• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who do you hold at fault for the Govt shutdown?

Who is at fault for the shutdown?

  • Republicans

    Votes: 87 45.3%

  • Democrats

    Votes: 32 16.7%

  • Both

    Votes: 65 33.9%

  • Neither

    Votes: 8 4.2%
  • Total voters
    192
humbolt said:
It has already happened. Blame is the main game now. Wheel of Blame would make an excellent TV game show.
Click to expand...

Well, I have to admit....no President in my lifetime has pointed more fingers than Obama has....Republican or Democrat.
 
Mithros said:
Lets back up to your original assertion:


So even though you acknowledge that the ACA is based on a conservative idea, implemented first by Republicans, you would still argue that the the ONLY form of health care discussed was distinctly liberal? ...sigh
Click to expand...
No. First I haven't admitted that the ACA is a conservative idea. That's your assertion. I agreed that it was perhaps based on an idea from a conservative think tank - not that it was conservative. I also pointed out that the correspondence between what Heritage proposed and what the ACA actually is, are seriously different. Again, as I mentioned, Romney, though Republican in name, is as much a republican as Nelson Rockefeller was. Hardly conservative, which is why I pointed out in my "jumble of unrelated thoughts" that 4 million conservatives were estimated to have stayed home last November. Now, if you would go back and read the link I posted earlier - something you obviously haven't, or won't - you would understand that I'm stating what has been witnessed by C-Span - that member of the vast right wing conspiracy.
 
Last edited:
mac said:
That doesn't make it true. Forcing people to be financially responsible is an infringement on liberty, and anti-American.



Financial responsibility, more accurately: lack of it, is a major factor affecting those that draw welfare. Are you going to outlaw 20in wheels?
Click to expand...

Please do! Please Please Please
 
humbolt said:
No. First I haven't admitted that the ACA is a conservative idea. That's your assertion. I agreed that it was an idea from a conservative think tank - not that it was conservative. I also pointed out that the correspondence between what Heritage proposed and what the ACA actually is, are seriously different. Again, as I mentioned, Romney, though Republican in name, is as much a republican as Nelson Rockefeller was. Hardly conservative, which is why I pointed out in my "jumble of unrelated thoughts" that 4 million conservatives were estimated to have stayed home last November. Now, if you would go back and read the link I posted earlier - something you obviously haven't, or won't - you would understand that I'm stating what has been witnessed by C-Span - that member of the vast right wing conspiracy.
Click to expand...

And if those four million conservatives had voted for Romney then the outcome might have been different, ACA might have already been repealed and the country might be much better off.:peace
 
Gimmesometruth said:
But the version of the health insurance mandate Heritage and I supported in the 1990s had three critical features. First, it was not primarily intended to push people to obtain protection for their own good, but to protect others. Like auto damage liability insurance required in most states, our requirement focused on "catastrophic" costs — so hospitals and taxpayers would not have to foot the bill for the expensive illness or accident of someone who did not buy insurance."
Click to expand...

So how am I (or anyone else) being "protected" by being required to buy health policies loaded down with provisions I neither want nor need?
 
Diogenes said:
So how am I (or anyone else) being "protected" by being required to buy health policies loaded down with provisions I neither want nor need?
Click to expand...
How are you or anyone else being protected when you buy health insurance?

Seriously? Is this an adult conversation?
 
humbolt said:
No. First I haven't admitted that the ACA is a conservative idea. That's your assertion. I agreed that it was perhaps based on an idea from a conservative think tank - not that it was conservative. I also pointed out that the correspondence between what Heritage proposed and what the ACA actually is, are seriously different. Again, as I mentioned, Romney, though Republican in name, is as much a republican as Nelson Rockefeller was. Hardly conservative, which is why I pointed out in my "jumble of unrelated thoughts" that 4 million conservatives were estimated to have stayed home last November. Now, if you would go back and read the link I posted earlier - something you obviously haven't, or won't - you would understand that I'm stating what has been witnessed by C-Span - that member of the vast right wing conspiracy.
Click to expand...

I see why you're so bothered by liberalism. It's so insidious that even conservative think-tanks come up with liberal ideas. But I think you can see why many people would strongly object to the individual mandate being called a liberal idea.. mostly because it's not.

But you're right. You made a completely unsubstantiated assertion that the Heritage foundations proposal and the ACA are "seriously" different. What exactly is the difference?

HF, Romneycare, and ObamaCare are all based on the individual mandate. Romneycare has a bigger penalty for not buying insurance. Romneycare applies to buisnesses with 11 or more employees, Obamacare applies to 50+. Obamacare includes a tax credit for small businesses (Proposed by McCain), Romneycare doesn’t.

Criticize the ACA to your hearts content. It's far from perfect. However, don't call it liberal.
 
Mostly the Republicans, everyone else to a lesser extent. I don't blame them for their opposition to Obamacare, but this isn't the right way to go about it.
 
mac said:
That doesn't make it true.
Click to expand...
Switching criteria? The question was "is it new?" No it is not.

Forcing people to be financially responsible is an infringement on liberty, and anti-American.
Click to expand...
I have seen this argument that irresponsibility is a liberty.
This, is a dead end argument



Financial responsibility, more accurately: lack of it, is a major factor affecting those that draw welfare.
Click to expand...
Most that are on "welfare" are children, the unemployed and the caretakers of said children. This conflating of "welfare" with getting people in into health insurance is rather confused. The ACA extends welfare and supplements those who cannot fully afford insurance. Again, would you rather have expensive ER care that we all have to pay for be the care of last resort....as it has been for decades?


Are you going to outlaw 20in wheels?
Click to expand...
Good grief, the tangents are amazing.
 
mac said:
Who, in your opinion, is primarily at fault for the shutdown?
Click to expand...

In equal measure, a weak, timorous POTUS who is inflexible in the way that only the weak are inflexible, and a politically stupid opposition led astray by vainglory and personal ambition. :roll:
 
A certain segment of Republicans who happened to have enough numbers to persuade the leaders of the party to put forth their demands. Most Republicans knew the outcome would be predetermined, as did most Democrats. Nevertheless, the language in the bill was pushed by those Republicans anyway. They hoped they could "negotiate" their way to a settlement, but failed.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
How are you or anyone else being protected when you buy health insurance?

Seriously? Is this an adult conversation?
Click to expand...
(1) I am protected by buying insurance I think I need.
(2) Point taken, I seriously question the maturity of those who would force me to buy what I don't want or need.
 
Mithros said:
Criticize the ACA to your hearts content. It's far from perfect. However, don't call it liberal.
Click to expand...
Since the hallmark of ACA is coercion, it is hard to describe it as anything but liberal. Conservatives believe in the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness - everything that liberals are opposed to.
 
Diogenes said:
(1) I am protected by buying insurance I think I need.
Click to expand...
Well, the thinking part....is the essence of the issue at hand.

If you think health insurance is not needed, then you go with that.
 
mac said:
Who, in your opinion, is primarily at fault for the shutdown?
Click to expand...



There wasn't an option for "What shutdown??"
 
Diogenes said:
Since the hallmark of ACA is coercion, it is hard to describe it as anything but liberal. Conservatives believe in the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness - everything that liberals are opposed to.
Click to expand...

Only if you conflate Libertarianism with Conservatism. The ACA is a conservative idea invented by Conservatives in response to a bipartisan mandate that forces hospital ERs to treat people first, and worry about getting paid second. Do you remember the kid who bled out from a gunshot outside the doors of a hospital while the ER doctors looked on from inside the hospital? Because we all think that's a terrible system.

But that mandate means that people can get health care without paying for it. The ACA is based on the idea of personal responsibility, there's a chance you'll need emergency care so you'd better pay for insurance so that the rest of us aren't stuck with your bill. That's as Conservative as it gets.
 
Mithros said:
I see why you're so bothered by liberalism. It's so insidious that even conservative think-tanks come up with liberal ideas. But I think you can see why many people would strongly object to the individual mandate being called a liberal idea.. mostly because it's not.

But you're right. You made a completely unsubstantiated assertion that the Heritage foundations proposal and the ACA are "seriously" different. What exactly is the difference?

HF, Romneycare, and ObamaCare are all based on the individual mandate. Romneycare has a bigger penalty for not buying insurance. Romneycare applies to buisnesses with 11 or more employees, Obamacare applies to 50+. Obamacare includes a tax credit for small businesses (Proposed by McCain), Romneycare doesn’t.

Criticize the ACA to your hearts content. It's far from perfect. However, don't call it liberal.
Click to expand...
It's liberal. Not one single member of the GOP voted for it. Don't blame Heritage for ObamaCare mandate
 
The Republicans. There was no scenario possible that pointed to either the Senate or the White House being open to negotiations with the entire federal budget as leverage. Caving in would set a poor precedent for these situations in the future and leave the law even more vulnerable to opposing pressure.
 
Mithros said:
Only if you conflate Libertarianism with Conservatism. The ACA is a conservative idea invented by Conservatives in response to a bipartisan mandate that forces hospital ERs to treat people first, and worry about getting paid second. Do you remember the kid who bled out from a gunshot outside the doors of a hospital while the ER doctors looked on from inside the hospital? Because we all think that's a terrible system.

But that mandate means that people can get health care without paying for it. The ACA is based on the idea of personal responsibility, there's a chance you'll need emergency care so you'd better pay for insurance so that the rest of us aren't stuck with your bill. That's as Conservative as it gets.
Click to expand...

Health care is a commodity, like food, clothing and shelter. As with those, buy it or receive it as charity. I would rather subsidize unpaid ER use via higher costs than impose coercion on Americans. In other words, I would prefer the pre-ACA status quo ante to the ACA. If that's not politically feasible then go all the way to single payer. ACA is a coercive, incoherent mishmash that destroys freedom while subsidizing both government and the insurance/drug complex.:peace
 
Jack Hays said:
Health care is a commodity, like food, clothing and shelter. As with those, buy it or receive it as charity. I would rather subsidize unpaid ER use via higher costs than impose coercion on Americans. In other words, I would prefer the pre-ACA status quo ante to the ACA. If that's not politically feasible then go all the way to single payer. ACA is a coercive, incoherent mishmash that destroys freedom while subsidizing both government and the insurance/drug complex.:peace
Click to expand...

But that's the same thing. Every American who had health insurance was forced to pay an average of $1000.00 a year extra to cover the uninsured under the now previous system. Under the ACA you either have to have insurance or pay a portion of the average amount you'll cost the rest of us by not being insured. Either way you're stuck with some form of a mandate unless you want to get rid of the mandate that says hospitals must treat patients before they worry about getting paid.

But regardless, I'm in total agreement about most everything else. The ACA is a coercive, mismash of ideas. A single payer system would be MUCH better, and would greatly lower costs. It's easy for hospitals to charge a single patient 75$ for an asprin, but quite another thing when there's a single entity paying for everyone.
 
americanwoman said:
There's no poll yet but I think it's ridiculous neither side can compromise. Yes, there are provisions that need to be worked out but why did the ones who oppose it not only wait until the last minute but have no alternative to bring to the table. Something needs to be done with healthcare and while Obamacare isn't perfect it's a start and maybe we should give it a try and if it doesn't work, then fix it.
Click to expand...

Young people eager to execute Obamacare, you make the leftwingers proud. :thumbs:
 
Jack Hays said:
Health care is a commodity, like food, clothing and shelter. As with those, buy it or receive it as charity. I would rather subsidize unpaid ER use via higher costs than impose coercion on Americans. In other words, I would prefer the pre-ACA status quo ante to the ACA. If that's not politically feasible then go all the way to single payer. ACA is a coercive, incoherent mishmash that destroys freedom while subsidizing both government and the insurance/drug complex.:peace
Click to expand...

Holy crap, someone else who believes in ER health care.

Who teaches this crap?
 
year2late said:
Holy crap, someone else who believes in ER health care.

Who teaches this crap?
Click to expand...

Who teaches that healthcare is a human right? No, scratch that. Who teaches that someone else's service/labor is a human right?
 
humbolt said:
It's liberal. Not one single member of the GOP voted for it. Don't blame Heritage for ObamaCare mandate
Click to expand...
With all due respect, that article is a massive truckload of BS.

The WSJ called him on it: Heritage Rewrites History - WSJ.com

Fox recognizes Heritage as the origin of the individual mandate: Individual health care insurance mandate has roots two decades long | Fox News


Heritage defended Romneycare, including individual mandates, in 2006: Understanding Key Parts of the Massachusetts Health Plan

And again The Significance of Massachusetts Health Reform
and again The Massachusetts Approach: A New Way To Restructure State Health Insurance Markets And Public Programs
and again Massachusetts Health Reform: What the doctor ordered
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Switching criteria? The question was "is it new?" No it is not.
Click to expand...

Yes it is. No law before required an individual to purchase health insurance.

I have seen this argument that irresponsibility is a liberty.
This, is a dead end argument
Click to expand...

No, the government making your personal decisions for you is an attack on personal liberty. Without doubt.

Most that are on "welfare" are children, the unemployed and the caretakers of said children. This conflating of "welfare" with getting people in into health insurance is rather confused. The ACA extends welfare and supplements those who cannot fully afford insurance. Again, would you rather have expensive ER care that we all have to pay for be the care of last resort....as it has been for decades?
Click to expand...

That's incorrect. Children are not on welfare, the parents of said children are. Many of them are employed and have made insanely bad decisions getting them to where they are. Should the government tell them they can't have anymore (or any) kids until they can learn to live responsibly?

Good grief, the tangents are amazing.
Click to expand...

That's not a tangent, homey.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom