I agree with you. Doesn't make the way the ACA was passed any better. He did it first! Is a poor excuse.
Affordable Care?
- Thread starter babe
- Start date
I agree with you. Doesn't make the way the ACA was passed any better. He did it first! Is a poor excuse.
Yes specific points of the ACA have very positive, increasingly so over time, poll numbers.
candrew
Well-Known Member
Sorry I was being facetious. There is/was plenty of information regarding the ACA since its earliest incarnations.
This site has been up for 3 years: https://www.dol.gov/ebsa/healthreform/
Any ignorance was either self imposed or caused by mis-information from the people against it (e.g. death panels)
I am talking about the lawmakers that passed, openingly admiting, that they had not read the bill. Voting on a bill at all when you do not know what is in it is idiotic at best. Absolutely pathetic.
SaltyDawg
Well-Known Member
Did that really happen or was that just part of the republican disinformation campaign?
There are several members of congress, both sides, that admitted to not reading the bill. Nancy Pelosi herself said that the bill needed to be passed to know what is in it.
So that complaint of mine is not at Dems or Repubs but at their (general term) incompetency and failure to know what they are even voting on.
SaltyDawg
Well-Known Member
If anyone voted on it without knowing what it was, that is inexcusable.
That's not what Pelosi meant though. She was saying that after the bill was passed, and everyone saw its effects, they'd be surprised everyone made such a big fuss to try to stop it. She wasn't saying that nobody understood anything about it. She was saying it's a good thing, and the republican disinformation campaign would be defeated with time.
candrew
Well-Known Member
I'm not inclined to defend Pelosi - but I think it's quite clear when you read the full text of the quote that she wasn't implying that she didn't read the bill.
LOL - call me a nitpicker; but I'm always skeptical of sound bytes when they cut the author off in the middle of the frickin sentence.
Ironically, she was addressing the "fog of controversy" surrounding the bill and her comment was used to just add more misinformation to the issue.
Her point is still idiotic. Pass it to know? Hell no. Tell me what's in it now.
Sorry did not mean to imply that was Pelosi going on record as not reading the bill. Just pointing out that it is idiotic what she said. When I say members on record saying they didn't read it. They say the didn't read it.
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
Forcible government plunder of the citizenry on the pretext of affordable care ain't capitalism. It is what I refer to as Libtardism. The Libtards need government force behind their destructive schemes.
SaltyDawg
Well-Known Member
Again, she wasn't saying we had to pass it to know what's in it. She was saying that all the crap the republicans were saying about it would be proven wrong with time. The republican disinformation campaign took her quote out of context, as candrew pointed out.
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
You have to be a dedicated jackass to claim the troll that is StuPelosity didn't say exactly what she said, and adding the "fog of controversy" made no difference to her level of stupidity, it just revealed her desperation to silence the opposition.
StuPelosity's real meaning.We have to pass the bill before the Republicans tell you what is in it. Once it is passed, your objections to it's content, "the fog of controversy" no longer matter. Neener neener!
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
He said very little about healthcare. He talked more about how dangerous political correctness was.
His idea about creating healthcare accounts for all citizens at birth is the best way to do it if government is involved and their true motive is to provide health care for everyone, but it ain't the government's role to be involved in healthcare so it is moot.
SaltyDawg
Well-Known Member
So are you saying that she had no idea what was in the bill, and it's just dumb luck that as more time passes and people learn more about it, they realize the republicans were full of crap and they actually like the things the bill does?
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
Destructive liberal policies are always most popular right before they are fully implemented and the consequences are realized.
SaltyDawg
Well-Known Member
Examples please. Medicare? Social Security? They're pretty popular with most people, and they were implemented many years ago.
Being popular is one thing, especially in a society with decades of indoctrination. . . .
Being free to direct the use of your own wages, and make choices that affect your own health, is. . . . apparently. . . . sometthing else.
Drones and massive monitoring of your movements, opinions, and sentiments are one thing. . . .
Giving government-sanctioned bureaucracies the power to pull the plug on any care essential to life is hardly "freedom" or respect for people's "right to life" or "pursuit of happiness".
The ACA was "on the table" for review, alterations, input for decades before it was passed in the dead of night while politicians argued it was "revenue neutral" and therefore not a tax, and would eventually make healthcare more affordable and available because it would make government overseers powerful enough to make all the decisions. . . . .
The major players in healthcare all had their seat at the table, and made sure they would prosper. Those who won't prosper or get the care are us.
And both are shinning examples of why government needs to stay as out of peoples lives as possible.