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.

(National Review)   A factual and honest history of Obamacare, and why single payer will never work   (nationalreview.com) divider line 317
    More: Hero, obamacare, Robert Reich  
•       •       •

4732 clicks; posted to Politics » on 29 Oct 2013 at 1:26 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-29 09:36:24 AM  
From TFA: It is a law based upon an idea that Republican leadership failed to consider, debate, or advance during any of the periods in which they have held political power - and one that they actively opposed when it was suggested in a similar form by President Clinton during the 1990s.

Humm... No.  It is actually the one they PROPOSED during the 1990s, to counter HillaryCare.
 
2013-10-29 09:41:34 AM  
why single payer will never work

England, France, Canada, Sweden, hell even Italy disagrees you ignorant fool.
 
2013-10-29 09:46:15 AM  
Now THAT'S how you write alternate history. Harry Turtledove, eat your heart out.
 
2013-10-29 09:55:47 AM  
Republicans, this story goes, are opportunistic hypocrites who dropped their longtime support for a system that looked just like Obamacare the very moment that a black man was elected to the White House. Democrats, meanwhile, are presented as being too nice and too solicitous of their opponents, and criticized for having elected to placate the Republican party by forgoing pursuit of what they truly wanted: Medicare for all

Wow. That is an excellent summary of the past few years, Charles C.W. Cooke.
 
2013-10-29 09:56:08 AM  
NRO? "factual and honest?" LOL.
 
2013-10-29 10:04:21 AM  
Whatever historical weight the Left chooses to attribute to the Heritage proposal, it cannot change the salient fact that "Heritage" is synonymous with neither "Republican party" nor "conservative movement" . . .

hahahaha

All Hail Heritage
 
2013-10-29 10:07:47 AM  
This is my favorite part.

Americans, remember, didn't even want the bill as it currently ended up, and they were so determined to stop it that the progressive stronghold of Massachusetts elected to the Senate a Republican who ran promising not only to "kill" that specific bill but also to end the Democratic party's filibuster-proof majority.

The progressive stronghold of Massachusetts elected Scott Brown to punish Martha Coakley for running a campaign that was lackluster at best, and might as well have had her burning Ortiz jerseys on Brookline Avenue at worst, and sent Brown and his truck packing the minute a real progressive candidate threw her hat in the ring.
 
2013-10-29 10:08:34 AM  
The current social contract should be replaced with a more rational one. In a civilized and rich country like the United States, it is reasonable for society to accept an obligation to ensure that all residents have affordable access to at least basic health care - much as we accept the same obligation to assure a reasonable level of housing, education and nutrition.

But as part of that contract, it is also reasonable to expect residents of the society who can do so to contribute an appropriate amount to their own health care. This translates into a requirement on individuals to enroll themselves and their dependents in at least a basic health plan - one that at the minimum should protect the rest of society from large and unexpected medical costs incurred by the family. And as any social contract, there would also be an obligation on society. To the extent that the family cannot reasonably afford reasonable basic coverage, the rest of society, via government, should take responsibility for financing that minimum coverage.
 
2013-10-29 10:10:34 AM  

BunkoSquad: This is my favorite part.

Americans, remember, didn't even want the bill as it currently ended up, and they were so determined to stop it that the progressive stronghold of Massachusetts elected to the Senate a Republican who ran promising not only to "kill" that specific bill but also to end the Democratic party's filibuster-proof majority.

The progressive stronghold of Massachusetts elected Scott Brown to punish Martha Coakley for running a campaign that was lackluster at best, and might as well have had her burning Ortiz jerseys on Brookline Avenue at worst, and sent Brown and his truck packing the minute a real progressive candidate threw her hat in the ring.


This. Seriously, she thought it was hers by right. Voters don't like people who act like they're entitled to office. They have to at least have a faux humility.
 
2013-10-29 10:12:48 AM  
Americans, remember, didn't even want the bill as it currently ended up, and they were so determined to stop it that the progressive stronghold of Massachusetts elected to the Senate a Republican who ran promising not only to "kill" that specific bill but also to end the Democratic party's filibuster-proof majority.

media.salon.com

What? They didn't want it? Why if I had known that I would have run on repealing it!
 
2013-10-29 10:15:03 AM  
WTF did I just read?

/was that satire?
//that was satire, right guys?
///guys?
 
2013-10-29 10:17:37 AM  
The underlying conceit here, that the Democratic party had the option of "sticking to the original vision" of single-payer but that it instead settled on Obamacare as part of some sort of grand compromise, is fairly popular among the law's apologists these days.

They switched from the democratic vision to 0bamacare in return for all 0 of those republican votes.
 
2013-10-29 10:30:24 AM  

SlothB77: The underlying conceit here, that the Democratic party had the option of "sticking to the original vision" of single-payer but that it instead settled on Obamacare as part of some sort of grand compromise, is fairly popular among the law's apologists these days.

They switched from the democratic vision to 0bamacare in return for all 0 of those republican votes.


Charles Rangel voted against reinstating the draft.

I guess that means he didn't put forward the bill, right?
 
2013-10-29 10:37:00 AM  

vygramul: Charles Rangel voted against reinstating the draft.

I guess that means he didn't put forward the bill, right?


What are you talking about?  Put down the pipe.  Way too early in the day for that.
 
2013-10-29 10:41:46 AM  

SlothB77: The underlying conceit here, that the Democratic party had the option of "sticking to the original vision" of single-payer but that it instead settled on Obamacare as part of some sort of grand compromise, is fairly popular among the law's apologists these days.

They switched from the democratic vision to 0bamacare in return for all 0 of those republican votes.


Thanks for pointing out once again that the GOP were so invested in opposing everything Obama did that every one of them was willing to vote against their own proposal.
 
2013-10-29 10:47:03 AM  
Republicans are hell-bent on making sure people can't get health care.
 
2013-10-29 10:50:15 AM  

SilentStrider: Republicans are hell-bent on making sure people can't get health care.


this is their number-one goal. it is their overriding obsession.
 
2013-10-29 10:50:29 AM  

SlothB77: vygramul: Charles Rangel voted against reinstating the draft.

I guess that means he didn't put forward the bill, right?

What are you talking about?  Put down the pipe.  Way too early in the day for that.


0 Republican votes means conservatives didn't propose Obamacare, despite it being a Heritage Foundation idea.
0 Rangel votes means he didn't propose reinstating the draft, despite it being his bill.
 
2013-10-29 10:53:26 AM  

FlashHarry: SilentStrider: Republicans are hell-bent on making sure people can't get health care.

this is their number-one goal. it is their overriding obsession.


Nah- it's just part and parcel of their primary goal- making sure no poor person gets anything paid for by any rich person. Because Jesus.
 
2013-10-29 10:53:44 AM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: WTF did I just read?

/was that satire?
//that was satire, right guys?
///guys?


You just had the pleasure of reading yet another bullshiat and lie-filled attempt to retcon history by the out-of-touch-with-reality-right-wing. Since they have nothing else going for them, they've got this, which is nice if you're into that sort of thing.

Maybe, just maybe, the liberal MSM libtardo media will actually mention (in passing at least) that the only people who have to deal with the healthcare.gov nonsense are the poor bastards living in red states with retards for elected officials. The same ones that couldn't be arsed to take free money or set up some manageable system in the interests of their own citizens and instead sent their stupid-ass Attys General to the Supreme Court to lose. Because they don't want to waste money.
 
2013-10-29 10:54:12 AM  

SlothB77: 0bamacare



Weren't you around 9 months, 12 months ago back when 10 lbs. was driving that "0bama" thing of his into the ground? He kind of turned himself into a laughingstock with that.
 
2013-10-29 10:55:42 AM  
Also, to be honest: any link to a "news" report on the failures of healthcare.gov that DON't include references to the fact that only red-staters are the ones fumbling through and that this is due to the failure of leadership in those states is lying by omission.

fark you.
 
2013-10-29 10:56:56 AM  

Dinki: Thanks for pointing out once again that the GOP were so invested in opposing everything Obama did that every one of them was willing to vote against their own proposal.


You guys are going so far out of your way to try to pin 0bamacare on the republicans.  It must be even worse than i feared.

So let's see.  An idea from 1993 that went nowhere = ownership of another dissimilar bill when it fails, even though you voted against it, tried to repeal it 50 times and brought that bill to the Supreme Court as unconstitutional.
Actually writing a bill, campaigning for the bill and then voting for the bill, defending the bill in front of the Supreme Court and then actually implementing the bill =! ownership of said bill.

This isn't even fun anymore.  This is just sad.  I kinda feel bad for you guys and want to buy you a drink.  Out of pity.
 
2013-10-29 11:00:52 AM  

vygramul: 0 Republican votes means conservatives didn't propose Obamacare, despite it being a Heritage Foundation idea.


So Heritage had an idea about health care that was tangentially similar to 0bamacare?  So what?  I had a dream about foxes last night.  So what?
 
2013-10-29 11:01:13 AM  

SlothB77: You guys are going so far out of your way to try to pin 0bamacare on the republicans. It must be even worse than i feared.


How to be a Republican In This Instance
----------------------------------------------------
Propose an idea.
Do nothing with it.
Let the other party run with the idea.
Declare it a disaster.
Once it works, take credit for it again.
 
2013-10-29 11:01:25 AM  

dr_blasto: free money


Look, I voted for Obama twice and would likely do it again given the choice, and I fully support the idea that everyone should have access to healthcare (I would have preferred a more socialist approach, like most of Europe and Canada have, but I digress), but the money isn't free. It comes from taxes. It should come from taxes. There's no way to have the system work without an infusion of tax money. Every time you (royally) say that the money is free, you give people like sloth the chance to make a valid argument. Don't so that. You'll just encourage him to argue more righteously.
 
2013-10-29 11:06:18 AM  

Gecko Gingrich: but the money isn't free. It comes from taxes. It should come from taxes. There's no way to have the system work without an infusion of tax money.


Sure, inelegant wording. The money was already set aside. It is there, not "will be there."

The states passed on this because they have obstinate leadership. The money was and is money they could have pulled back to their economies, back to those who gave it up in taxes in the first farking place, yet they refuse.

That cash was already collected in taxes. Future monies come from device taxes and various other sources.
 
2013-10-29 11:06:45 AM  
A factual and honest history of Obamacare

From NRO?

www.clubrunner.ca
 
2013-10-29 11:06:56 AM  

SlothB77: So Heritage had an idea about health care that was tangentially similar to 0bamacare? So what? I had a dream about foxes last night. So what?


Me: Hey guys, let's go to the movies!

Most everyone else: Nah. I'm not in the mood right now.

biatch eating crackers: Hey guys, let's go to the movies!

Most everyone else: That sounds like a great idea!

Me: I don't want to go to the movies.

Everyone else: But it was your idea!

Me: No it wasn't.
 
2013-10-29 11:14:24 AM  

SlothB77: 0bamacare


LOL THE O IN OBAMACARE IS A ZERO LOL
 
2013-10-29 11:16:33 AM  

phaseolus: SlothB77: 0bamacare


Weren't you around 9 months, 12 months ago back when 10 lbs. was driving that "0bama" thing of his into the ground? He kind of turned himself into a laughingstock with that.


In fairness he turned himself into a laughing stock in far more comprehensive ways than that. Sloth the Bill Kristol of Fark is doing his best to emulate that. Presumably the goal is to have even the rightwing farktard sock puppet accounts disown you. Not sure what that does for someone but it seems to be the aim.
 
2013-10-29 11:19:06 AM  

SlothB77: vygramul: 0 Republican votes means conservatives didn't propose Obamacare, despite it being a Heritage Foundation idea.

So Heritage had an idea about health care that was tangentially similar to 0bamacare?  So what?  I had a dream about foxes last night.  So what?


Tangentially? You mean with an individual mandate with a tax penalty for failure to comply?
 
2013-10-29 11:19:54 AM  

Tigger: Sloth the Bill Kristol of Fark is doing his best to emulate that.


Hey at least he isn't the Charles Krauthammer of Fark.... yet.
 
2013-10-29 11:20:43 AM  

FlashHarry: SlothB77: 0bamacare

LOL THE O IN OBAMACARE IS A ZERO LOL


I get it!!

HAR HAR HAR HAR DEE HAR HAR!!!
 
2013-10-29 11:22:01 AM  

vygramul: Tangentially? You mean with an individual mandate with a tax penalty for failure to comply?


Link
 
2013-10-29 11:27:43 AM  

Gecko Gingrich: vygramul: Tangentially? You mean with an individual mandate with a tax penalty for failure to comply?

Link


Then you must mean tangentially to be where the government subsidizes it for people who cannot afford it?
 
2013-10-29 11:28:52 AM  

vygramul: Then you must mean tangentially to be where the government subsidizes it for people who cannot afford it?


Though I know I responded to a question posed to sloth, my response was not meant to be mine but what I imagined his response to be.
 
2013-10-29 11:45:44 AM  
wow, you guys really latched onto this idea.  Heritage is a think tank.  Think tanks come up with ideas.  They considered it, then ultimately rejected it.  It was from 1993.

TFA thoroughly demolishes this:

Whatever historical weight the Left chooses to attribute to the Heritage proposal, it cannot change the salient fact that "Heritage" is synonymous with neither "Republican party" nor "conservative movement," nor that, even if it were, such a link would serve only to confuse matters. As Avik Roy notes over at Forbes, the so-called "Heritage plan" was actually "killed" by another Heritage employee, Peter Ferrara, whose first act after leaving the organization was to campaign vehemently against the idea and to "[convince] 37 leaders of the conservative movement, including Phyllis Schlafly, Grover Norquist, and Paul Weyrich, to sign a petition opposing" it. Ferrara was joined in his opposition by the Cato Institute, the Galen Institute, and almost everybody on the Republican side of Congress.

i know you guys are trolling, but you guys are in pants-on-head stupid territory now.  If the republicans loved that idea so much, they would have passed that law.

This thread reminds me of the quote from The Social Network movie "If you guys were the inventors of Facebook, you'd have invented Facebook."

If Republicans had passed the 0bamacare bill, the Republicans would've passed the 0bamacare bill.  That's all there is to it.
 
2013-10-29 11:47:36 AM  

El_Perro: Whatever historical weight the Left chooses to attribute to the Heritage proposal, it cannot change the salient fact that "Heritage" is synonymous with neither "Republican party" nor "conservative movement" . . .

hahahaha

All Hail Heritage


Wow.  Tastes revisionist-ey.
 
2013-10-29 11:50:43 AM  

SlothB77: wow, you guys really latched onto this idea.  Heritage is a think tank.  Think tanks come up with ideas.  They considered it, then ultimately rejected it.  It was from 1993.

TFA thoroughly demolishes this:

Whatever historical weight the Left chooses to attribute to the Heritage proposal, it cannot change the salient fact that "Heritage" is synonymous with neither "Republican party" nor "conservative movement," nor that, even if it were, such a link would serve only to confuse matters. As Avik Roy notes over at Forbes, the so-called "Heritage plan" was actually "killed" by another Heritage employee, Peter Ferrara, whose first act after leaving the organization was to campaign vehemently against the idea and to "[convince] 37 leaders of the conservative movement, including Phyllis Schlafly, Grover Norquist, and Paul Weyrich, to sign a petition opposing" it. Ferrara was joined in his opposition by the Cato Institute, the Galen Institute, and almost everybody on the Republican side of Congress.

i know you guys are trolling, but you guys are in pants-on-head stupid territory now.  If the republicans loved that idea so much, they would have passed that law.

This thread reminds me of the quote from The Social Network movie "If you guys were the inventors of Facebook, you'd have invented Facebook."

If Republicans had passed the 0bamacare bill, the Republicans would've passed the 0bamacare bill.  That's all there is to it.


Is THAT why Heritage's Director, Center for Policy Innovation testified in favor of it as recently as 2003?

DO go on.
 
2013-10-29 12:04:03 PM  

SlothB77: i know you guys are trolling, but you guys are in pants-on-head stupid territory now. If the republicans loved that idea so much, they would have passed that law.



If today's Republican party was a collection of public servants devoted to helping America grow and prosper and stay safe and be healthy and globally competitive, you'd have a point.
 
2013-10-29 12:32:05 PM  

vygramul: SlothB77: wow, you guys really latched onto this idea.  Heritage is a think tank.  Think tanks come up with ideas.  They considered it, then ultimately rejected it.  It was from 1993.

TFA thoroughly demolishes this:

Whatever historical weight the Left chooses to attribute to the Heritage proposal, it cannot change the salient fact that "Heritage" is synonymous with neither "Republican party" nor "conservative movement," nor that, even if it were, such a link would serve only to confuse matters. As Avik Roy notes over at Forbes, the so-called "Heritage plan" was actually "killed" by another Heritage employee, Peter Ferrara, whose first act after leaving the organization was to campaign vehemently against the idea and to "[convince] 37 leaders of the conservative movement, including Phyllis Schlafly, Grover Norquist, and Paul Weyrich, to sign a petition opposing" it. Ferrara was joined in his opposition by the Cato Institute, the Galen Institute, and almost everybody on the Republican side of Congress.

i know you guys are trolling, but you guys are in pants-on-head stupid territory now.  If the republicans loved that idea so much, they would have passed that law.

This thread reminds me of the quote from The Social Network movie "If you guys were the inventors of Facebook, you'd have invented Facebook."

If Republicans had passed the 0bamacare bill, the Republicans would've passed the 0bamacare bill.  That's all there is to it.

Is THAT why Heritage's Director, Center for Policy Innovation testified in favor of it as recently as 2003?

DO go on.


oh-snap.jpg
 
2013-10-29 12:43:49 PM  
c0.nrostatic.com

That looks like something Norman Rockwell painted in a fever dream.
 
2013-10-29 12:49:53 PM  
A map of OECD countries:

foreignpolicyblogs.com

A map of countries with single-payer healthcare:

www.cpreview.org

Sorry,  subby, but I'm going to have to take 50+ years of experience from every developed country on Earth over your NRO article.
 
2013-10-29 12:55:34 PM  
I think it's a little early for you Republicans to be rewriting history on this. I get the temptation: you lost, and you feel like you need to do something right away. But trust me on this. What actually happened is still to fresh, and you're going to be smacked with backlash. You've got to let the situation settle down. Wait 15 years. Just like you guys forgot all about what happened during the HillaryCare brouhaha, people will forget all about what happened with Obamacare. And then you can spring your history on them, and everyone will be like, "Yeah, that story makes sense. fark the Democrats!"
 
2013-10-29 12:56:42 PM  
Single Payer never works except in all those country where it does.
 
2013-10-29 01:05:21 PM  

SlothB77: If Republicans had passed the 0bamacare bill, the Republicans would've passed the 0bamacare bill. That's all there is to it.


I truly admire your dedication to inserting a "0" at the head of every mention of the President of the United State's last name.  It must come up a lot given that he was handily reelected in 2012.
 
2013-10-29 01:07:29 PM  
SlothB77:

i know you guys are trolling, but you guys are in pants-on-head stupid territory now.  If the republicans loved that idea so much, they would have passed that law.

A Republican governor proposed it and passed it in Massachusetts.  Another Republican governor in Utah would have passed it with the individual mandate if not for the state legislature.
 
2013-10-29 01:19:11 PM  
Because when I want truthiness, I look to the National Review Online.
 
2013-10-29 01:19:20 PM  

whistleridge: A map of OECD countries:

[foreignpolicyblogs.com image 790x515]

A map of countries with single-payer healthcare:

[www.cpreview.org image 800x406]

Sorry,  subby, but I'm going to have to take 50+ years of experience from every developed country on Earth over your NRO article.


You forgot to juxtapose that with a "Merican map of the world.
 
Displayed 50 of 317 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report