The democrat party is in trouble. Big trouble. Captain Barack Schettino has run the SS Partito Democratico into the rocks just off Obamacare island. It’s listing heavily, taking on water and the rats are jumping ship.
After 40 years in Congress, George Miller (D-CA) is retiring. Miller has been a Pelosi capo for much of that time. Another Pelosi confidante, Henry Waxman (D-CA), has also read the tea leaves is headed for the exit.
These are ominous signs for the democrat party. It’s not as though Republicans aren’t retiring but these are democrats in positions of real power. And they know.
This isn’t what democrats predicted. Over and over they promised Obamacare would boost their electoral aspirations, none more so than the feckless Obama sycophant known as Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
“I think actually that Democrats will be able to run on Obamacare as an advantage.”
Politico ran an article titled “Nancy Pelosi’s tough times.”
I’ve bookmarked it so when I am unhappy I can return to it for a mood lift.
For House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, the bad news keeps piling up.
On Thursday, longtime Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman, a Pelosi ally and fellow Californian, announced he would retire at the end of this Congress. That closely follows Rep. George Miller’s (D-Calif.) decision to also leave the House at the end of the year.
While Democrats should hold both seats, the departures put more districts in play. Perhaps more important, the retirement of two Pelosi friends — both of whom would be chairmen in a Democratic majority — bolsters the GOP argument that their grip on the House is solid.
National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Greg Walden (Ore.) called Waxman’s retirement a “clear indication … that the House Democrats don’t think they’re going to be wielding the gavels next time.”
The NRCC will use the Miller and Waxman retirements to raise money and lean on business groups and wealthy donors to back GOP candidates, arguing that the writing is already on the wall for Election Day and they’d better get on the winning side now.
Pelosi was even forced to deny rumors on Thursday that she too was retiring. More than a dozen Democrats called her personally to find out what was going on after a story speculated she might step down.
Be still my heart. If only.
There has been no one so consistently wrong about Obamacare as has Nancy Pelosi. Her words are now legendary.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV-05TLiiLU[/youtube]
Well, they passed it and we still don’t know all that’s in it. When asked a couple of years later about that obviously direct quote, Pelosi claimed that her words were “taken out of context.”
Pelosi said that the quote “was taken out of context” and it is most often quoted “by the far right.”
Then she said there is no bill:
We don’t even have a bill written yet. The Senate has not acted. And that really, the president really thought he was going to get a Republican vote in the Senate… You can’t say it’s in the bill, read it, ’cause there is no bill.”
Yet she had read the non-existent bill:
Also, Pelosi said “we read the bill.”
Pelosi also promised that everyone would have lower rates and better care.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqONZAN_Us0[/youtube]
She then was um, unexpectedly unable to remember saying that:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04-MwSPcdAI[/youtube]
She promised that democrats would stand tall for Obamacare
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXz0YO7FcDM[/youtube]
And she was utterly humiliated by Jonathan Stewart
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Yut2jE5-aQ[/youtube]
This is the woman who had to have it passed before we could find out what’s in it- the woman who had three years to watch a failure develop knows nothing about nothing. She shoved it up our you know whats but she is not responsible for its incompetence?
She is a disgrace. She’s a partisan fool.
Obamacare is not becoming more popular- it’s becoming more and more unpopular- especially among the uninsured– and people are learning what “affordable” means.
Obamacare has become an albatross around the necks of vulnerable democrats:
President Barack Obama was barely out of the Capitol after delivering his State of the Union address Tuesday before members of his own party began distancing themselves from the president, and they’re running as fast as they can.
In an interview with CNN after the speech, Alaska Sen. Mark Begich, one of the most vulnerable Democrats up for reelection this year, took aim at Obama’s focus on using executive actions to go around Congress. ”I’ll be anxious to see what these executive orders are,” he said. “But if they go too far you’ll clearly hear push back from me. There’s no question about it.”
Begich also criticized Obama on energy, objecting to his calls to end oil and gas tax incentives and opposition to opening up more of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling. He added that he has no interest in campaigning with Obama, but is open to showing Obama why his policies are wrong.
Obama is downright radioactive:
Obama’s post-speech roadshow conspicuously excludes any state where vulnerable Democratic incumbents are up for reelection. And in Wisconsin, where Democrat Mary Burke is trying to unseat Gov. Scott Walker this fall, the candidate is avoiding Obama’s scheduled appearance on Thursday. Earlier this month, North Carolina Sen. Kay Hagan avoided an appearance with Obama in her home state.
These are ominous signs for the democrat party and Obamacare faces an even worse 2014.
Bon Voyage.
UPDATE
A loyal Democratic soldier tells the truth about Obamacare
Rep. Jim Moran of Virginia rarely holds his tongue (and never his punches), but he was the loyal Democratic soldier when it was time to vote for Obamacare. His pending retirement from Congress has freed him now to finally say what he thinks about the president’s takeover of the nation’s health care.
Mr. Moran joins a group of departing Democrats conceding what everyone knows: Obamacare is a train wreck. An airliner crash. A battleship aground on the reef. Pick your metaphor. “I’m afraid that the millennials, if you will,” Mr. Moran tells Washington’s WAMU-FM radio, “are less likely to sign up. I think they feel more independent. I think they feel a little more invulnerable than prior generations . But I don’t think we’re going to get enough young people signing up to make this bill work as it was intended to, financially.”
His analysis is spot on, but that’s small consolation. “I just don’t know how we’re going to [fix] it, frankly,” says Mr. Moran. “If we had a solution, I’d be telling the president right now.” Now he tells us.
Belated it is, but Mr. Moran’s assessment is a breath of fresh air in an environment where the Obama administration talks about “surges” in enrollments and tells “success” stories that don’t bear the weight of scrutiny. Obamacare was sold to the nation on a similar foundation of lies.
UPDATE II
Democrats: Cede the House to save the Senate
With Democrats’ grasp on the Senate increasingly tenuous — and the House all but beyond reach — some top party donors and strategists are moving to do something in the midterm election as painful as it is coldblooded: Admit the House can’t be won and go all in to save the Senate.
Their calculation is uncomplicated. With only so much money to go around in an election year that is tilting the GOP’s way, Democrats need to concentrate resources on preserving the chamber they have now. Losing the Senate, they know, could doom whatever hopes Barack Obama has of salvaging the final years of his presidency.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
I hope so… but I surmise that a goodly number of passengers on the SS Obama will deny it’s sinking until the band strikes up “Nearer my God to Thee”, and Leonardo DiCaprio shows up on deck.
Also, not all of the retiring Dems will be leaving their seats up for grabs.
Some Districts are completely ”safe.”
A Dem will serve forever where Waxman is, where Waters is, and so on.
I wouldn’t be popping those champagne corks too fast (unless you bought them the “conservative” way and just put them on the country’s credit card and then refuse to honor the debt unless somebody gives you something).
Dems aren’t likely to take back the House so that’s a given. And yeah, they’re likely to lose a Senate seat or two.
But Obama’s here untill 2016, the GOP Senate numbers for 2016 look horrible, TeaBircher popularity continues to plummet, ACA’s popularity continues to soar, and as the GOP’s SOTU response told us, they are still no more than a dishonest empty suit with no plans whatsoever other than to appease the donor class.
So the GOP and TeaBirches really haven’t stepped up thier game much since that Nov 2012 ass padding when just as you’re doing now, they were popping those corks.
And your Presidential prospects look worse.
@Ronald J. Ward: Don’t give up on the American citizens that are having their yes opened wide. Both democrats and republicans want one thing in common and that is freedom. It is obvious mor and more each day that obama is nothing but red.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Really? With whom?
Your analcranial disorder seems to have gotten even worse, RJW. At no time in our history has any government program remained as unpopular as the ACA continues to be this long after enactment. And when you have black Chicagoians taking to the airwaves and telling Obama to just quit, you have to wonder, can he hold his numbers which are in the low 40’s?
Everyone (at least those smarter than you) are predicting the GOP will take the Senate. That will give Republicans control of both houses and at that point, Obama is a lame duck that can do no more than take up space in the Oval Office and plan ritzy parties on the tax payer’s dime.
TeaBirchers? Cleaver. Did your teabagging partner get tired of you talking trash about him?
@enchanted:
Sorry, but I have to disagree with you there. There are no more Democrats, only Progressives (Socialists) who want to create their dream of a socialist utopia, ala Saul Alinsky. Who are the majority of Democrats pushing for 2016? None other than Queen Thunderthighs who not only did her thesis on Alinsky, but remained close personal friends with him, and Cloward and Piven, until his death. And you need to understand that Socialism is not for the Socialist, who seeks power, but only the average man that they hold power over.
@enchanted: But Obama isn’t running in 2016. Americans are indeed opening their eyes and what the GOP is offering, or perhaps, lack of, is becoming less attractive.
Like it or not, voters don’t care much for austerity. They prefer certain safety nets. They are becoming frustrated working for slave wages. They are not a big fan of Plutocracy and Social Darwinism pushed by the GOP corporate puppets. And conservatives have absolutely nothing to offer other than “Obama’s bad”.
Argue that all you want but conservatives have not improved their image or changed their agenda since being soundly rejected in 2012.
@Ronald J. Ward:
You’re a funny guy, Ron.
Sissie Matthews:
But please, carry on
@Ronald J. Ward:
When the DNC has its convention, they should just call it
“The Bimbo Coronation” as opposed to “Bimbo Eruption”
or maybe
“The Arkansas Trailer Park Trash Convention”
@Ronald J. Ward:
“Walk through the Clinton home and wave a $100 bill you nevah know what you gonna get.”
@Ronald J. Ward:
and that’s the best that can be said about her.
I think when you review the monthly statements you’ll find that much more has been charged since the Dims are controlling the budget, what? about 7 trilllion in Obammys terms.
@retire05:
I think you nailed it 05. Can you blame him?
@Ronald J. Ward:
There you go again….picking on Walt’s dog. But you didn’t rise to my challenge, if they don’t want to be controlled by the rich, what is their alternative? Name any country in the world that is not run by the rich…….anyone?
@Ronald J. Ward:
Bad? He’s not nearly that good.
@Redteam:
Apparently, RJW’s OFA “Word of The Day” site has gone down and he is stuck with the few words he did glean from it; Plutocracy, troll, teabagger, Social Darwinism and when all else fails, sock puppet.
The problem is that RJW is not smart enough to know that he just continues to make a fool of himself, and is simply another one of the lemming who shout “Look how fabulous the Emperor’s clothes are.” RJW dreams of the day when no one will be hungry, or homeless or making a wage less than they think they are worth. Everyone will live in that great Socialist utopia where egalitarianism rules.
Can’t you just see it now, Redteam? 4’11” Asian women will be playing for the NBA because they are no longer judged on merit; all NFL players will draw the same pay as the garbage man, including the women who play for the NFL; all homes will be required to allow only so much space per person, preferably in high rise apartment complexes such as we see in Russia and China as getting gasoline will be allowed to only those who require vehicles needed for the production of food and bicycles will be required to get back and forth from your nondescript apartment to your government run job and food will be doled out on need, not because you want a steak tonight instead of chicken.
Now, all these policies will require people to not only implement them, but to make sure that everyone complies with the rules. I believe these people are called “Politburo.” And who better to run these programs, and provide for your every need but the members of the Democratic Progressive Caucus?
Can’t you just see it your mind’s eye, Redteam?
Of course, medical care will be rationed because those who are no longer useful/productive will not be worth the money it costs the government to keep them alive. And golly gee, how lucky we are that Dr. Ezekial Emanual has already laid the plan out for us.
Yes, RJW knows that there is a better way to achieve true egalitarianism. He can hardly wait. Of course, you can point out other societies that have tried his way, and how it failed and only created misery and death of millions, but see, you just don’t understand that those societies failed because they didn’t have the right people in charge. The Democrat Progressives will do a much better job, don’t ya know?
@retire05:
But even then, RJW can’t tell me why it won’t still be a Plutocracy, The Super Rich people will still be the super rich, they will continue to live on their huge estates and have limousines and private airplanes. But their costs will go way down once the Dimocrat progressives are running things and exterminating the unproductive so they won’t have to feed them or provide medical care. Ah, the socialist utopia!!!
http://conservativebyte.com/2014/02/ray-stevens-embraces-obama-budget-plan/
Love Ray Stevens plan for budgeting. Same as the Dimocrats, spend other peoples money or just print more, as long as the paper and ink don’t run out, no problem.
@drjohn: #10
But would you want it? Thanks for the mental image.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to go scrub out my skull with Pyrantel.
Yecch.
@Ronald J. Ward: Just like in 2010 when Dems got their asses handed to them in the HOUSE?? Oh how quickly you forget!!
I have to disagree regarding Democrats being on the ropes. Far too many of them are on the government dole these days and that percentage grows every day, ObamaCare is just one more way to hook people on some government giveaway program. The last thing any of those people will do is not vote Democrat because they run the risk of getting their freebies yanked out from under them if they do so.
I think the nation has pretty much reached the tipping point on the takers versus the makers and those numbers are only going to get worse. I’ve said it before but the only real crime in Mitt Romneys 47% percent comment is that he was being brutally honest and he hit a nerve with the left.
Conservative enclaves folks, get used to the idea because that may be the only way to temporarily escape the European Democrats of America as the bleed the host dry.
@Ronald J. Ward: Oh lookie, “Teabirches” – someone else came up with a cutesy name for conservatives. That;s wonderful way to come across as a 12 year old/
@Redteam: I’m not going to begin to argue your concept that the rich are somehow deserving of ultimate unchecked power to own and govern the U.S.A. because like, hell, all country’s do it or, or something along that line of profound stupidity.
But what I will argue is that you can’t win elections campaigning on that promise, which seems to be all today’s conservatives have to offer.
And yes Dr. John, tea party popularity is nose diving while ACA sign ups and popularity is rising.
@Common Sense: And “Oh how quickly you forget” the 06 and 08 elections. Yes, 2010 blew in a nice wave for conservatives but those political winds have changed considerably. Realistically, “Obamacare” and “Obama’s bad” is all the GOP has to run on and like I said, while you may gain a few seats in 14, Obama’s here till 16 and isn’t running for reelection, ACA is here to stay with sign ups and popularity rising, and you guys can’t field a competitive candidate.
@Ronald J. Ward:
That’s not what Redteam said, you lying teabagger.
@Ronald J. Ward: Obama wasn’t a competitive candidate either…until the powers that be pumped millions into forming a brand around his false image, one that exploited the hate already manufactured by a immature and out of touch entertainment/media network against Bush, Christianity, and anything it deemed offensive.
At this point, the dems have created the bugaboo they wanted people to fear (Bush) by promoting the demagogue Obama. He is, in reality, what Bush was portrayed as being: and narcissistic twit with bad intentions and questionable intelligence.
Your assertions are comic, childish, and hard to take seriously. It all boils down to the cult of personality, and false feeling that you have that your “side” somehow “won” in 2008 and 2012.
The country is vast. Truly educated, mature individuals have a hard time drinking the kool-aid from any political party. The pop-culture brainwashing put over on people like you has reeked havoc on a large scale. There is no real “right” or “left”, but the growing resignation of too many people bent on embracing an us vs. them mentality is really killing things for everyone. I suggest you reject this stance and grow up.
You represent just another troll on this board (calling others a troll while trolling doesn’t make them a troll, though if you really are dem sycophant, I know where you learned such a tactic (See Obama and friends) You are the troll). You add nothing to the conversation, and haven’t offered anything beyond parroting the whole “yes we did” juvenile victory dance…but you, and everyone else, is waking up to see there’s been no victory, nothing to dance about. Obama’s presidency is a failure. It’s failed in way that the media pretended Bush’s failed. Obama is, on all accounts, the embodiment of the pettiness and incompetence that the liberal elite sought to frame Bush as. Obamacare is a failure. This isn’t wishful thinking, but rather a realization brought about by data.
You have to own it now, buddy. I still contend that regular troll posters like you — divisive, trite, and utterly hateful — are either paid or volunteer thought commandos for the dem party, out there getting in people’s faces like a certain someone told them to do.
But make no mistake. You don’t change any minds here, don’t win any victories other than perhaps a deluded ego boost for yourself when you think you stuck it to someone with your weak and overrated sense of rhetorical skill.
Your talking points are hackneyed and utterly lacking in intellectual depth. Damn right the county is going to respond to mania of mass stupidity by voting out the puppet masters. And if not? An election won doesn’t make you right. Busing in the poor to vote for your candidate by exploiting their poverty, race, etc., isn’t right, nor can you claim to have “won” anything.
It merely means that a measure of integrity has been lost. That integrity is gone from the more powerful voices in the dem party. Their are good dems out there, but they might as well be of the GOP to the radical left that was permitted to take office thanks to money, John Stewart, and the promotion of hatred at the hand of mass ignorance. You claim Obama isn’t running for re-election, though he’s been running against Bush for five years. 2016 is far away. The right has a hard time raising a demagogue to follow a demagogue, and that shows me they are by far the healthier party. When one party unified under a radical banner…well, that’s never ended well…historically.
Time to read, study some history, and stop saying “everyone loves Obama, no one loves the GOP”. That may be what you want, but that’s dangerous thinking and not something a wise, thoughtful, and mature person would ever go for.
So yeah. Obamacare is great and Bush sucks and the teabaggers…yada yada.
No ones listening anymore. No one’s buying it. That’s was the point of the post above, and you’ve only reinforced it’s legitimacy.
Start engaging in real dialogue instead of treating our democracy like it’s a football game, one which you draw your identity from by desperately needing your team to win.
Pathetic.
@Ronald J. Ward: 22
I notice you were unable to name any country that is not run by the rich.
want to supply a benchmark for that claim?
That’s 2 good solid reasons, can you think of one for the Dimocrats?
@Bobachek:
It is deliberate, engineered atrophy. Obama and the far-left Democrats are creating a cascading economic disaster built on greatly expanded, unsustainable entitlements that, (unless halted,) can only result in a complete economic crash that (IMO) will make the Great Depression seem mild in comparison. Perhaps this is why they are trying so hard to shove gun control and mandatory registration of all firearms, for after the fall comes to protect their slimy treasonous hides. I propose that establishment Republicans understand this, and are operating in manner to allow a crash to happen, (while protecting the assets of themselves and their cronies,) expecting that an enraged public will finally, reject the fiscal insanity of the Fabian socialist-Democrats, and welcome their Republican form of progressive big government.
That’s my two cents anyway.
@Ditto:
The problem with thinking a marauding, scared and hungry mob can be is controlled is that eventually the mob will turn on those arrogant enough to think they had control. See tbe French Revolution.
Unless our REPUBLIC turns away from the insane socialist ideology currently eating away at our original national principles, we will fall, and sooner than anyone may currently believe. When tbe economy collapses under the weight of all the welfare spending, what will the leftists do to placate the mob of government dependents they created with their class warfare driven deficit spending? See the Bolsheviks and Maoist regimes.
@Bobachek:
I tend to agree with you. The other thing is the uncanny ability for repubs to be blind and stupid at a time when all they have to do is nothing and let the dems fall on their own swords.
@Nathan Blue: You seem to follow the same game plan from the same playbook of your fellow regulars here which is when the argument of a given thread is challenged (in this case “Democrats are in trouble and they know it”) , you simply spin it to reinventing your own argument out of thin air, claim victory to your new fabricated argument, and then dismiss your debating opponent with contempt.
I’m not being critical as I understand your arguments have no legs, no rationale, no chance to be taken seriously as they stand. The prospects of the GOP in upcoming years look grim. ACA is here to stay and becomes politically harder to take away by the day. Obama’s President until 2016. The GOP 2016 Senate seats to defend is out of proportion. The “party of no” doesn’t have a campaign strategy or a suitable agenda to present the electorate. People have soundly rejected the GOP agenda (Ryan’s budget, etc) yet they haven’t backed away from it. The Tea Party is both imploding the GOP with their infighting (Lugar, etc) while losing elections (Joe Walsh, Allen West, Todd Akin, Ken Cuccinelli, Democrats regaining control of the Virginia state Senate, the crushing of E W Jackson, the eking by of Bachmann, et al.) Tea Party Governors like Rick Scott, Tom Corbett, Paul LePage, and Rick Snyder are very vulnerable in 2014 while the 2016 looks grim as well. The GOP continues to alienate workers, women, Hispanics, minorities, and are now starting to snub Catholics with no signs of changing. And what winning candidate can you possibly field to go up against Hillary or Warren, or whoever the dems nominate? Christie’s toast. Jeb? Rubio?
I also understand that it’s rather meaningless to explain the meaning of words here because they will only mean what suits your agenda or what can be turned as either an attacking tool or to distract (i.e. Redteam refuses to accept that the Disney dog’s name was Pluto rather than Plutocrat because it gives him an “out” from the reality of the argument, creates a distraction from the argument, or perhaps “puts the ball in my court” by putting me on defense rather than offense. And this is just a minute example of many.)
But it would be interesting to know if you or your cohorts have a consistent definition of the word “troll”, the purpose of trolling, and how trolls come into play on blogs, political or otherwise.
My understanding, other than that mythical,one eyed, bridge patrolling/cave dwelling creature of fairy tale, is that trolling is the intentional disruption of the topic and the provocation of inciting emotional responses. That seems to be a consistent definition of Internet trolling.
I strongly challenge you and/or your fellow contributors here to give a coherent definition to “troll” or “trolling”. I don’t expect a clear or decisive definition as that would certainly expose your argumentative objectives. Might be best to keep talking about a dog’s name or elementary school homosexual innuendos or, or something along that line of intelligence.
It always amazes (and sickens) me to see how the Dems accuse the other side of doing that of which they themselves are most guilty.
@Ronald J. Ward:
The ACA is going to die. Slowly and painfully.
@DrJohn:
In an imaginative “feel good” world, perhaps. In the real world, it doesn’t make a great deal of sense. If I’m wrong, it would be interesting to hear your logic behind that. Funding for it is already included in the law, making defunding impossible without repealing the entire law. Repealing the entire law isn’t possible until at least Jan of 2017 as the math isn’t there for Rs to take 2/3 Senate majority to override Obama’s veto.
And the above is assuming a 2016 Republican super majority, which isn’t likely.
And another area where your statement fails the smell test in the real world is in my above argument to Nathan Blue that Governors like Rick Scott, Tom Corbett, Paul LePage, and Rick Snyder are very vulnerable in 2014. So if these govs are replaced by Dems, Medicaid expansion and an ACA friendly government will rule, just as we’re seeing in KY, etc. I mean, try running for KY Gov with a promises of completely repealing ACA. That’s a tall order today and will be near impossible in a year or 2. Where this is going to present problems is for other ACA resistant states like S.C. for Govs like Haley who have lost out on fed cash and have screw over their constituents with a clear admission of spiting Obama (remember S.C. state Rep Chris Crawford, an ER doctor supported Medicaid expansion yet voted against it with an admission that “It is good politics to oppose the black guy in the White House right now, especially for the Republican Party”.) Once again for fear you haven’t quite got it yet, Obama will be gone in 2017 and ACA will still be here.
So your logic comes into question as the Govs like Haley and others are either going to be more under the gun to embrace ACA or they’re going to be replaced with someone that is. And as I’ve previously argued, some of these vulnerable govs are already pushing the expansions to save their political hides, just as we’re seeing Mitch McConnell running $6 digit TV ads trying to imply he’s for insuring and protecting the uninsured—–not with austerity measures but rather by actually insuring.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Medicaid expansion did not require destroying the entire system.
The basic problem with health care was entitlements. Everything else was paid for. Obamacare not only doesn’t address the expansion of entitlements, it makes the situation even worse. Combined with the lack of enrollments needed to make the system financially sustainable the future is bleak and that is unquestionably part of the reason long term liberals are bailing. They want out before the palace crumbles.
@DrJohn: Destroying the entire system is obviously not only a product of your imagination but a denial of the deficit exploding disaster our health care system was previously in.
Those lack of enrollments also seem to be a product of your imagination or perhaps wishful thinking, along with that feel good sensation you must acquire with believing “The ACA is going to die. Slowly and painfully”.
Time will tell, my friend.
Ronald J. Ward
YES THE PEOPL DON’T WANT THE AUSTHERITY WHICH THEY ARE BEING IMPOSE NOW,
THEY WANT FREEDDOM FROM IT WHICH IS A MONSTER WITH MANY HEADS
BEING TREASURED BY OBAMA AND DEMOCRATS, THEY EVEN SUCCEEDED TO HAVE THE MONSTER GROW MORE HEADS LATELY,
WHICH ALL ARE TRYING TO EXTERMINATE THE AMERICANS,
AND REPLACE THEM WITH FOREIGNERS HATER OF AMERICA,
@Ronald J. Ward:
I know his name is Pluto and you keep saying he is crazy. That’s your problem, not mine.
Yes but you continue to not be able to name one country that is not a Pluto-crazy. Is that because there is none, so your ranting about America is not unique.
So that’s your understanding. Why not go to dictionary.com and enter that word and see what definition you come up with. Hint: it won’t fit your definition.
That would be you, correct? You throw them out, we assume it’s your everyday language with your boyfriend.
@DrJohn:
Yes, it has already started the process. As soon as the supreme court rules that the subsidy’s and penalties for the federal exchange states are illegal, that will kill it deader than hell.
@Ronald J. Ward:
the Power of the Purse resides in the Congress. They can fund or defund anything they want to each and every year.
Redteam
HI
IF congress have the power to defund it,
why don’t they do it now?
they know by now the people hate this law and even do not trust it’s application,
and do not trust OBAMA’words,
TED CRUZ HAS TALK ABOUT IT,
there is no way the CONGRESS DON’T KNOW,
WHAT ARE THEY WAITING FOR?
THE LEGALIZATION OF THE MILLION AND A HALF ILLEGALS
TO SIGN IN?
@ilovebeeswarzone: because both houses have to agree, the Senate belongs to the Dims.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Again, you spin. It’s not the lack of enrollees that will cause the ACA to crash and burn, it’s who is enrolling, and who is not. Most states are seeing a major spike in Medicaid enrollees, insured who do not pay one damn dime for their health insurance, and seniors who are, as statists prove, more expensive to pay out on.
“Congressman Jim Moran (D-Va.) is voicing concern that the entirety Affordable Care Act could unravel because not enough young people are signing up.
More than 40,000 Virginians signed up for health insurance on the federal exchange last month. Only 27 percent of those were young adults — the group needed to fund the new system. Moran says he doesn’t think those numbers are going to get much better.
“I’m afraid that the millennials, if you will, are less likely to sign up. I think they feel more independent, I think they feel a little more invulnerable than prior generations,” Moran says. “But I don’t think we’re going to get enough young people signing up to make this bill work as it was intended to financially.”
If Moran’s prediction is correct, the whole law could unravel. He says there just isn’t enough incentive for healthy young people to sign up for insurance.
“And, frankly, there’s some legitimacy to their concern because the government spends about $7 for the elderly for every $1 it spends on the young,” Moran says.
Moran supported covering everyone under Medicare, which would have been expensive but have avoided this problem. Now Moran is running short on solutions.
“I just don’t know how we’re going to do it frankly,” he says. “If we had a solution I’d be telling the president right now.”
http://wamu.org/news/14/01/24/moran_not_enough_millenials_using_health_care_exchange
You see, millennials, who would have flocked to “catastrophic only” health insurance understand that when their biggest normal health costs entail a simple one year physical exam or the occasional doctor’s office visit for a prescription to treat the flu or occasional sinus infection, they are better off simply paying the fine that will be levied against them in lieu of a $2,000+/year insurance premiums.
The whole ACA was designed for the young to support the costs of the aged. But, as Jim Moran stated, it is not working out that way. Virginia is not an oddity in that respect, but the norm. That is why 39 Democrats voted in November for the “If You Like Your Insurance, You can Keep Your Insurance” bill. That is why Nancy Pelosi refused to accept for the disaster the ACA has been when she appeared on the Jon Stewart Show.
When the number of people who have actually lost their health insurance, that they were satisfied with, exceeds the number of those uninsured that now have insurance, the program is failing. When the young are opting out, refusing to support those older patients with their premiums, the program is failing. When states are taking on more Medicaid debt than they can sustain in the future, the program is failing. When those who are not eligible for subsidies are seeing their premiums rise by 25-75%, the program is falling. When health insurance companies are pulling out of state exchanges because they can’t even break even on the program, the program is failing.
In the unicorn world you live in, the world of falsehoods and lies, you may think that all the fall out from the ACA is a success story. It just proves how delusional leftist are.
@retire05:
seniors should be on medicare.
And there is only a fine, if you don’t buy, in the states that established a state exchange (mostly Dim states)
and you have to be on a state exchange to get a subsidy. (Assuming the law is followed, of course)
@Redteam: Yes, Congress has the power of the purse and utilized that power by embedding what’s known as “mandatory funding” within the ACA law which means such funding has already been legislated and the only way to change that is to repeal the entire law.
Did you have your head in the sand during the shutdown?
The only option they may have is to obstruct other legislation in hopes to sidestep those mandates which as we learned during the last government shutdown, isn’t the smartest thing for them to do.
They can’t defund unless they repeal. They can’t repeal because they don’t have the seats. They can’t get the seats because they want repeal. They can’t back off of repeal because it will upset their corporate donors. So what’s a good obstructionist wanting to win elections while chanting repeal to do?
Stick with arguing dogs. At least you can masquerade your abject ignorance on that subject as satire.
@Ronald J. Ward:Thanks for making it clear that you don’t know how the federal government works. Yes, madatory funding is included, but if the money is not appropriated then none can be spent. That’s how they stopped the Viet Nam war.
LOL. When no money is available, it can’t be spent. Even Social Security payments can be withheld unless the Congress appropriates the money, And that is ‘mandatory’ funding.
I thought you wanted me to stop talking about Walt’s dog.
When are you gonna tell us all which country in the world is not a Pluto-crazy? I think you bit off more than you can chew.
@Ronald J. Ward:
How little you seem to know about the government. One Congress cannot bind future Congresses. If future Congresses want to “defund” Obamacare, they simply eliminate any funding for subsidies, state exchanges, et al. Not even list those expenditures. Unless those expenditures are listed in the annual budgets, there is no money to facilitate the execution of those programs.
Did you have your head in the sand during
the shutdowncivics class?Not true. If Congress doesn’t fund the programs involved, there is no way for those programs to get the money to operate. And the funding must be listed in the annual budgets.
Stick with arguing
dogsabout teabaggers. At least you can masquerade yourabject ignoranceexpertise and experience on that subject as satire.AND FAILING BECAUSE OBAMA MADE A LOT OF SPEECHS AND CAMPAIGNS,
but never ask the young to be the payers of their bill,
he should have had the decency to talk to those youngs, but he underestimate the intelligence of those youngs who saw it and said no not for us, and the next years be caught with more increase of paying,
and be sucked out of their money,which they need to pay for their own study,
BUT he HAD THAT BILL VOTED BY ONLY DEMOCRATS IN THE DARK OF THE EVENING
WHILE NO REPUBLICANS WHERE THERE, LIKE A BUNCH OF WHEREWOLVES WAITING
FOR NIGHT TO DO THEIR BLOOD SUCKING MEAL,
THAT”S WHY YOU WONT GET THE YOUNG IN THERE, THEY HATE WHEREWOLFS,
WHO ONLY TARGET THEM TO PAY FOR THEIR LAWS, they also are stuck with the 7trillion debt
the PELOSI BILL WHICH YOU HAVE TO PASS THE BILL BEFORE YOU SEE IT,
IS THAT EVER BEEN DONE BEFORE IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES?????
@Redteam: @retire05: I might suggest you visit the Congressional Research Service on Mandatory Funding.
Congress appropriates 3 types of funding; discretionary spending, mandatory spending, and net interest.
Net interest doesn’t pertain to this argument as it deals strictly with the debt. Discretionary spending isn’t specified by an enacted law meaning it’s subject to the discretion of the Congressional whim. Mandatory spending is a different animal as it’s mandated funding for existing programs. The only way ACA can be defunded is by passing a law in both chambers, signed into law by the President, or over riding a veto by 2/3rd of the House.
I can understand the ignorance of a given troll as simply that, just as a common misspelling or such. However, when those same blatant errors are made by numerous trolls, it does raise red flags.
So doc how do you feel about your 2012 POTUS predictions?
@Ronald J. Ward:
Ron, I quoted a democrat agreeing with me and I linked it for you. Feel free to support your assertions.