Another lie about ACA revealed

[*michaelsean*]

So Gruber really was an integral part of designing it, and therefore was in the know when he said that the language saying only states could form the exchanges was on purpose. He also said they wanted to trick the American people with if you like your doctor or your plan you can keep them. Obama claimed he knew him about as well as he knew Bill Ayers.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/22/confirmed-white-house-lied-about-jonathan-grubers-role-in-developing-obamacare/

I didn't link the original WSJ article because they make you sign up, and I figure as long as Rawstory is considered legit then so is Breitbart.

[SunsetBengal]

(06-23-2015, 04:31 PM)michaelsean Wrote: So Gruber really was an integral part of designing it, and therefore was in the know when he said that the language saying only states could form the exchanges was on purpose.  He also said they wanted to trick the American people with if you like your doctor or your plan you can keep them.  Obama claimed he knew him about as well as he knew Bill Ayers.  

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/22/confirmed-white-house-lied-about-jonathan-grubers-role-in-developing-obamacare/

I didn't link the original WSJ article because they make you sign up, and I figure as long as Rawstory is considered legit then so is Breitbart.

I wouldn't worry so much about the source of this story, as it has been all over multiple sources.  That sad part is that what many people suspected before the ACA was passed, is being proven to be true.  The problem is that with the bulk of the Nation enamored with multicultural issues, no one is paying much attention to what has really transpired.  Obama likely doesn't care that these things are getting out, he's in his second term, nothing to lose for him.

What I would like to see, is for congress to grow a pair, and put Hillary Clinton on some federal charges for her crimes.  If it weren't for the fact that every single elected official has something that they don't want brought to the public eye, perhaps something would be done.  They're all dirty, dirty, I tell you!

[JustWinBaby]

(06-23-2015, 04:58 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: They're all dirty, dirty, I tell you!

Of course many are, especially the ones who weren't already millionaires before taking office.

The real sweetheart deals and influence aren't campaign contributions from lobbyists, it's preferred opportunities in favorable investments.  Harry Reid came from dirt, has been a career politician and made millions in....real estate.  Others get their payout after office by peddling their influence and connections as lobbyists or govt affairs advisers with corporations.

[Benton]

(06-23-2015, 04:31 PM)michaelsean Wrote: So Gruber really was an integral part of designing it, and therefore was in the know when he said that the language saying only states could form the exchanges was on purpose.  He also said they wanted to trick the American people with if you like your doctor or your plan you can keep them.  Obama claimed he knew him about as well as he knew Bill Ayers.  

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/22/confirmed-white-house-lied-about-jonathan-grubers-role-in-developing-obamacare/

I didn't link the original WSJ article because they make you sign up, and I figure as long as Rawstory is considered legit then so is Breitbart.

And this article does nothing to disprove that. An email between two guys saying he was once invited by a third party to meet Obama?

Michaelsean, I invite you to meet with Putin. You're officially a Russian.

I'm not saying the legislation was good or bad. I've got no idea how involved this guy was, or if he had an agenda. But "one email indicates Mr. Gruber was invited to meet with Mr. Obama. In a July 2009 email, he wrote that Mr. Orszag had “invited me to meet with the head honcho to talk about cost control.”an email that indicated"" is not a smoking gun. It's an unfounded accusation.

[fredtoast]

(06-23-2015, 04:31 PM)michaelsean Wrote: He also said they wanted to trick the American people with if you like your doctor or your plan you can keep them. 

The American people did not vote on the ACA.  So why bother trying to fool them?

[StLucieBengal]

When will they finally just scrap this nonsense and free us all from this terrible law.

[StLucieBengal]

(06-23-2015, 07:22 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The American people did not vote on the ACA.  So why bother trying to fool them?

No that's for your elected officials that are too busy "compromising" instead of standing on principles.

[fredtoast]

(06-23-2015, 07:45 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: When will they finally just scrap this nonsense and free us all from this terrible law.

When someone comes up with a better plan.

What do you suggest?

[StLucieBengal]

(06-24-2015, 02:11 AM)fredtoast Wrote: When someone comes up with a better plan.

What do you suggest?

No insurance at all. Pay out of pocket.

Or if we have to have insurance only catastrophic. But I prefer a pay out of pocket scenario.

Costs would drop.

[Stewy]

(06-23-2015, 05:17 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Of course many are, especially the ones who weren't already millionaires before taking office.

The real sweetheart deals and influence aren't campaign contributions from lobbyists, it's preferred opportunities in favorable investments.  Harry Reid came from dirt, has been a career politician and made millions in....real estate.  Others get their payout after office by peddling their influence and connections as lobbyists or govt affairs advisers with corporations.

And how long has it been since there wasn't a President that wasn't already a millionaire before taking office?  Were the Obama's joint assets not worth over 1 mil when he took office?  I find it hard to believe they weren't considering she comes from money and he was a Senator with all expenses paid for a few years.  I'm willing to be wrong however.

Regardless, I don't think Obama wanted to shove the ACA down everyone's throats for personal monetary gain.  I think he's been trying to build a FDR/LBJ legacy since he took office.

[Stewy]

(06-24-2015, 02:20 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: No insurance at all.   Pay out of pocket.  

Or if we have to have insurance only catastrophic.   But I prefer a pay out of pocket scenario.  

Costs would drop.

The Insurance and Pharmaceutical lobbies would never let that happen.  You might as well suggest someone just come up with a cure all wonder vaccines that prevents all disease of all kinds, thus the lack of need for anything but catastrophic medical (accidents/injury).  That's just as likely.

[GMDino]

(06-24-2015, 02:11 AM)fredtoast Wrote: When someone comes up with a better plan.

What do you suggest?

The GOP has a plan.  Had one for years now.

And they'll tell you all about it...right after they get rid of the ACA.  

Don't want to spoil the surprise.  

[GMDino]

(06-24-2015, 09:47 AM)Stewy Wrote: And how long has it been since there wasn't a President that wasn't already a millionaire before taking office?  Were the Obama's joint assets not worth over 1 mil when he took office?  I find it hard to believe they weren't considering she comes from money and he was a Senator with all expenses paid for a few years.  I'm willing to be wrong however.

Regardless, I don't think Obama wanted to shove the ACA down everyone's throats for personal monetary gain.  I think he's been trying to build a FDR/LBJ legacy since he took office.

I think Bill Clinton would fit the "non-millionaire" category.  Well, before he was elected to be President.  

[Belsnickel]

(06-24-2015, 09:47 AM)Stewy Wrote: Regardless, I don't think Obama wanted to shove the ACA down everyone's throats for personal monetary gain.  I think he's been trying to build a FDR/LBJ legacy since he took office.

We have a winner, folks! I'm in complete agreement with you, here. The past two Presidents, IMHO, have gone into the office with a legacy mindset. Bush was about finishing what daddy started, and Obama was about the social welfare issues like FDR and LBJ. I fear that this is a trend that will be continually ongoing. I understand it to an extent. We venerate those that have come before them and most of them do have a lasting legacy, whether you view what they did positively or negatively those legacies have to stick in the mind of those taking the oath of that office. But going into it with the mindset that you want to create that sort of legacy is going to further degrade the office from its original intentions. Our elected officials are supposed to be leaders, yes, but they are supposed to be of us, the people.

Maybe it is our fault for the reverence with which we speak of those that walked those halls before. That in itself elevates the position to a place it was not intended to go. We call the POTUS the 'leader of the free world' but the position is not that. It is the leader of the executive branch of our government, not the leader of this country.

Just a little mini-rant of mine.

[*michaelsean*]

(06-23-2015, 06:01 PM)Benton Wrote: And this article does nothing to disprove that. An email between two guys saying he was once invited by a third party to meet Obama?

Michaelsean, I invite you to meet with Putin. You're officially a Russian.

I'm not saying the legislation was good or bad. I've got no idea how involved this guy was, or if he had an agenda. But "one email indicates Mr. Gruber was invited to meet with Mr. Obama. In a July 2009 email, he wrote that Mr. Orszag had “invited me to meet with the head honcho to talk about cost control.”an email that indicated"" is not a smoking gun. It's an unfounded accusation.

The lie is that this guy had nothing to do with the ACA.

[*michaelsean*]

(06-23-2015, 07:22 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The American people did not vote on the ACA.  So why bother trying to fool them?

Because politicians never try to sell their programs to the public.  Who was he telling "If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor."?  Congress?

[fredtoast]

(06-24-2015, 02:20 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: No insurance at all.   Pay out of pocket.  

Or if we have to have insurance only catastrophic.   But I prefer a pay out of pocket scenario.  

Costs would drop.

But then we all end up paying for people that can not afford medical treatment and have to be hospitalized.

I know this will break your heart, but the American people will not accept letting people die because they can not afford medical treatment.  Especially children. And you will also be disappointed to know that the same is true for every industrialized country in the world. So if you want to move to a country that agrees with your position you are going to have to go third world.

When there is a car wreck they want to see people taken to hospitals, not left to die in the streets.

[fredtoast]

The ACA was a sell out to the insurance companies. We should have a government run single pay system, but that would eliminated billions of dollars of profits for private insurance companies.

[JustWinBaby]

(06-24-2015, 09:47 AM)Stewy Wrote: And how long has it been since there wasn't a President that wasn't already a millionaire before taking office?  Were the Obama's joint assets not worth over 1 mil when he took office?  I find it hard to believe they weren't considering she comes from money and he was a Senator with all expenses paid for a few years.  I'm willing to be wrong however.

Regardless, I don't think Obama wanted to shove the ACA down everyone's throats for personal monetary gain.  I think he's been trying to build a FDR/LBJ legacy since he took office.

I don't believe the Clinton's were millionaires.  The Obama's probably would not quite have been save for the cushy book deal he got.

Personally, I don't think Obama has ever been concerned about being a great POTUS, he just doesn't want to be known as a bad one (which would be difficult when you constantly pass the buck to Congress and maintain a hands-off safe distance)...But mainly I think he's trying to chart a Clinton-like course for himself to amass fortune and influence post office.

[JustWinBaby]

(06-24-2015, 11:02 AM)fredtoast Wrote: The ACA was a sell out to the insurance companies.  We should have a government run single pay system, but that would eliminated billions of dollars of profits for private insurance companies.

The money is not in insurance - average profit margins are basically nill after you remove interest carry on reserves.  In 2013, the US health insurance industry had net income just over $10B (about $300 per American) on revenues over $455B.