Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Relapse wrote: The point being, the Republicans wanted nothing to do with this piece of ill concieved legeslation.
And?
The Republicans might "want nothing to do with this piece of ill conceived legislation", but that does not change the origin of the ideas.
We can talk in circles here, but the fact remains that no Republican with authority to vote for it did. They all voted against it. That blame falls with the Democrats and,as Dogma so correctly points out, Independents at the time. First, most of the people who voted for it never even really knew what it contained, then they wanted to be exempt from it. Next we had unions that supported Obama pissing their pants over having to use Obamacare and crying for an exemption. Now people are waking up to the fact that Obama lied and Democrats are trying to foist this off on the whole Republican party.
One more time no Republican in the Senate voted for the passage of this bill. They all voted against it. Every Democrat and the Independents however were voting for it.
Except, once again, unless the Democrats have a DeLorean that they took to 88 MPH and influenced the Heritage Foundation to put forward their idea--it was a "Republican created idea".
Hell, Mitt Romney adopted the Heritage Foundation's idea for the system that he so roundly took credit for.
Kanluwen wrote: Except, once again, unless the Democrats have a DeLorean that they took to 88 MPH and influenced the Heritage Foundation to put forward their idea--it was a "Republican created idea".
Hell, Mitt Romney adopted the Heritage Foundation's idea for the system that he so roundly took credit for.
And Newt Gingrich, leader of the house Republicans, supported the heritage plan as well.
Looking for a club in Brisbane, Australia? Come and enjoy a game and a beer at Pubhammer, our friendly club in a pub at the Junction pub in Annerley (opposite Ace Comics), Sunday nights from 6:30. All brisbanites welcome, don't wait, check out our Club Page on Facebook group for details or to organize a game. We play all sorts of board and war games, so hit us up if you're interested.
Pubhammer is Moving! Starting from the 25th of May we'll be gaming at The Junction pub (AKA The Muddy Farmer), opposite Ace Comics & Games in Annerley! Still Sunday nights from 6:30 in the Function room Come along and play Warmachine, 40k, boardgames or anything else!
Words from the guy who was instrumental in developing the Heritage Plan.
The principle idea was the same, but when you get down to tacks and nails, nothing about the idea's are similar. So can we get off this merry-go-round now? The Dems can claim that it's a "Republican" idea all they want, but the Republicans (obviously) didn't agree with this in any way shape or form.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/04 05:15:39
Words from the guy who was instrumental in developing the Heritage Plan.
The principle idea was the same, but when you get down to tacks and nails, nothing about the idea's are similar. So can we get off this merry-go-round now? The Dems can claim that it's a "Republican" idea all they want, but the Republicans (obviously) didn't agree with this in any way shape or form.
HAHAHHAHA! That's halarious!
I just read the column, and it basically says "My idea wsn't anything like Obamacare, it was actually *proceeds to describe obamacare*".
Seriously, see the three points
1) His idea of the mandate was to protect businesses from being out of pocket when people couldn't pay, not to help people get coverage! Lol, it doesn't actually change anything, but it's funny that Republicans have to swear they weren't trying to actually *help* people, because that would be bad.
2) Induce people to buy insurance with subsidies (Yep, that's obamacare, see the subsidies are being argued as bad in this very thread!)
3) Make it so that people just lose out on tax breaks for being uncovered, don't make it a legal requirement! Lol, does he even know how the "obamacare" fine is being enforced? The only enforcement possible is withholding tax returns!
Hahaha, that was a hoot, but it's still funny to me how he has to lie about what his idea was, because any possible association with Obama would get him scape goated in a split second.
So, what's next on "conservatives say the darnedest things"?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/04 05:39:38
Looking for a club in Brisbane, Australia? Come and enjoy a game and a beer at Pubhammer, our friendly club in a pub at the Junction pub in Annerley (opposite Ace Comics), Sunday nights from 6:30. All brisbanites welcome, don't wait, check out our Club Page on Facebook group for details or to organize a game. We play all sorts of board and war games, so hit us up if you're interested.
Pubhammer is Moving! Starting from the 25th of May we'll be gaming at The Junction pub (AKA The Muddy Farmer), opposite Ace Comics & Games in Annerley! Still Sunday nights from 6:30 in the Function room Come along and play Warmachine, 40k, boardgames or anything else!
I like the Liberals say the darndest things. Next they'll be saying it was a Repulican vote that passed Obamacare and not a Democrat or Independent voted for it.
The logic you miss in all of this is, if it was a Republican approved plan, they would have voted for it.
I'm not really sure what trying to pin the origin of the idea on the Republican party really gets you.
Let's pretend for a moment that one think tank does in fact represent the GOP. They pump out a gakky individual mandate idea, then do absolutely nothing with it for years. Democrats come along and go, "Hey, this idea's just gakky enough for us, let's do it." They "misspeak" relentlessly about what this plan will do in order to sell it. When given the opportunity to vote for it, no Republican does.
If things were going well, all we'd be hearing from the fellow travelers and water carriers is about how great this Democrat health care law is doing. Because things are predictably not going well, Democrats and their allies are doing their best to pin the origin on Republicans. I guess coming up with the idea and doing nothing with it is as bad as stealing the idea and being dumb enough to vote for it? I dunno. I'm not sure what the goal here is.
Seaward wrote: I'm not really sure what trying to pin the origin of the idea on the Republican party really gets you.
Let's pretend for a moment that one think tank does in fact represent the GOP. They pump out a gakky individual mandate idea, then do absolutely nothing with it for years. Democrats come along and go, "Hey, this idea's just gakky enough for us, let's do it." They "misspeak" relentlessly about what this plan will do in order to sell it. When given the opportunity to vote for it, no Republican does.
If things were going well, all we'd be hearing from the fellow travelers and water carriers is about how great this Democrat health care law is doing. Because things are predictably not going well, Democrats and their allies are doing their best to pin the origin on Republicans. I guess coming up with the idea and doing nothing with it is as bad as stealing the idea and being dumb enough to vote for it? I dunno. I'm not sure what the goal here is.
Deflection and spin. Repeat the same thing often enough, it becomes the truth. Not going to work with this though.
Relapse wrote: I like the Liberals say the darndest things. Next they'll be saying it was a Repulican vote that passed Obamacare and not a Democrat or Independent voted for it. The logic you miss in all of this is, if it was a Republican approved plan, they would have voted for it.
Nice strawman you have there, pity he doesn't have a brain, perhaps he'll find one one day. The argument about the origins of the idea has always been about showing that the Republican opposition and stonewalling was purely for political purposes - to fulfill their #1 priority of "making Obama a 1 term President" - rather than because of the policy itself.
/Oh look, Seaward brought another Strawman to be it's friend
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/04 06:01:16
Looking for a club in Brisbane, Australia? Come and enjoy a game and a beer at Pubhammer, our friendly club in a pub at the Junction pub in Annerley (opposite Ace Comics), Sunday nights from 6:30. All brisbanites welcome, don't wait, check out our Club Page on Facebook group for details or to organize a game. We play all sorts of board and war games, so hit us up if you're interested.
Pubhammer is Moving! Starting from the 25th of May we'll be gaming at The Junction pub (AKA The Muddy Farmer), opposite Ace Comics & Games in Annerley! Still Sunday nights from 6:30 in the Function room Come along and play Warmachine, 40k, boardgames or anything else!
Relapse wrote: I like the Liberals say the darndest things. Next they'll be saying it was a Repulican vote that passed Obamacare and not a Democrat or Independent voted for it.
The logic you miss in all of this is, if it was a Republican approved plan, they would have voted for it.
That is gibberish.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
Maddermax wrote: Nice strawman you have there, pity he doesn't have a brain, perhaps he'll find one one day. The argument about the origins of the idea has always been about showing that the Republican opposition and stonewalling was purely for political purposes - to fulfill their #1 priority of "making Obama a 1 term President" - rather than because of the policy itself.
Let's continue to pretend. We'll pretend that you're speaking accurately here. Why would I care? Doing the right thing for the wrong reasons is fine with me. It's a gakky law, no matter who came up with it, no matter who was dumb enough to support it, no matter who likes it. You can oppose it because you made a deal with Zombie Hitler, for all I care, as long as you oppose it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/04 06:07:20
Relapse wrote: Seb, not a single Republican voted for that thing.
Holy fething gak balls I have explained this at least a half dozen times in this thread. This is getting beyond a fething joke.
No Republican voted for it. They own none of it, they are responsbible for none of it. Yes, good, we're fething settled on that fething point?
Good, now we move on, and the question turns to why not one single Republican voted for ACA. And it's a fair question, when you look at the nature of the bill (a market based reform), the origin of the concept (in a conservative think tank tied very closely to the GOP) and the history of GOP leaders proposing reform like ACA... you'd think one guy out of 200 would cross the floor. Hell, even if the final bill was so horrible that they all rejected it, you'd think one guy out of 200 would at some point during the early concept phases have said he was roughly on board with a piece of legislation that was in line with what they'd been claiming they wanted all along.
And the answer to that question is that the GOP wanted a way to rebuild their brand after the stomping of 2008, and to tear down Obama's brand at the same time. They decided the best way to do this would be to attack the healthcare reform, scare people about what it meant and then sink it.
That's what 'this idea started with the Heritage Foundation' means. It is part of the greater picture that explains exactly what Republican opposition to ACA was all about - they were never concerned with any of the stupid nonsense about death panels or socialised medicine - they just told those stupid lies because they were trying to win a political game.
Realising that, really truly being aware of how the Republicans have played this and how it has affected the debate over ACA every step along the way, makes it impossible to take the constant stream of 'here's three people who said they don't like some bit of ACA' threads we've had for years, many of them posted here on this forum by you.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/04 06:38:40
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Let's pretend for a moment that one think tank does in fact represent the GOP. They pump out a gakky individual mandate idea, then do absolutely nothing with it for years.
This was not one conservative think-tank, nor was Butler's comment specific.
Stuart Butler wrote:My view was shared at the time by many conservative experts, including American Enterprise Institute (AEI) scholars, as well as most non-conservative analysts. Even libertarian-conservative icon Milton Friedman, in a 1991 Wall Street Journal article, advocated replacing Medicare and Medicaid "with a requirement that every U.S. family unit have a major medical insurance policy."
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
dogma wrote: This was not one conservative think-tank, nor was Butler's comment specific.
It is a massive, massive stretch to claim that plans involving getting rid of Medicaid and Medicare entirely in any way resemble the ACA - the plan that included expansions thereof. The Heritage Foundation's plan was closest, and it still doesn't resemble the ACA all that much. The others are even further afield.
Let's continue to pretend. We'll pretend that you're speaking accurately here. Why would I care? Doing the right thing for the wrong reasons is fine with me. It's a gakky law, no matter who came up with it, no matter who was dumb enough to support it, no matter who likes it. You can oppose it because you made a deal with Zombie Hitler, for all I care, as long as you oppose it.
Well, that explains a lot.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
Seb, Sorry to annoy you with the voting comments. They were not aimed towards you, but at Madder, who can't seem to understand that Republicans did not like or accept Obama's plan.
It is funny, though, that all the finger pointing towards Republicans is now front and center since things seem to be falling apart and more things are being found wrong with Obamacare, not least of which is the fact that Obama is being found out to have lied about things.At least it's better than the tinfoil hat accusation that Republicans are physically torpedoing the website.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/04 06:32:46
It is a massive, massive stretch to claim that plans involving getting rid of Medicaid and Medicare entirely in any way resemble the ACA - the plan that included expansions thereof. The Heritage Foundation's plan was closest, and it still doesn't resemble the ACA all that much. The others are even further afield.
And here I thought ACA was pillaging Medicare.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
You honestly trying to claim the Heritage Foundation isn't a core element of the Republican political machine?
or... Dems are running away from the PPACA because it's so unpopular. Not sure how really.... incumbents have major electoral advantages anyways. *shrugs*
What? That makes no sense given your own link. It was about the Democrats saying 'well we've been so attached to this thing we've really got no option left but to stand up for it'.
From its inception the ACA has lacked anyone to champion it. Obama didn't, and throughout the period in which it was written no Democrats in the House or Senate went out and meaningfully argued for its reforms or explained why they are necessary. It is genuinely possible that I've spent more time explaining the foundations of ACA than Pelosi and Reid have combined.
The bill only really got passed in the first place because Democrats got themselves in to a position where running away from the bill would likely be more harmful than passing the thing. Without their favoured tactic of ineffectual cowardice available, they passed the thing, and still none of them stood up and made a serious defence of the thing.
Nothing much has really changed. Democrats will come out in defence of ACA, targeting specific claims about how awful it is and disputing them, but still there is a complete absence of any champions of the bill.
So seriously, the idea that after all this time, history is being re-written by the conservatives to pretend that Democrats were jumping all over themselves to own ACA, and now suddenly they're running away and attempting to give it to Republicans... complete and total bs.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Maddermax wrote: Nice strawman you have there, pity he doesn't have a brain, perhaps he'll find one one day. The argument about the origins of the idea has always been about showing that the Republican opposition and stonewalling was purely for political purposes - to fulfill their #1 priority of "making Obama a 1 term President" - rather than because of the policy itself.
Let's continue to pretend. We'll pretend that you're speaking accurately here. Why would I care? Doing the right thing for the wrong reasons is fine with me. It's a gakky law, no matter who came up with it, no matter who was dumb enough to support it, no matter who likes it. You can oppose it because you made a deal with Zombie Hitler, for all I care, as long as you oppose it.
Hey, if you're happy with blatant obstructionism in your government, so be it. However, remember where this particular thread of the conversation came from - Relapse brought it up on the last page. So you don't have to care, but understand why the argument is occurring first.
Looking for a club in Brisbane, Australia? Come and enjoy a game and a beer at Pubhammer, our friendly club in a pub at the Junction pub in Annerley (opposite Ace Comics), Sunday nights from 6:30. All brisbanites welcome, don't wait, check out our Club Page on Facebook group for details or to organize a game. We play all sorts of board and war games, so hit us up if you're interested.
Pubhammer is Moving! Starting from the 25th of May we'll be gaming at The Junction pub (AKA The Muddy Farmer), opposite Ace Comics & Games in Annerley! Still Sunday nights from 6:30 in the Function room Come along and play Warmachine, 40k, boardgames or anything else!
Seaward wrote: I'm not really sure what trying to pin the origin of the idea on the Republican party really gets you.
It demonstrates the fundamentally dishonest nature of the Republican scare campaign over ACA.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
sebster wrote: It demonstrates the fundamentally dishonest nature of the Republican scare campaign over ACA.
The trouble is that it's not dishonest if it's true. Costs will go up. Plans will be (and have been) canceled. A lot of people are going to lose out. And it's only going to get massively worse next year.
Relapse wrote: Seb, Sorry to annoy you with the voting comments. They were not aimed towards you, but at Madder, who can't seem to understand that Republicans did not like or accept Obama's plan.
You were quoting me, and doing so to repeat, again, that no Republican voted for ACA therefore it wasn't an Republican bill. Which is true, but nothing to do with the relevance of why no Republican voted for the bill. You point out that Republicans did not like or accept Obama's plan, but I'll remind you that Republicans had committed to oppose this thing before there had been any decision on what form Obama's plan would take.
It was a plainly political decision - oppose Obama's major reform absolutely, get people really scared about it and rebuild the Republican brand as the people who stopped Obama. When ACA ended up being a market based solution that closely matched a reform put in place by a Republican governor, which itself was based on a form that Republicans had been arguing for for a couple of decades after a Republican think tank had proposed it... well that made Republicans look mighty silly, but only to the people who'd been paying attention (and fortunately there aren't many of those people around).
So the Republicans just kept on marching on, every week releasing another story about how ACA was going to be a disaster. And now that it's finally rolling out... well the Republican noise machine is carrying on, continuing to release stories about how bad ACA is.
It is funny, though, that all the finger pointing towards Republicans is now front and center since things seem to be falling apart
The finger pointing is there because it's easier to trash the other side than it is to defend your own side. Which is, fittingly enough, exactly why in 2008 Republicans chose to attack the Democrats over ACA, instead of, like, coming up with some policies of their own that people actually liked.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
sebster wrote: It demonstrates the fundamentally dishonest nature of the Republican scare campaign over ACA.
The trouble is that it's not dishonest if it's true. Costs will go up. Plans will be (and have been) canceled. A lot of people are going to lose out. And it's only going to get massively worse next year.
It is dishonest if it's false, as most of the ACA scare mongering has been.
Meanwhile, why do you reckon it's going to get worse next year? Is that when they introduce Deathplanels, when they complete the government takeover of all healthcare or when the economy collapses because socialism? I forget which is the Absolutely Truetm talking point of the day.
It is a massive, massive stretch to claim that plans involving getting rid of Medicaid and Medicare entirely in any way resemble the ACA - the plan that included expansions thereof. The Heritage Foundation's plan was closest, and it still doesn't resemble the ACA all that much. The others are even further afield.
And here I thought ACA was pillaging Medicare.
Depends what day it is whether the ACA is pillaging Medicare too much, or not pillaging it enough. I think it might be on a schedule related to whether Obama is an unstoppable dictator or a do-nothing empty suit on that particular day.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/11/04 07:02:04
Looking for a club in Brisbane, Australia? Come and enjoy a game and a beer at Pubhammer, our friendly club in a pub at the Junction pub in Annerley (opposite Ace Comics), Sunday nights from 6:30. All brisbanites welcome, don't wait, check out our Club Page on Facebook group for details or to organize a game. We play all sorts of board and war games, so hit us up if you're interested.
Pubhammer is Moving! Starting from the 25th of May we'll be gaming at The Junction pub (AKA The Muddy Farmer), opposite Ace Comics & Games in Annerley! Still Sunday nights from 6:30 in the Function room Come along and play Warmachine, 40k, boardgames or anything else!
Seaward wrote: The trouble is that it's not dishonest if it's true. Costs will go up. Plans will be (and have been) canceled. A lot of people are going to lose out. And it's only going to get massively worse next year.
You're not following. It would not be dishonest to say 'I have reviewed the requirements of base level plans under ACA and have found that the cost of the services provided it excessive for people on base level incomes'. That's fine. It would also be true to say that ACA competitive market assumptions are not holding in certain regional areas. Those are complaints that are honest.
But those complaints do not sound like the majority of complaints about ACA we've heard over the years. The majority of complaints have been about socialisation of healthcare, government interference, and nonsense along those lines - big picture complaints that attempt to claim the overall structure of ACA is somehow unacceptable to Republicans... which is a basically dishonest position to take when until those ideas became the foundation of ACA, they were something the Republicans were very much in favour of.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Maddermax wrote: Meanwhile, why do you reckon it's going to get worse next year?
Because the employer mandate is going to start to get felt, and a lot of people who thought they'd be fine will realize they won't be, and because the individual market's death spiral is going to cause the first big premium jump.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
sebster wrote: You're not following. It would not be dishonest to say 'I have reviewed the requirements of base level plans under ACA and have found that the cost of the services provided it excessive for people on base level incomes'. That's fine. It would also be true to say that ACA competitive market assumptions are not holding in certain regional areas. Those are complaints that are honest.
But those complaints do not sound like the majority of complaints about ACA we've heard over the years. The majority of complaints have been about socialisation of healthcare, government interference, and nonsense along those lines - big picture complaints that attempt to claim the overall structure of ACA is somehow unacceptable to Republicans... which is a basically dishonest position to take when until those ideas became the foundation of ACA, they were something the Republicans were very much in favour of.
I'll continue to disagree that the Heritage Foundation speaks for the entirety of the Republican Party, then or now, just as I'd disagree that the Center for American Progress speaks for the Democratic Party.
I'm unaware of any actual Republican legislative proposals from history that bore a resemblance to the ACA, though those would make a far stronger argument.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/04 07:16:34
sebster wrote: You're not following. It would not be dishonest to say 'I have reviewed the requirements of base level plans under ACA and have found that the cost of the services provided it excessive for people on base level incomes'. That's fine. It would also be true to say that ACA competitive market assumptions are not holding in certain regional areas. Those are complaints that are honest.
But those complaints do not sound like the majority of complaints about ACA we've heard over the years. The majority of complaints have been about socialisation of healthcare, government interference, and nonsense along those lines - big picture complaints that attempt to claim the overall structure of ACA is somehow unacceptable to Republicans... which is a basically dishonest position to take when until those ideas became the foundation of ACA, they were something the Republicans were very much in favour of.
I'll continue to disagree that the Heritage Foundation speaks for the entirety of the Republican Party, then or now, just as I'd disagree that the Center for American Progress speaks for the Democratic Party.
I'm unaware of any actual Republican legislative proposals from history that bore a resemblance to the ACA, though those would make a far stronger argument.
Newt. Gingrich. You might remember him as being somewhat big in the 90s. Seriously, if John Bohner today proposed it, would you also say that Republicans had nothing to do with it?
Please note before you bring out your much abused strawman again, I'm not arguing that any republican voted for it, I'm arguing against you saying that it had nothing to do with Republicans to start with.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/04 07:36:25
Looking for a club in Brisbane, Australia? Come and enjoy a game and a beer at Pubhammer, our friendly club in a pub at the Junction pub in Annerley (opposite Ace Comics), Sunday nights from 6:30. All brisbanites welcome, don't wait, check out our Club Page on Facebook group for details or to organize a game. We play all sorts of board and war games, so hit us up if you're interested.
Pubhammer is Moving! Starting from the 25th of May we'll be gaming at The Junction pub (AKA The Muddy Farmer), opposite Ace Comics & Games in Annerley! Still Sunday nights from 6:30 in the Function room Come along and play Warmachine, 40k, boardgames or anything else!
Maddermax wrote: Newt. Gingrich. You might remember him as being somewhat big in the 90s. Seriously, if John Bohner today proposed it, would you also say that Republicans had nothing to do with it?
No. Boehner's a guy who can actually put legislation on the floor of the House.
Is your contention that Gingrich's 2009 proposal was similar to the ACA? I'll let you think about that one before you have to respond.
Maddermax wrote: Meanwhile, why do you reckon it's going to get worse next year?
Because the employer mandate is going to start to get felt, and a lot of people who thought they'd be fine will realize they won't be, and because the individual market's death spiral is going to cause the first big premium jump.
Strange that Massachusetts has an employer mandate but hasn't crashed horribly. Strange indeed.
Maddermax wrote: Newt. Gingrich. You might remember him as being somewhat big in the 90s. Seriously, if John Bohner today proposed it, would you also say that Republicans had nothing to do with it?
No. Boehner's a guy who can actually put legislation on the floor of the House.
Is your contention that Gingrich's 2009 proposal was similar to the ACA? I'll let you think about that one before you have to respond.
Hey, read his 1994 proposal if you want, which was signed by other big Republican names, such as Bob Dole (you might remember him too).
But sure, it has nothing to do with Republicans. They all flip-flopped in 2009 for political reasons, of course, and that's fine, I'm not saying any of them voted for the ACA, so you can keep those strawmen in your pants. But the reason they changed their minds, understand was purely political.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/11/04 07:52:14
Looking for a club in Brisbane, Australia? Come and enjoy a game and a beer at Pubhammer, our friendly club in a pub at the Junction pub in Annerley (opposite Ace Comics), Sunday nights from 6:30. All brisbanites welcome, don't wait, check out our Club Page on Facebook group for details or to organize a game. We play all sorts of board and war games, so hit us up if you're interested.
Pubhammer is Moving! Starting from the 25th of May we'll be gaming at The Junction pub (AKA The Muddy Farmer), opposite Ace Comics & Games in Annerley! Still Sunday nights from 6:30 in the Function room Come along and play Warmachine, 40k, boardgames or anything else!
Come along and play Warmachine, 40k, boardgames or anything else! 
