ObamaCare

Democrats are turning on it:

The about-face of these Democrats is a phenomenon worth pausing over. Many formerly supportive constituencies have grown wary of Obamacare in recent weeks as we’ve learned more about the effects it will have on the health care system. But these Senators’ 180-degree turns are something more severe.

The fate of the Democratic party in America over the next decade is tied to Obama’s healthcare reform. If it is seen to be a success, America could trend Democratic for the foreseeable future. If it fails, liberalism as we’ve known it will take a massive hit. But, so far, support for Obamacare has been waning instead of waxing. Even a recent piece by Talking Points Memo that placed the blame for Obamacare’s potential failure on Republicans noted that the law’s unpopularity with the public at large was the number one threat to its success. Democrats are getting nervous and consequently are trying to put some distance between themselves and the ACA.

Well, Queen Nancy told us we had to pass the bill to find out what was in it.

43 thoughts on “ObamaCare

  1. BlueMoon

    Here’s an interesting part from the full Kaiser Health News story:

    “Finally, Wyden pressed Cohen to help find ways to resolve a glitch in the law which may result in the denial of federal assistance to millions of Americans of modest means who could be priced out of family health coverage at work. He referred to the Internal Revenue Service ruling last month that workers cannot get federal tax credits to help them purchase coverage in health insurance marketplaces, unless the cost of the individual’s coverage through their workplace exceeds 9.5 percent of the worker’s household income. The ruling ignores the fact that the cost of family coverage would be much higher.

    “We’ve got millions of people – working-class, middle-class people – who are going to be pushed into a regulatory health coverage no man’s land,” Wyden said. “They are unable to afford the family coverage through their employer and ineligible for the subsidy that could be used by dependents on the exchange.”

    Cohen said he would respond to Wyden in writing next month with ideas about how states could help such workers.”

    I think this means Kathleen, Duchess of HHS, is going to be hard at work writing regulations and draft Executive Orders that mitigate the adverse effects the Senate Democrats are worried about. Those regulations and Executive Orders will have to violate the PPACA as currently written, of course, but the court challenges are likely to extend past the 2014 mid-terms. Or, the Democrats will propose changes to the PPACA to fix the problems Queen Nancy told us to wait and find for ourselves, then blame the Republicans for not voting for the changes (and I believe the Republicans in the House should refuse to tweak the PPACA). What a mess, as expected. But I’m sure the Democrats will find a way to convince at least 55% of the citizens that the Republicans are to blame for any and all negative outcomes of the PPACA. Unfortunately.

    1. Jim

      So there are tweaks that everyone agrees would improve the PPACA, and Republicans are blocking those improvements, but Republicans don’t deserve any blame?

      1. Karl Hallowell

        One such “tweak” is to reverse the bill and start over. We need to keep in mind that even a virtuous Congress would have great difficulty fixing this law just due to the large number of possible ways of fixing the bill.

      2. newrouter

        why exactly should the gop, who had no part in passing this steaming pile of crap, help the proggtards?

      3. Jardinero1

        Why should republicans fix something they were opposed to? If the democrats don’t like the act they passed, they can change it.

        1. Jim

          Because they’re in office to serve the people. Are you proposing the adopt a Leninist “the worse, the better” program of heightening the contradictions?

          And no, the Democrats can’t change it, not without Boehner’s permission and a few GOP votes.

          1. Leland

            Jim, you act like there’s not another option. Instead of tweaking a bad law; why not just repeal it? Shouldn’t the Democrats take the blame for passing a bad law without reading it? Shouldn’t they get the blame for not repealing a bad law they passed?

            Lot’s of better options than blaming the GOP for not wanting to support higher taxes for death panels.

          2. BlueMoon

            So, Jim, were the Democratic Senators and Representatives and President serving the people when they rammed the PPACA through when polls showed more of the people were against the PPACA than were for it?

          3. Jim

            The Dems were serving the people by passing a law that they thought was good for the country. The Republicans are not serving the people by blocking tweaks to that law that they think would be good for the country.

      4. Paul Milenkovic

        “But I’m sure the Democrats will find a way to convince at least 55% of the citizens that the Republicans are to blame for any and all negative outcomes of the PPACA.”

        Blue Moon: Are you a prophet?

      5. Chris L

        The law is basically a sh*t sandwich that the guys who made it want the guys who warned against making to help in making it more edible. The thing is, no matter how much frosting you try to put on it, it stills tastes like sh*t. Knowingly trying to help get the American people to eat this sandwich would be immoral.

        1. Jim

          Knowingly trying to help get the American people to eat this sandwich would be immoral.

          No, it’s their sworn duty. The law is the law. To use your metaphor, the sandwich is going to be eaten, one way or another. The thing that’s immoral is obstructing any effort to improve that sandwich out of political spite.

          1. a reader

            No, it’s not the GOP’s sworn duty to shore-up Obozocare. You’re just making shit up on the spot as usual.

          2. Gregg

            Jim writes:

            “No, it’s their sworn duty. The law is the law. ”

            Just like Reid;s sworn duty is to pass a budget every year…..

            And Obama’s sworn duty to follow the immigration LAW as passed by Congress….

            …or himself submit a budget by a certain date…..

            We would love it if the Lib-Dems followed the law they swore to follow.

          3. Chris L

            No Jim, it is not their duty to vote for something they don’t believe in. The law is bad on a fundamental level.

          4. Jim

            it is not their duty to vote for something they don’t believe in

            No one is saying that. I’m saying that it’s their duty to vote for things that they think will help the country. For them to block bills that they think will improve Obamacare, out of spite or a wish for Obamacare to perform as badly as possible, is an abdication of that duty.

          5. a reader

            I’m saying that it’s their duty to vote for things that they think will help the country.

            Clearly they don’t think it’ll improve the country.

            So glad we could clear this up for you.

      6. George Turner

        Already, 21 states that are setting up Obamacare health care exchanges are not allowing insurers in their states to cover abortions. Unlike Pelosi, they read the law and it says they can do that. ^_^

      7. BlueMoon

        Everyone agrees? Where’s your data? I don’t recall getting a call or letter from you asking my opinion on this one.

      8. Gregg

        “So there are tweaks that everyone agrees would improve the PPACA,”

        Ah one of the classic Obama techniques:

        *EVERYONE* agrees…yeah right. We reject your premise.

    2. a reader

      Well said, BlueMoon. Whatever their faults, we must be thankful to every Republican who opposed the federal take-over of private healthcare to whatever extent they could, in whatever capacity was available to them. Let us not take for granted that the worst version, originating in the House, with its public “option” was defeated. Let’s not forget the partial victory in the Scotus, either, nor forget there’s still another battle coming-up with the Oklahoma lawsuit, a victory which would effectively negate Obamacare in half the states.

      This war is not over, and it will not be won with a single, easy victory.

  2. Robin Goodfellow

    Just put together a several thousand page bill that repeals it and tell congress that they have to pass it to find out what’s in it.

  3. a reader

    Also, amazing double-standard at play: Democrats are never expected to pitch-in and help the GOP push its agenda…

    1. Jim

      You must be joking. Name a major Bush administration agenda item that passed without any Democratic support.

      1. a reader

        Name one Bush agenda item which ran contrary to the Democratic party line that the mainstream media demanded that the Democrats help pass.

      2. Ed Minchau

        Indeed, Jim. There may be a glimmer of a clue there for you in your own words. CLUE Bush got bipartisan support CLUE Obamacare got no Republican support at all CLUE CLUE CLUE.

        1. a reader

          Bush was certainly no conservative, but his only remarkably conservative agenda item, the partial privitization of SS, was stopped dead cold by the Democrats.

          Again, double standard.

          1. Jim

            So Bush proposed dismantling the Democratic party’s proudest achievement, and the Democrats had the nerve to oppose him? What a shock!

            Meanwhile, Democrats voted for his tax cuts, his Medicare plan, his education policy, his wars, etc.

          2. a reader

            Meanwhile, Democrats voted for his tax cuts, his Medicare plan, his education policy, his wars, etc.

            Which of those did the MSM demand that Democrats support? I remember quite the opposite demand.

        2. Jim

          CLUE Bush got bipartisan support CLUE Obamacare got no Republican support at all CLUE CLUE CLUE

          Exactly. Some Democrats felt free to support Bush initiatives. Virtually no Republicans feel the same freedom to support Obama priorities (and ones who did were quickly defeated in primaries). The GOP made unified opposition to Obama their #1 priority, as Mitch McConnell explained:

          It was absolutely critical that everybody be together because if the proponents of the bill were able to say it was bipartisan, it tended to convey to the public that this is O.K., they must have figured it out…

          They thought that unified opposition to things like Obamacare would make those proposals more controversial and less popular, and it did. They thought that they could keep Obama from accomplishing much, and make anything that he did accomplish so unpopular, that he’d lose re-election. They failed in that, and now the question is whether they will stick to obstruction, or find some other way to position themselves.

          1. Chris L

            They don’t believe the law is salvageable. Putting frosting on a sh*t sandwich doesn’t mean you should feed it to your kids. Telling the kid it’s OK with the frosting is wrong.

  4. ken anthony

    I have to thank Jim. He puts a chill up my spine because many others agree with him. While others do not think at all, but just fall in line. (Breibart used to highlight that by asking them to explain what they were protesting and they could not.)

    We have a republic, if we can keep it. We’ve already given it up with regard to senators and weakening of the tenth amendment. We’ve already given it up with regard to advise and consent. How long (or have we already past that point with only gasps here and there) before we haven’t kept it?

    1. Gregg

      “(Breibart used to highlight that by asking them to explain what they were protesting and they could not.)”

      Asking them to explain themselves is usually pretty devastating to their position because they haven’t given it 5 seconds thought. That’s what happens when you go by feeling rather than logic.

      They most certainly haven’t examined their premises…Like our beloved Jim here:

      he’s hates businessmen and thinks them evil; he’s willing to place his health, his liberty and his life in the hands of government hacks….

      and he clearly has not stopped to ponder why he trusts a political hack over a businessman, nor whether or not there’s the slightest bit of difference between them.

      The contrast is amazing…the lefties abhor faith yet live on faith. They claim to be lovers of science and reason yet utilize neither.

Comments are closed.