Obamacare is dead. Or it will be when the Supremes finally administer the coup de grace. So what comes after Obamacare?
Would you believe Boehnercare?
What is it?
It is the plan that is now circulating for when the Supremes strike down Obamacare. The Republicans want to take the “popular” aspects of Obamacare and make them Boehnercare.
Is brain death a prerequisite for becoming a leader in the Republican Party?
Mr. Boehner, if Obamacare is unconstitutional, what the hell makes you think your version of it will be?
The Republicans want to bribe the voters with the so-called popular provisions, such as allowing your kids to live in your basement and stay on your insurance until they are 26 or the coverage of preexisting conditions.
Allegedly they want to keep healthcare affordable.
If you want to make healthcare affordable, there is one foolproof system that will work every time. It is called the free market.
Not only does it work, we have proof. If you need to see the free market at work, look at vision correction, AKA Lasik.
When Lasik first appeared on the scene, treatments cost $10,000. Today it is $199 an eye and the doctor will finance it for you.
It is simple. Health insurance does not cover Lasik. Health insurance distorts and destroys the free market. Healthcare consumers neither know nor care what the costs of healthcare are. All they know is what their copay and deductable are. That is it.
The Republicans in Washington are talking about using government to try and keep healthcare costs down. If you are not terrified of that, you should be.
Washington’s competence ends at the level of managing a two-moon outhouse.
If Boehner and company pander this way, all we will be getting is Obamacare lite. Government is never the solution. It is the problem.
All this proves is that Boehner and company are big government Republicans. There is no commitment on their part to reduce the size of government. We can’t even afford the level of government we currently have.
Our debt exceeds that of all of Europe combined. Debt is a far greater enemy than the lack of a government healthcare program.
When will the Republicans ever learn?
They have bought into the myth that we must make certain that everyone has health insurance.
Health Insurance is what is making healthcare more expensive. Healthcare is not the issue. Making healthcare inexpensive so that the average American can pay out of their pocket. The Republicans have fallen for it. The debate should be how could we use the free market to make medical care affordable, more efficient and more cutting edge.
By buying into the left’s line that the issue is the number of uninsured, we have lost.
If the Republicans put parts of Obamacare back in, this time as Boehnercare, we will destroy the budget and we will set the platform for socialist healthcare in ten years.
It will just be easier for them next time.
Boehner is a neo-CON which means he's playing on the same side as the Dems. He proved this during that dog and pony show over raising the debt ceiling when both sides were fighting for the same thing: more debt.
Currently the correct term is RINO (Republican in Name Only). Neo-Con used to mean what Mr Henning stated in 1930s-90s, but now it tends to mean a hawk(pro-war) often a hawk who has never served. Boehner is not a RINO,or Neo-Con but he is NOT a fiscal conservative either.
Before hurling insults at those with whom you disagree on the use of the term "neo-conservative", it would be helpful to read beyond the first paragraph of the Wikipedia entry on the term. If one were to read at least the full entry, he might begin to realize that investigation of a range of primary sources would be in order before descending into name calling and denigration of those who find merit in Ron Paul's notions. Better yet, look at John Boehner's accomplishments, evaluate them on their merits, and address them. If the house speaker seems to have accomplished great things, name them, defend them, and advocate them to your heart's content. If, on the other hand, his accomplishments are few, shallow, sometimes destructive of sound Constitutional goals, or downright self serving, proclaim that also. In the meanwhile, please realize that getting one's self worked up into a lather over the use of poorly understood terminology, the use of which can do little more than perpetuate a reliance on name-calling, will not be likely to resolve our nation's current deadly crisis of vision and leadership.
Please, Dave. You've got to get the terminology and talking points correct.
You need a crash course in RP talking points, by one who always wins the debate.
I hope this video helps you understand!
Yes. Now I understand perfectly. And, as always, Mr. Shotwell, you win the debate.
Boehner must be hitting the bottle again.
Debrajoe, he's going to make me start hitting the bottle right along with him. :-)
I don't believe getting rid of health insurance completely would be too popular, Judson. I see your point but it may take years to bring cancer treatment or bi-pass surgery down to $1,000. For a start, maybe healthcare insurance should be more competitive with less regulations.
The problem with health insurance, pre-Odumbocare anyway, is that the people have come to expect "first dollar" coverage where no matter what covered treatment is needed, insurance is expected to kick in immediately. For example, if you have a bronchial infection, your insurance is expected to begin covering your treatment at once (after your co-pay/max out-of-pocket, of course). Back in "the day", people would have what was called "major medical" that would cover catastrophic health problems, such as cancer or severe injuries from a car accident...things that would bankrupt most average citizens if they didn't have insurance to cover them. The premiums for "major medical" were very reasonable because those sorts of problems were relatively rare, and when you got bronchitis, or some other relatively minor problem, you paid the doctor out of pocket. Gradually more & more things began to be expected to be covered, so premiums went up & up.
Totally agree. Who ever expects to pay a plumber 20 dollars? Well,often a copay is 10 or 20 dollars for doctor's visit. Makes it easier to go to doctor for any small ailment. Insurance should be individual and require a deductible; it should not be through an employer. And no one should be on a parent's insurance policy over the age of 18. Sorry if I sound hard hearted but we are in dire financial straights. People need to be more responsible for their own health.
It's really nothing more than a popularity ploy. Certain parts of OvomitCare have been deemed as popular, such as the up to 26-year olds living at home and pre-existing conditions clause. It's a no-brainer than RINO Boehner is pandering to those who favor the popular provisions of OvomitCare. No doubt there are some conservatives who like such ideas. They sound good and costs/numbers have NOT been provided for just these parts, only the entire OvomitCare package. I'm kind of in favor of those ideas myself but would have to see such numbers associated with keeping vs. scrapping them.