Skip to main content

View Diary: Looks Like Durbin Backing Chained CPI (187 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Thanks to everyone who supported (11+ / 0-)

    ACA and the privatization of healthcare. You helped open the door for this snake (Obama) to privatize the rest of the Social Safety Net.

    "It depends what the meaning of 'is', is"
    Platform of the Neo-Democratic Party
    Speaking out of one side of their mouth for the little guy, their nominal constituency, and the other for the plutocracy, their real constituency.

    by Sanctimonious on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 10:25:43 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Pretty deranged. The PPACA does not privatize HCR (0+ / 0-)

      Not even the Tea Party makes such a ludicrous claim.

      Listen, I understand that you're upset over Chained CPI, but no one will take you seriously if you spout off nonsense about HCR.

      I repeatedly claimed that Obama would never propose cuts to social security. I was wrong. Then again, I also claimed, repeatedly, that Rick Perry would win the 2012 Election, and that The Supreme Court would overturn Health Care Reform.

      by NoFortunateSon on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 01:30:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Mandatory payments to private insurance companies (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lysias, 3goldens, madgranny, JesseCW, cslewis

        is not privatization?? No public option or public plan of any kind per the wishes if the hospital and insurance lobbyists is not privatization?

        "It depends what the meaning of 'is', is"
        Platform of the Neo-Democratic Party
        Speaking out of one side of their mouth for the little guy, their nominal constituency, and the other for the plutocracy, their real constituency.

        by Sanctimonious on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 02:52:05 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  pri·vat·iz·a·tion (n) (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tporky

          1. The transfer of ownership of property or businesses from a government to a privately owned entity.

          2. The transition from a publicly traded and owned company to a company which is privately owned and no longer trades publicly on a stock exchange. When a publicly traded company becomes private, investors can no longer purchase a stake in that company.

          You can thank FDR for our private insurance industry. But there is nothing about the PPACA that privatizes. I encourage you to do some more reading on the matter. You'd feel a lot better if you understood HCR.

           

          I repeatedly claimed that Obama would never propose cuts to social security. I was wrong. Then again, I also claimed, repeatedly, that Rick Perry would win the 2012 Election, and that The Supreme Court would overturn Health Care Reform.

          by NoFortunateSon on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 04:09:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  If it w-a-l-k-s like a pri-va-ti-zed d-u-c-k (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            3goldens, NoMoreLies, cslewis

            and quacks like a privatized duck...

            What is ObamaCare?
            by PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

            ...
            Because a single-payer system eliminates the profits that drive up the costs, Wall Street, Insurance companies, and “free market economists” hate a “socialized” medical care system. They prefer a socialized “private” health care system in which public monies flow into private insurance companies.
            To make the costs as high as possible, conservatives and the private insurance companies devised ObamaCare. The bill was written by conservative think tanks and the private insurance companies. What the “socialistic” ObamaCare bill does is to take income taxes paid by citizens and use the taxes to subsidize the private medical premiums charges by private health care providers in order to provide “private” health care to US citizens who cannot afford it.

            The extremely high costs of ObamaCare is not “socialistic medicine.” ObamaCare is high-cost privatized medicine that guarantees billions of dollars in profits to private insurance companies.

            It remains to be seen whether such a ridiculous health care scheme, nowhere extant on earth except in Romney’s Massachusetts, will provide health care or just private profits.

            It is a privatized duck...or, more correctly, an albatross around the neck of the American people. Keep quibbling and nitpicking away though, you clearly aren't interested in the truth. Dude.

            "It depends what the meaning of 'is', is"
            Platform of the Neo-Democratic Party
            Speaking out of one side of their mouth for the little guy, their nominal constituency, and the other for the plutocracy, their real constituency.

            by Sanctimonious on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 04:45:34 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  You're citing the co-founder of Reganomics? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              tporky

              Dude, seriously? What's next, a link to the National Review? Remind me: are you for or against Chained-CPI?

              I repeatedly claimed that Obama would never propose cuts to social security. I was wrong. Then again, I also claimed, repeatedly, that Rick Perry would win the 2012 Election, and that The Supreme Court would overturn Health Care Reform.

              by NoFortunateSon on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 04:59:25 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yes, it's shocking that Obama has moved (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                madgranny, NoMoreLies, greenbell

                the Democratic Party so far too the right that even a former Reagan cabinet member is shocked.

                Keep being a good Obama lieutenant and keep spreading the lies, misinformation, and personal attacks and insinuations though  - tragically, that's all you guys have left. Yours is the pathetic and dishonest voice of the pathetic and dishonest Obama administration.

                "It depends what the meaning of 'is', is"
                Platform of the Neo-Democratic Party
                Speaking out of one side of their mouth for the little guy, their nominal constituency, and the other for the plutocracy, their real constituency.

                by Sanctimonious on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 05:14:48 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  OFA pays me a lot to do it. (0+ / 0-)

                  It's hard work maintaining all these sock puppets here.

                  Seriously, you totally stepped in it on that one. You didn't even know you we're citing the founder of Reganomics to try and criticize HCR from the right!

                  What's next? Quotes from Grover Norquist?

                  Try to educate yourself on HCR, and you can be taken seriously.

                  I repeatedly claimed that Obama would never propose cuts to social security. I was wrong. Then again, I also claimed, repeatedly, that Rick Perry would win the 2012 Election, and that The Supreme Court would overturn Health Care Reform.

                  by NoFortunateSon on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 07:14:42 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  You know what Ad-Hominem is, don't you? (0+ / 0-)

                You just completely ignored the argument presented.

                You can't Privatize something that was never Public to begin with - you're right about that.

                That doesn't change the fact that the PPACA is compulsory purchase of private products, and that every argument made to advance it also supports privatizing Social Security.

                dEar Ellois: U send Fud down holez, we no eaTz u. That iz deAl. No forget. MooRlockz Haz 2 eats. Stoopid Elloiz.

                by JesseCW on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 07:27:07 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  The logical failure in connecting PPACA and SS (0+ / 0-)

                  Pretending HCR isn't HCR is the linchpin of Obama Derangement Syndrome, as it completely undercuts the entire argument many, such as the OP, use to justify a variety of outlandish theories about the President.

                  When confronted with the absurdities of these arguments, this leads to various pretzel logic, such that the definition of privatization to now include already private industries(!)

                  I've heard the post hoc ergo propter hoc logical fallacy that passing HCR would allow privatization of SS.

                  The basis for this fallacy is that because the Supreme Court upheld the PPACA, it also means that they would uphold a challenge to privatizing SS. Newsflash: they would for both.

                  Privatization of SS was already attempted once. It failed. It never made it to the Supreme Court. So we can never know for certain.

                  But as many of the front page diarists and legal scholars repeatedly demonstrated, the legal basis for the PPACA was sound from New Deal jurisprudence (Wickard v Fillburn, et al.). I think it is safe to assume the Roberts Court would have ruled privatizing SS, had Republicans succeeded in 2005, would have been Constitutional on the same grounds. Now some on the Roberts Court went through great pains to try and argue against the PPACA, but Roberts upheld it by voting with the four liberal justices.

                  There are plenty of reasons to be angry at Obama. Blame New Deal jurisprudence for making it constitutional to tax you for not buying a private product. But you'll have to find another reason besides HCR though.

                  I repeatedly claimed that Obama would never propose cuts to social security. I was wrong. Then again, I also claimed, repeatedly, that Rick Perry would win the 2012 Election, and that The Supreme Court would overturn Health Care Reform.

                  by NoFortunateSon on Sun Apr 14, 2013 at 08:38:37 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site