Thursday, December 10, 2009

Obamacare = Deathcare For Old, Short & Fat People (Video)

29 comments:

Woodsterman (Odie) said...

Kind of says it all doesn't it. ZERO and the boys are coming at us from all directions. OH, the irony here is they're doing with our money ...

The Malcontent said...

Obama didn't "inherit " anything. He ,with his arrogant attitude, make promises of CHANGE !!!CHANGE!!! CHANGE!!!


Now that he is not able to wave his magic wand and fix everything now BLAME!!! BLAME!!! BLAME!!!

Liberty said...

Calling it ObamaCare is a misnomer. The current plans on the table are not his plan. Reading his website and his book back during the campaign, you get the idea that he wants to guarantee coverage only to children; adults...well, they're on their own.

I think that at this point, he's going along with this plan merely to get something done about our problem- which is a problem, BTW. I do not agree with the Congress' way of fixing that problem, but I do appreciate the fact that they're trying to do something.

Calling the current plans 'ObamaCare' is even more silly in light of the fact that he, contrary to his usual way, has really taken a back seat on this issue. He hasn't really spoken out about this issue at all- his silence is rather strange, to say the least.

Other than that- I'd have to say that denying coverage to people on the basis of height...is pretty dumb, and that doesn't sound plausible to me. And at this point, I doubt they'll be able to deny coverage to old people. They haven't gone completely Nazi yet.

WomanHonorThyself said...

and the lefties still defend this tool!!!!

Teresa said...

Odie,
Yep. Times are crazy now.

Teresa said...

The Malcontent,
I don't think that Obama knows what the term responsibility means.

Teresa said...

Liberty,
It is not a misnomer at all. Obama has been the driving force behind health care reform known now as Obamacare. With a quick web search I found that he has averaged at least one speech per month(its probably many more) promoting his so-called health care reform. He is the one that is willing to accept anything called "health care reform" regardless of whether it harms or helps us now and in the future. Just because it isn't the exact version that he expressly desired doesn't not make it Obamacare unless he specifically makes some statement for senators and representatives to follow his command on the issue. And, he hasn't done that. Health care reform is his "baby" so to speak so that is why it is proper for it to be called Obamacare.

Liberty said...

Actually teresa, a lot of people are very upset with him because he hasn't been active enough in promoting/blasting the plan. (It depends on what side of the aisle you're on.)

This is not his plan. Yes, he wants healthcare reform, and that is the lone reason he's going along with this, albeit half-heartedly.

He hasn't been defending his own rhetoric on the issue, which shows me he is half-hearted at best about it. He has also largely kept mum about it until someone brings it up to him in a press conference, and then he gives a quick, by-rote answer. Once a month or so, he has to do a speech because of public opinion.

This is not his plan. He is merely going along with it because it is something. I think this plan would more aptly be called Congresscare.

Teresa said...

Liberty,
If Obama wasn't behind the Dems version of health care reform than he could say stop "your" version to the Senate and stop your version to the the House, but he hasn't done that. He is behind any health care reform that gets passed because regardless of what is in it, he is for so called health care reform. That is why Obamacare fits just perfectly as a name for the Dems so-called health care reform. There has been many speeches where he has promoted health care reform. And, whether he has promoted it as much as Dems or other people have liked does not negate the fact he is for any type of health care reform that the Dems pass. If he didn't back any of the Dems health reform plans then he wouldn't be for health care reform, or Obamacare, but he hasn't ever said that he is against any of their proposals. This is his "baby" so to speak, so this is Obamacare.

Liberty said...

No, he really can't say 'stop'. There are too many moderate Democrats behind this plan for him to simply say stop- he would lose even more support with both the Congress and everyday Americans.

At this point, he's all about political expediency. Right now, he needs to get something done about healthcare before he breaks yet another promise, making the Dems even more fed up with him.

He can't say he's against it, or he'll lose patronage.

Teresa said...

If Obama had true moral conviction and really wanted to help people in a meaninful fashion instead of just being happy with any piece of legislation that has the health care reform name on it, he would go through the bill and tell Harry Reid what exactly he wants in the bill. But, since he hasn't got the gumption to, then he will accept any type of health care reform since he has promoted health care reform even before he became President . The piece of legislation does not have to be perfect, or even adequate for that matter, for Obama to be behind the health care reform legislation. Obamacare fits since he is behind the Dems version of health care reform no matter what it is. Actually, moderate Dems are the ones he is losing now, so him stepping up to the plate and helping senators distinguish what should and shouldn't be in the bill may actually help him out in passing a piece of legislation.

Liberty said...

I don't think, Teresa, you fully understand how politics works nowadays. It is not about morality. It is not about people telling others what to do. It is about political expediency, and getting reelected. Those are the only two things that matter. And this healthcare 'reform' is all that that is for Obama.

He must get a plan, any plan, through NOW. He must, or his supporters will start to get really fed up with him, and there goes his reelection in 2012.

He can't tell Harry Reid what to do at this point. The moderate Dems and even the Republicans are too much of a force behind this for him to dictate to them what to do. The very fact that moderate Dems are turning away from him is the very reason he can't be too strong-armed with them. Once again, I don't think you understand how the Game is played.

At this point, he wants to get this through. Fast. So that he can then concentrate on trying to defuse the war situation.

Teresa said...

Liberty,
Yes, I do understand how politics works today. You have just outlined some of the reasons why politics within Washington today is so very sad, and very sickning. Politics in Washington needs to go back to its roots and the princples according to the Founding Fathers. The Founding Fathers believed in morality and looking out for the people, unlike most politicians today. Politics should not just be about passing any piece of garbage legislation so Obama can claim victory for his side. This and all politics should actually be about helping the American people instead of the politicians being selfish bastages.

Liberty said...

Sorry, but that's not how it is now. I think there has always been an element of 'dirty politics'- it just reigns now, as it has at other times.

Obama is not playing by the Founders' rules, I assure you. That was my point. He is supporting this plan for the sake of money and votes. Period.

Teresa said...

Liberty,
Are you okay with how corrupt our politicians are today? Because I am not okay with it.

Just because politics isn't conducted properly doesn't mean that we cannot return civility and honor to politics. That is what I was referring to. The status quo of politics today must change.

Liberty said...

No, I am not okay with corruption; but they are. You were talking as if they were not. Sorry, but the way it is done nowadays, corruption is the norm. Get over it. Pipe dreams of politicians actually growing up are just that; pipe dreams.

Yes, I would like to see a return to integrity and honesty in politics, but as it stands right now that is not what we have. Right now we have a bunch of corrupt men in Congress, both Republican and Democrat, we have a corrupt man in the White House, and to all intents and purposes, we have quite a corrupt government.

Simply trying to say that Obama's move is not based on political expediency will not change the political climate in Washington, or at home.

Teresa said...

Liberty,
I don't understand how you could have possibly gotten that I don't believe that Washington is corrupt out of any of my statements. They are, and I will be one of the first people to admit it. That doesn't mean that the citizens can't start holding our politicians accountable now. And, that is what the Tea Party movement is all about. The government needs to return to the principles that our Founding Fathers set forth such as: less spending and government waste, integrity, honesty, and morality. We as citizens can help to make sure that that happens.

By you saying corruption is the norm and get over it displays to me that you are okay with corruption and okay with being complacent about holding our politicians accountable for their actions. That doesn't show me that you really care about changing the status quo. It shows me that by doing nothing you are in effect alright with the corruption in Washington.

Liberty said...

I guess my main question is- how in the world did you change topics like that? We were discussing the so-called 'Obamacare' and whether it really is Obamacare, and somehow now we're talking about political ethics. Wha-?

I am not OK with corruption. But...I don't see how that's relevant in this discussion. We were discussing Obamacare, and whether it really is Obamacare- not whether Obama is corrupt or not.

My point is that this current plan is not 'Obamacare'. He is merely going along with it because of political expediency. He must get a plan through- any plan- or he will lose support. Lots of it. Dems are already upset with him because he hasn't said a word about DOMA (one of his campaign promises, and one I can get behind), and because of the wars. They don't need more. And his delaying a healthcare plan will give them the ultimate ammunition.

Teresa said...

Liberty,
Ethics is related to the issue of Obamacare. You disagree about the health reform bill being called Obamacare, but that is what conservatives are referring to Obama's and the Dems version of health care reform. It makes sense since Obama is supporting the Dems plan. If he wasn't supprting the Dems plan than we would not refer to it as Obamacare.

Liberty said...

But calling it Obamacare is a misnomer- a bad one. It makes you sound ignorant, and like you don't understand what's going on. Obama is supporting this bill, yes. But he is far from the biggest proponent of it. And I have explained that he is merely going along with it for political expediency.

Obamacare is not accurate. Stop trying to blame everything on Obama. It gets monotonous.

Teresa said...

Liberty,
Obamacare is NOT a misnomer. What is ignorant is you not attributing the fact that obama wants so-called health care reform and is in favor of the Dems version. This is his " baby" so to speak as I have stated several times. For you to think that he isn't a major proponent of the Dems health care plans is ignorant. I am not blaming everything on Obama. And, for you to say that is flat out wrong. I disagree with him on about 98% of issues so of course I am going to disagree and be critical of him.

Liberty said...

Yes, he is in loose favor of this version of healthcare. But it is not his plan, so it is inaccurate to call it Obamacare.

We can be honest and accurate without forgiving his real transgressions. We don't need to be innacurate and make things up to disagree with him.

I have read Obama's books. I read his campaign website. All of it. This is not 'his' plan. His plan is much less comprehensive, and would probably end up costing a lot less.

But at this point, he must get some sort of plan through. Soon. Or he will lose a lot of support.

Teresa said...

Liberty,
You can choose to believe what the MSM feeds you but I am not making anything up. I disagree with Obamacare. Yes, it is right to call it Obamacare because he is for the Dems health care reform legislation. Just because it wasn't Obama's original plan does not mean he isn't behind it and backing the plan today. He may be accepting some revisions to his original plan but as long as he backs the basic plans that the Dems are proposing calling it Obamacare is acceptable. I don't need to make anything up to disagree with him on. I already disagree with him on about 98% of issues.

You call health care reform what you like but I and many others are going to keep on referring to it as Obamacare.

Liberty said...

Well, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

And FTR, I don't pay much attention to the MSM. I do read them, yes, but I disagree strongly with most reporters.

Maybe you should lay off the Fox News.

I still think calling it Obamacare is innaccurate. I am interested in accuracy, not political games.

Teresa said...

Liberty,
That sounds good. We'll agree to disagree.

Can't lay off listening to the truth, or real news. Fox news is the only channel, for the most part, that asks the hard-hitting questions. I do listen to other news channels sometimes. Jon Stewart has even been asking more tough questions than the MSM. I mostly read articles online.

Liberty said...

I find that Fox News commentators often only ask questions that would give them information that isn't inconvenient for them. And some of the hosts- like O'Reilly or Hannity, or even Beck- I find alarmist and annoying, frankly. They don't know how to debate and I lose all respect for someone who can't debate. :P

I like Jon Stewart though. I think he's still hung up on some liberal issues- like the poor, or healthcare- but I do think he's funny and I love his war stance. :)

Teresa said...

Liberty,
I like Fox because they are the only channel that gives a conservative leaning perspective, I mean fairly. Hannity can be overbearing but can debate people. O'Reilly has been pretty fair to the President on issues and can debate others also. Beck is whacky but shows a great love for country and the truth. He has a wide variety of people on his show. He helped start the Tea Party movement which has reawakened a lot of citizens to follow politics and our government. But, the hosts usually bring other people in to debate each other. If you haven't yet, watch Fox News in the morning between 9 and 12 and for the most part its not opinion oriented.

Liberty said...

I read both Fox, the NYTimes, and the Washington Post, and then of course blogs like yours. I am of the opinion that the more I read, the more balanced I'll be. :D

The problem with Hannity and O'Reilly is that they try to yell over people that really annoys me. ^.^

Anonymous said...

12/21/09, not in vain
Dear God,
Please, if it is your will, let me not end my life after Obamacare surgeons mutilate my gastrointestinal system, or after being forced to take deadly drugs, or to engage in starvation-level calorie restriction because that's the only way I can "lose weight." And, God, if I must die at the hands of Obama's minions, please help me find a way to make the bastards shoot me instead of killing me in some way they can pretend is "health care." Amen.