cost of being in the co-op above that of just purchasing insurance from said insurer. Beyond that, the co-op would have to establish a brand name, recruit people that have actuarial experience, figure out how to meet state regulatory guidelines, and build up a sufficient reserve fund. It is not very easy to do. There's a reason there are only two functioning health insurance co-ops in the country today, and those basically function like every other insurance company in the country.

I own a 1 employee corporation and have to purchase private health insurance. If I had 1 additional employee I could get group health insurance. It only takes 2 people forming a co-op to be able to purchase group health insurance which has very different (usually more favorable) rules for the purchasers. Now in order to really drive the cost down you have to get critical mass, sure.. but you would immediately get these things sprouting up so that small business owners like myself could get a group discount. Also, there's a few large lobbying organizations which I'm sure would start offering associated health insurance co-ops.


Okay, maybe I'm a little confused. Are you talking about a health insurance co-op or a health insurance purchasing co-op? They are completely different things. One acts a lot like a mutual insurance company, and the other is functionally identical to the health insurance exchanges in the law.
 
2012-07-02 12:59:19 PM  

JokerMattly: I don't believe that corporations influence what companies will offer, no.
I fully believe the Insurance companies offer the minimum they can for the most they can given the market they sell to.


Actually, Medicare generally dictates what insurance companies offer. If Medicare starts covering something then health insurance companies will also provide it.

As for the latter part, it depends on the size of the (potential) customer. Small companies will get raped, while huge megacorps like Halliburton, Bank of America, etc. will either get the rate they demand or will just self-insure, and even then the insurance companies will trip over themselves trying to get the contract to manage the plan for them.
 
2012-07-02 01:00:00 PM  

Serious Black: Okay, maybe I'm a little confused. Are you talking about a health insurance co-op or a health insurance purchasing co-op? They are completely different things. One acts a lot like a mutual insurance company, and the other is functionally identical to the health insurance exchanges in the law.


a health insurance purchasing co-op
 
2012-07-02 01:03:53 PM  

the_geek: Serious Black: Okay, maybe I'm a little confused. Are you talking about a health insurance co-op or a health insurance purchasing co-op? They are completely different things. One acts a lot like a mutual insurance company, and the other is functionally identical to the health insurance exchanges in the law.

a health insurance purchasing co-op


In that case, what you're talking about is already part of the law.
 
2012-07-02 01:08:55 PM  

the_geek: JokerMattly: I don't believe that corporations influence what companies will offer, no.
I fully believe the Insurance companies offer the minimum they can for the most they can given the market they sell to.

Actually, Medicare generally dictates what insurance companies offer. If Medicare starts covering something then health insurance companies will also provide it.

As for the latter part, it depends on the size of the (potential) customer. Small companies will get raped, while huge megacorps like Halliburton, Bank of America, etc. will either get the rate they demand or will just self-insure, and even then the insurance companies will trip over themselves trying to get the contract to manage the plan for them.



Corporations will always find the most cost-effective way to insure every employee that they are required to by law and nothing more. Medicare can dictate what insurance companies offer because they insure about 45 million people. There are no employers in the U.S. that come anywhere close to that number of full-time employees. This is why we need single payer.
 
2012-07-02 01:10:29 PM  

Serious Black: In that case, what you're talking about is already part of the law.


Still doesn't help me. I have a 1 employee company so still no group policies/prices and I also make more than $50k/yr so my average employee salary is too high to qualify.
 
2012-07-02 01:12:41 PM  
FARK in Bullet Points:

* Use headlines to troll

* FARK party at ____

* It's always "C"

* F*ck it, pony thread.
 
2012-07-02 01:12:54 PM  

babygoat: Corporations will always find the most cost-effective way to insure every employee that they are required to by law and nothing more.


AFAIK employers are not required to pay for any sort of insurance for their employees (yet). So what you have said and what follows is categorically false.

Also, I support single payer but it's not coming until more boomers realize they will die without it.
 
2012-07-02 01:15:41 PM  

the_geek: Actually, Medicare generally dictates what insurance companies offer. If Medicare starts covering something then health insurance companies will also provide it.


It is almost as if Medicare and Medicaid are large enough actors on the insurance market, like I said, that they can dictate terms. I hardly doubt individual corporations reach anywhere near the enrollment of Medicare.
 
2012-07-02 01:17:58 PM  

JokerMattly: It is almost as if Medicare and Medicaid are large enough actors on the insurance market, like I said, that they can dictate terms. I hardly doubt individual corporations reach anywhere near the enrollment of Medicare.


You had individual churches/hospitals demanding special health insurance plans that covered or did not cover specific forms of birth control. You don't think GE, Bank of America, etc. can demand certain coverages?
 
2012-07-02 01:45:29 PM  
"What the court did not do on its last day in session, I will do on my first day if elected president of the United States. And that is I will act to repeal 'ObamaCare,'" Romney said Thursday in Washington

I'm sure he was going for a nice sound bite, but it's awfully disturbing if he doesn't know that SCOTUS striking down a law is not the same as repealing it.
 
2012-07-02 02:01:19 PM  

the_geek: Serious Black: In that case, what you're talking about is already part of the law.

Still doesn't help me. I have a 1 employee company so still no group policies/prices and I also make more than $50k/yr so my average employee salary is too high to qualify.


As an individual, you would be able to purchase health insurance through the exchanges that are being set up for individual purchasers. Those have no restrictions on your salary, the plans offered on the exchange must be priced using adjusted community rating, and depending on how many family members are in your household, you may also qualify for a premium tax credit to defray some of the cost.
 
2012-07-02 02:08:30 PM  

Serious Black: the_geek: Serious Black: In that case, what you're talking about is already part of the law.

Still doesn't help me. I have a 1 employee company so still no group policies/prices and I also make more than $50k/yr so my average employee salary is too high to qualify.

As an individual, you would be able to purchase health insurance through the exchanges that are being set up for individual purchasers. Those have no restrictions on your salary, the plans offered on the exchange must be priced using adjusted community rating, and depending on how many family members are in your household, you may also qualify for a premium tax credit to defray some of the cost.


This is another variation on the 'this law doesn't benefit me personally due to my very specific, narrowly defined parameters (which are likely made up) so therefore Obamacare is bad' stratagem.
 
2012-07-02 02:11:03 PM  

the_geek: You had individual churches/hospitals demanding special health insurance plans that covered or did not cover specific forms of birth control. You don't think GE, Bank of America, etc. can demand certain coverages?


By "individual hospitals/churches" do you mean the Catholics?
Because I hear Catholics are a big voting blocks with a lot of influence. More so that I'd argue even BoA has.
 
2012-07-02 02:13:45 PM  

propasaurus: Serious Black: the_geek: Serious Black: In that case, what you're talking about is already part of the law.

Still doesn't help me. I have a 1 employee company so still no group policies/prices and I also make more than $50k/yr so my average employee salary is too high to qualify.

As an individual, you would be able to purchase health insurance through the exchanges that are being set up for individual purchasers. Those have no restrictions on your salary, the plans offered on the exchange must be priced using adjusted community rating, and depending on how many family members are in your household, you may also qualify for a premium tax credit to defray some of the cost.

This is another variation on the 'this law doesn't benefit me personally due to my very specific, narrowly defined parameters (which are likely made up) so therefore Obamacare is bad' stratagem.


I must say, I do appreciate having read the entire damn law myself so that I have pretty close to encyclopedic knowledge of what's in it and can counter those kinds of arguments.

/if you haven't read the law, I recommend picking up Jon Gruber's graphic novel
 
2012-07-02 02:53:39 PM  

the_geek: Lost Thought 00: 2 would trample States Rights by making it impossible for states to regulate insurance.

It wouldn't trample states rights to regulate insurance sold within their state. I'm purchasing insurance from *another* state. So I've got interstate commerce clause on my side.


That's the way it works right now. Your insurance company doesn't have to be based in your state, they have to comply with your state regulations.

"Selling insurance across state lines" is a policy that allows insurance companies to use the regulations of the state they're based in, instead of the state where they're selling the plan. It could be more accurately described as "nullifying state insurance regulations".
 
2012-07-02 04:03:19 PM  
I don't think the Romney/Stannis comparison is fair. (to Stannis)
 
2012-07-02 04:15:19 PM  

cubic_spleen: I look forward to Romney's wedding feast.


Spoiler.
 
2012-07-02 04:54:52 PM  

dennysgod: In the grand scale in problems with America "Obamacare" is far down on the list.

Obama wasted most of the first 2 years of his presidency on hcr instead of focusing on the bad economy and look where that got him; now Romney main goal is to do the same thing.


So now the "OMG BIGGEST SPENDING SOCIALISM STIMULUS!!!" is now "nothing"?

Which is it?
 
2012-07-02 04:55:41 PM  

Counter_Intelligent: FARK in Bullet Points:

* Use headlines to troll

* FARK party at ____

* It's always "C"

* F*ck it, pony thread.


images3.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2012-07-02 08:19:22 PM  
The stated agenda:

1. Repeal Obamacare
2. Seek tax cuts and deficit reduction
3. Approve Keystone XL Pipeline
4. Tighten trade with China
5. Repeal Dodd-Frank and other "job-killing regulations."
6. Comprehensive immigration reform

What any rational person should think:

1. Repealing his own law will have this basic result. It will eliminate health insurance for hundreds of thousands of young people, who only have insurance now because of the new law. This will probably push costs even higher for those who still have their pre-PPACA plans.
2. Pay back the Koch Brothers and Adelson; implement austerity for the 99%. Eliminate domestic programs for thousands of Americans (including veterans), ignore our crumbling infrastructure, borrow more money and give it to defense contractors while simultaneously cutting troop strength, pay, and benefits.
3. GIve millions to China for low-quality steel, allow Canada to sell their oil to China, increase fuel prices in the midwestern US (which will increase food prices across the board), and leave the US on the hook for numerous small oil leaks, spills, and bursts over the coming decades
4. Seems rather contradictory given #3. But the most likely end result of any Romney-administration trade reforms with China is increased prices to US consumer goods without any gain in domestic manufacturing jobs.
5. Transfer even more of our GDP into financial-sector black holes while adding zero new domestic jobs.
6. Best case scenario? Pour more borrowed money into false border controls while simply forcing Mexicans to become more creative with their entry methods. Worst case scenario? Encourage states to crack down on immigration themselves. Which will make most states' manual labor worker pools resemble Alabama. You know, where perennially unemployed Americans walked away from farm jobs. Compounded with #3, this will cause US food prices to leap completely out of control.

There is actually one issue that I don't think Romney has blown it - don't think he's said anything about delaying Obama's timetable for withdrawl from Afghanistan.
 
2012-07-03 12:19:20 AM  

dennysgod: In the grand scale in problems with America "Obamacare" is far down on the list.

Obama wasted most of the first 2 years of his presidency on hcr instead of focusing on the bad economy and look where that got him; now Romney main goal is to do the same thing.


I love how the anti-Obamas talk about how they would have fixed the economy without at all dealing with the number one cause of personal bankruptcies...
 
2012-07-03 12:22:35 AM  

the_geek: Serious Black: In that case, what you're talking about is already part of the law.

Still doesn't help me. I have a 1 employee company so still no group policies/prices and I also make more than $50k/yr so my average employee salary is too high to qualify.


If you have your business structured as a small business, then you can still buy through the state exchange (under 50 employees) and you will even get a tax credit if you do so through your business instead of going as an individual... there's a whole lot to help small businesses like yours and mine (whopping 3-man operation I've got goin on).
 
2012-07-03 02:45:47 AM  

elchip: [i.imgur.com image 606x1100]


LOL. However Joffrey was the exact opposite of "strong on the 2nd amendment" unless it applied to him.
 
Displayed 46 of 96 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report