• 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!

Mitch Daniels Not Only Took ObamaCare Funds, He Pushed Similar Reforms

Guess you missed the November 2010 election results and the 26 states that are now suing Obama. Not surprising but tell me where did you learn that it was someone else's responsibility to pay for your healthcare? Are they to monitor your lifestyle as well including what you eat and drink? Where does the nanny state end in your world?

I guess you missed the '08 election. Apparently, you're under the delusion that the '10 elections were about health care reform. They weren't. They were about the economy and jobs. Since when does wanting my nation to ensure its citizens have access to adequate, affordable health care mean that I want the gov't to take care of me? Your posts are just more asinine far-right hyperbole. What are you doing here anyway? Shouldn't you be downtown kicking homeless people while professing your compassionate conservative credentials?
 
Last edited:
I guess you missed the '08 election. Apparently, you're under the delusion that the '10 elections were about health care reform. They weren't. They were about the economy and jobs. Since when does wanting my nation to ensure its citizens have access to adequate, affordable health care mean that I want the gov't to take care of me? Your posts are just more asinine far-right hyperbole. What are you doing here anyway? Shouldn't you be downtown kicking homeless people while professing your compassionate conservative credentials?


Lol?

2010 was in reaction to the over reaching of the Dem's in the House and Senate. Healthcare "reform" was a primary driver. You really are steeped in the Koolaide aren't you?
 
I guess you missed the '08 election. Apparently, you're under the delusion that the '10 elections were about health care reform. They weren't. They were about the economy and jobs. Since when does wanting my nation to ensure its citizens have access to adequate, affordable health care mean that I want the gov't to take care of me? Your posts are just more asinine far-right hyperbole. What are you doing here anyway? shouldn't you downtown kicking homeless people while professing your compassionate conservative credentials?

The '10 election results confirmed the states action againt against Obamacare since the elections were after the suits were filed. The '08 elections were a mandate on Bush and we now know that the obama record is worse thus the '10 elections.

I asked you a question which you ran from, where did you learn it was someone else's responsibility to pay for your healthcare? You cannot sell your state on a healthcare program so you want to force a healthcare program on everyone from the bloated federal bureacracy that currently has created a 14.4 trillion dollar debt all because you buy the rhetoric and ignore results.
 
Lol?

2010 was in reaction to the over reaching of the Dem's in the House and Senate. Healthcare "reform" was a primary driver. You really are steeped in the Koolaide aren't you?

Posts like yours are proof that if you repeat a lie often enough, gullible people will start to believe it. You really are delusional aren't you? Show me where the '10 elections were about health care reform. They were about jobs and the economy.
 
The '10 election results confirmed the states action againt against Obamacare since the elections were after the suits were filed. The '08 elections were a mandate on Bush and we now know that the obama record is worse thus the '10 elections.

I asked you a question which you ran from, where did you learn it was someone else's responsibility to pay for your healthcare? You cannot sell your state on a healthcare program so you want to force a healthcare program on everyone from the bloated federal bureacracy that currently has created a 14.4 trillion dollar debt all because you buy the rhetoric and ignore results.

How am I running from your question? I did have an answer for your general position, of which that specific question was a part of. I didn't directly answer that specific question because it was asinine.
 
How am I running from your question? I did have an answer for your general position, of which that specific question was a part of. I didn't directly answer that specific question because it was asinine.

Asinine? You think it is asinine that we live in a country where personal responsibility issues are expected to be paid for by someone else? How typical of you so tell me what are you doing for your local charities to help people in need? Are you sending in more of your income to the Federal govt. so they can provide that bureaucratic "help" for issues that you support? Doubt that you are putting your money where your mouth is because like all liberals all you want to do is force your ideology on everyon else. The 2010 elections proved you out of touch with reality as are today's polls on Obamacare, Rasmussen 57% support repeal.
 
If they're supporting a state-managed health care program but opposing a nationally-managed health care program then it would fall in line with the conservative's .

Conservative doesn't have a "state's rights" argument because he believes health care insurance should be sold across state lines - mandated at the federal level, it would clearly usurp the state's right to determine who sells health insurance in their state.
 
Asinine? You think it is asinine that we live in a country where personal responsibility issues are expected to be paid for by someone else? .


So now you are against insurance all together? :shock:
 
Conservative doesn't have a "state's rights" argument because he believes health care insurance should be sold across state lines - mandated at the federal level, it would clearly usurp the state's right to determine who sells health insurance in their state.

You have a problem with states controlling what is going on in their state but not the Federal Govt. telling you what you must do in your state? You really are for a massive central govt. where power is controlled in D.C. and then they help solve problems in your state? Your faith in Federal Bureaucrats is quite telling as evidenced by the current 14.4 trillion dollar debt which was created by those bureaucrats. You see, you cannot sell your state on what you want so like all liberals you either want the court or the Federal Govt. to overrule the people of your state.
 
You have a problem with states controlling what is going on in their state but not the Federal Govt. telling you what you must do in your state? You really are for a massive central govt. where power is controlled in D.C. and then they help solve problems in your state? Your faith in Federal Bureaucrats is quite telling as evidenced by the current 14.4 trillion dollar debt which was created by those bureaucrats. You see, you cannot sell your state on what you want so like all liberals you either want the court or the Federal Govt. to overrule the people of your state.


You said last night you were pro selling health insurance across State lines. So that means the laws of S Dakota could be controlling your health insurance.
 
You said last night you were pro selling health insurance across State lines. So that means the laws of S Dakota could be controlling your health insurance.

LOL, so the S. Dakoka insurance company forces you to buy from them? Apparently personal choice in a liberal world only involves abortion and the killing of a life. Competition is the key to lowering healthcare costs and competition scares big govt. liberals as it takes away their power
 
So his hypocrisy on health care ensures your vote for him? How about his position on Planned Parenthood? Does his willingness to take away health care services for poor women ensure your vote for him?
I have yet to find any politicians without some hypocritical positions, including Obama, who I voted for in 2008.

I have come to the conclusion that what politicians do during non-election years is more telling than what they say when running for office.
 
LOL, so the S. Dakoka insurance company forces you to buy from them? Apparently personal choice in a liberal world only involves abortion and the killing of a life. Competition is the key to lowering healthcare costs and competition scares big govt. liberals as it takes away their power


With your expertise in business where do you think insurance companies will relocate to:

a) the State that allows the most favorable policies towards the insurance companies

or

b) the State that allows the most favorable policies to the insured.
 
With your expertise in business where do you think insurance companies will relocate to:

a) the State that allows the most favorable policies towards the insurance companies

or

b) the State that allows the most favorable policies to the insured.

Happening already and why TX is doing better than the nation on employment. There is nothing to prevent other states from doing the same thing but they choose to be anti business with their tax policies. Why did you have your business in TX and not some other state?
 
Happening already and why TX is doing better than the nation on employment. ?


Last I checked health insurance was not being sold over state lines. Could you please try to address what was posed to you rather than diverting.
 
Last I checked health insurance was not being sold over state lines. Could you please try to address what was posed to you rather than diverting.

Good Lord, man, you are trolling. Businesses are moving to TX, didn't say that healthcare insurance companies were moving to TX. You really are looking for attention, so either offer something of value or I will ignore you like I have on a number of your posts.
 
Good Lord, man, you are trolling. Businesses are moving to TX, didn't say that healthcare insurance companies were moving to TX. You really are looking for attention, so either offer something of value or I will ignore you like I have on a number of your posts.

on that note though, there are many, many insurance companies who do business here.
 
Good Lord, man, you are trolling. Businesses are moving to TX, didn't say that healthcare insurance companies were moving to TX. You really are looking for attention, so either offer something of value or I will ignore you like I have on a number of your posts.


Which had absolutely nothing to do with what was posed to you by me about selling insurance over state lines. Again epic fail from you to actually defend your position.
 

Yes, asinine far-right hyperbole.

The 2010 elections proved you out of touch with reality as are today's polls on Obamacare, Rasmussen 57% support repeal.

Oh, Rasmussen? Why am I not surprised? Here, take a look at a real study on the role of health care reform in the '10 elections. You'll find that health care was not the main issue of the '10 elections; and that support for the law was largely divided along party lines with a slight majority of independents having negative views; but a large majority of Americans supporting the individual components of the law. Hardly a mandate on health care reform, like you keep repeating. More of a mandate on the economy, like I said.

Health Care in the 2010 Congressional Election | Health Policy and Reform

Health Care in the 2010 Congressional Election
NEJM | October 27, 2010 | Topics: Data Watch, Reform Implementation
Robert J. Blendon, Sc.D., and John M. Benson, M.A.

Eight months after the enactment of historic health care reform legislation (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act), the country faces a midterm congressional election with all seats in the House of Representatives and one third of Senate seats up for election. The election has significance for health care because most of the provisions of the national reform law do not take effect for years, and some of them could be altered by the next Congress. Such alteration might involve expanding the government’s role in the plan — for example, by adding a public insurance option to compete with those of private insurers — or in the other policy direction, repealing and replacing much of the current legislation before it is implemented. The former possibility has been raised by some leading congressional Democrats, and the latter by leading Republicans.1,2 This partisan divide over the legislation’s future makes the 2010 election highly significant for Americans involved in medicine and health care.

We examined the role of health care in the coming congressional election from the perspective of potential voters, drawing on results from 17 independent polls. Most of these polls, which have sample sizes of 721 to 2054, report the views of the public as a whole, though others report the views of registered voters or people likely to vote in the election (see Opinion Polls on Health Care and the 2010 Election). Our analysis focuses on six questions: the mood of the country at the time of the election, the potential role of health care as a voting issue, the public’s approval or disapproval of the current national health care reform legislation, what registered voters want the next Congress to do about the legislation, differences in views of the health care law between those who report that they intend to vote for a Democratic congressional candidate and those who say they’ll vote for a Republican candidate, and the implications for health care reform of electing a new Congress controlled by Republicans.

First, regarding the question of the country’s mood, it seems clear that Americans today have very negative views about the general direction of the country, and they express an anti-incumbent attitude toward Congress. As the 2010 congressional election approaches, more than 6 in 10 likely voters (64%) believe that the country has gotten off on the wrong track, while about one third (31%) think the country is headed in the right direction (Bloomberg). In addition, the results of current polling portray the electoral environment as similar to that of 1994 and 2006, when the incumbent party lost control of both houses of Congress. Registered voters’ anti-incumbent mood can be seen in their inclination not to vote to reelect their current congressional representative, but rather to look around for someone else: 55% of registered voters say they are inclined to look around (WP–ABC, September–October), and only 31% say they are inclined to vote to reelect their current representative, a lower proportion than just before the 1994 and 2006 congressional elections (37% each).3 An important sign for the future of the new health care law is that 53% of likely voters believe that if the Republicans become the majority party in both houses of Congress, they could successfully repeal laws that have been passed during the past 2 years (Battleground–GWU–Politico).

Second, polls suggest that health care is an important but secondary voting issue in this election. Asked how important each of several issues would be in their voting decision for Congress this year, more than 4 in 10 Americans (41 to 49%) said that health care or health care reform would be extremely important. The economy or jobs was the issue designated as extremely important by the largest proportion (55 to 62%), and 37 to 51% said that the budget deficit or federal spending would be extremely important in their voting decision (USA Today–Gallup; KFF, October). In addition, 37% pointed to dissatisfaction with government, and 36% to taxes, as issues that would be extremely important in their vote (KFF, October).

More than 7 in 10 respondents (71%) say that a candidate’s position on the health care law will play a role in their congressional vote — and there’s a large partisan division on this question: 67% of Democrats say they are more likely to vote for a congressional candidate who supported the new health care law, and 72% of Republicans say they are less likely to vote for such a candidate. Among independents, a larger proportion say they would be less likely (37%) than say they’d be more likely (29%) to vote for a candidate who supported the new health care law (Pew–NJ, September–October).

Third, more than 7 months after the health care reform law was enacted, a majority of Americans neither favor nor oppose it. Various independent polling organizations have taken varied approaches to this question and have reported a range of results (WP–ABC, September–October; AP–GfK Roper, September; CBS–NY Times; KFF, October; Pew–NJ, September 9–12). Since the law’s enactment, there has been a huge continuing debate about its potential positive and negative implications. Although support for the legislation may have varied during this period, public support is not substantively different at the time of the election from what it was at the time of enactment (WP–ABC, February; AP–GfK Roper, March; CBS, March; KFF, March; Pew, March) (see Table 1).

Americans clearly have conflicting views about various aspects of the health care legislation and their impact. On the one hand, many elements of the law are highly popular, including the provision of tax breaks for small businesses to make coverage for their workers more affordable (favored by 90% of the public), expansion of the Medicare prescription-drug benefit to fill the “doughnut hole” (favored by 79%), and the requirement that insurers cover all applicants, even if they have preexisting conditions (favored by 58 to 80%).
 
Last edited:
You have a problem with states controlling what is going on in their state but not the Federal Govt. telling you what you must do in your state? You really are for a massive central govt. where power is controlled in D.C. and then they help solve problems in your state? Your faith in Federal Bureaucrats is quite telling as evidenced by the current 14.4 trillion dollar debt which was created by those bureaucrats. You see, you cannot sell your state on what you want so like all liberals you either want the court or the Federal Govt. to overrule the eople of your state.
If you are for selling health insurance across states lines, it would seen that it is you who wants the Federal Govenment to control what happens in the states. Does Texas allow all health insurance to be sold in the state???
 
Yes, asinine far-right hyperbole.



Oh, Rasmussen? Why am I not surprised? Here, take a look at a real study on the role of health care reform in the '10 elections. You'll find that health care was not the main issue of the '10 elections; and that support for the law was largely divided along party lines with a slight majority of independents having negative views; but a large majority of Americans supporting the individual components of the law. Hardly a mandate on health care reform like you keep repeating.

The reason the Republicans won, was because the Democrats sat on their hands, because Obama turned to be a centrist. If the health care law had a robust Public Option the Democrats would have done much better.
 
The reason the Republicans won, was because the Democrats sat on their hands, because Obama turned to be a centrist. If the health care law had a robust Public Option the Democrats would have done much better.

I agree considering the fact that the public option was supported by a majority of Americans. But health care was not the main issue of the last elections. I suggest anybody interested in this topic read the study that I cited in post #70. It's very insightful.
 
Last edited:
Yet these States will go crawling to the Feds when they medicaid money.

Where does the Fed get the money the states are 'crawling' to get? Who's money is it that 'the Fed' is so graciously doling out? Cuz...the fed...they are just ROLLING in Fed created monies...right? And the states and citizens of the states...they have nothing to do with 'the Feds' largess...

I swear to God...sometimes...its clear you dont even think before you bang **** out. Your wee brain goes..."oh...a chance for a little GOTCHA comment!!! ZIIIIING!!!" and away you go...
 
Where does the Fed get the money the states are 'crawling' to get? Who's money is it that 'the Fed' is so graciously doling out? Cuz...the fed...they are just ROLLING in Fed created monies...right? And the states and citizens of the states...they have nothing to do with 'the Feds' largess...

I swear to God...sometimes...its clear you dont even think before you bang **** out. Your wee brain goes..."oh...a chance for a little GOTCHA comment!!! ZIIIIING!!!" and away you go...


Where do you get your legal tender.

494097.jpg

Please note what it says just above George Washington's portrait.
 
Back
Top Bottom