ACA Success story! ...Or not

[exploited]

The website and roll-out is a f**k.

The program itself gives me serious doubts you guys are going to benefit much.

The problem is that this program is supposed to be, if the world were even remotely rational, universal public healthcare... Nothing less will work to bring down your costs. Instead, you are mandating that people deal with flower of paradise, sometimes referred to as "insurance companies."

Why? As all of you have made clear to me one time or another, it is because it wouldn't be politically feasible. Not with the Republican Party currently infected with a brain parasite. That's too bad. Because I have this sneaking suspicion that Obamacare is going to get f**k by insurance companies, mentally deficient Tea Party cultists and Republican legislatures, and it was a tragic mistake for the Democrats not to press for state-administered, federally funded universal public healthcare.

[dontworrybehappy]

[The Comrade]

k well this court disagreed. get over it.

[Bauce]

[Spider]

@exploited
They did press for it. This whole thing opened with a very contentious single payer/public option debate, remember. It was immediately obvious there wasn't a snowflake's chance in hell it was going to actually happen...so they did this instead on the theory that it would be better than nothing. lol.

[Bauce]

[dontworrybehappy]

[The Comrade]

well this is a cute tangent. what is especially funny is that you are the most racist person on this board and you're trying to lecture "democrats" about civil rights.

and lol at you comparing civil rights to the ACA ruling.

[The Comrade]

Citing terrible Supreme Court rulings throughout history does not invalidate the SCOTUS' present day authority to rule that the ACA is constitutional. And you can think this too is a horrible ruling. Even if you want to compare those shameful rulings like Dred Scott and Plessy Ferguson to the Obamacare ruling, which is ridiculous, those two aforementioned rulings were in fact the law at that time because the Supreme Court said so and they have that authority. The former became moot because of a constitutional amendment and the latter due to a new ruling that overturned it. You might want to push for something like that to happen if you really hate the Obamacare ruling so much, because pointing out the fact that the court has made shitty rulings in the past isn't going to make this one any less official or valid.

[dontworrybehappy]

I was pointing out that the SC has made improper rulings in the past after someone said that they are basically never wrong.

The fact that comrade thanked you for that rediculous reply says a lot.

Only a true to God idiot would think I was COMPARING the ACA to civil rights rulings made by the SC. A true idiot. A really stupid idiot. Because nowhere did I do that. I simply used those examples of times when the SC got it wrong. Or later, rulings were overturned. MEANING THE SC IS NOT JESUS CHRIST. I was pointing out that historically it can and DOES happen. It's amazing how you can show someone a pencil and they call it a water hose. Damn, sometimes I gotta realize who I'm dealing with and dumb down the shit out of my replies.

And what happened when the Florida SC ruled in 2000 in favor of Bush? Democrats didn't let that shit go for YEARS. They were accusing them of all kinds of crap. Funny how when the ruling isn't what you like, the SC is wrong, but if its what you're for, they're right, no questions asked.

How blindly partisan of you.