Obama doesn't believe reasonable people can disagree about Health Care Reform

[andymays]

http://reason.com/news/show/135529.html

Excerpt:

It's funny—I don't feel like a fearmongering naysayer. And I haven't gotten a check from a health insurance lobbyist in ages. Actually, come to think of it, I've never gotten a check from the insurance lobby.

But Obama says that I am, along with (pick your poll) 30 to 60 percent of Americans who are not on board with massive government intervention in one of the biggest and fastest growing sectors of our economy. So it must be true.


Excerpt:

Everyone needs someone to mischaracterize while engaging in political battle—remember all those Islamists who "hate our freedoms"? But the strangest thing about Obama's cynics-and-naysayers gambit is that it's no gambit at all. Every single time Obama implies (or says outright) that the people who disagree with him are confused, that they aren't listening properly to what he is saying, they they are in the thrall of liars, or that they are fearful or mean-spirited—he's doing it in good faith.

Obama's path is so clearly illuminated by the light of his own reason, he simply can't entertain another possible way of being, a different set of beliefs, held by an intelligent person who is well-informed and well-intentioned—or so his language about cynicism, fear, and lies strongly implies. His assumption of bad faith or idiocy on the part of his opponents is done, it seems, with a pure heart.

[boxcar]

http://reason.com/news/show/135529.html

Excerpt:

It's funny—I don't feel like a fearmongering naysayer. And I haven't gotten a check from a health insurance lobbyist in ages. Actually, come to think of it, I've never gotten a check from the insurance lobby.

But Obama says that I am, along with (pick your poll) 30 to 60 percent of Americans who are not on board with massive government intervention in one of the biggest and fastest growing sectors of our economy. So it must be true.


Excerpt:

Everyone needs someone to mischaracterize while engaging in political battle—remember all those Islamists who "hate our freedoms"? But the strangest thing about Obama's cynics-and-naysayers gambit is that it's no gambit at all. Every single time Obama implies (or says outright) that the people who disagree with him are confused, that they aren't listening properly to what he is saying, they they are in the thrall of liars, or that they are fearful or mean-spirited—he's doing it in good faith.

Obama's path is so clearly illuminated by the light of his own reason, he simply can't entertain another possible way of being, a different set of beliefs, held by an intelligent person who is well-informed and well-intentioned—or so his language about cynicism, fear, and lies strongly implies. His assumption of bad faith or idiocy on the part of his opponents is done, it seems, with a pure heart. emphasis mine

"The operative term here is "can't". A hardcore narcissist cannot see any other path other than his own because as the writer rightly suggested such people (as BO) believe their own light of reason and intellect is so bright that it outshines all others. Everyone else's "light" pales by comparison. This is precisely why BO has demonized everyone involved in this debate save for his own political party. In his mind, all other parties to this debate are stupid, insignificant, immoral, thieves, liars, incompetents, etc, etc., etc.

Boxcar
P.S. Oh, I forgot: Hail to King BO!

[Track Collector]

It's all part of the playbook.

When others don't agree with you, first try to win them over. If unsuccessful, paint them to be fools, or make them out to be the villians.
Time to clean house in 2010 and 2012, and fight like h*ll in the meantime to prevent disasterous legislation from being enacted.

[mostpost]

Every single time Obama implies (or says outright) that the people who disagree with him are confused, that they aren't listening properly to what he is saying, they they are in the thrall of liars, or that they are fearful or mean-spirited—he's doing it in good faith.

Perhaps the reason Obama is saying people are confused is that PEOPLE ARE CONFUSED. :bang: :bang:
The majority of people think HR3200 provides care for illegal immigrants. It does not.
SEC. 246. NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS.

Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.

The majority thinks abortions will be funded under HR3200. They will not. Nothing in the bill repeals current policy on the funding of abortions.

45% think that elderly people will be forced into counseling sessions in which they will be encouraged to "Step aside". This is blatently false. Section 1233 merely authorizes medicare payment for such a consultation IF the patient desires it.

As far as a government takeover of healthcare, there is nothing in the bill that says government is not trying to takeover healthcare. I'm sure many of you will take that as proof that they are. Nothing will convince you otherwise. For myself, I can't see that private industry is doing such a great job of handling the problem. Unless you consider huge profits a great job.
We spend more money on health care than any other industrialized nation. Our outcomes in various categories rank in the thirties. Just this morning I heard of a survey that says our wait times rank behind France, United Kingdom, Australia and several other countries with a public health care system.

[newtothegame]

Perhaps the reason Obama is saying people are confused is that PEOPLE ARE CONFUSED. :bang: :bang:
The majority of people think HR3200 provides care for illegal immigrants. It does not.
SEC. 246. NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS.

Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.

The majority thinks abortions will be funded under HR3200. They will not. Nothing in the bill repeals current policy on the funding of abortions.

45% think that elderly people will be forced into counseling sessions in which they will be encouraged to "Step aside". This is blatently false. Section 1233 merely authorizes medicare payment for such a consultation IF the patient desires it.

As far as a government takeover of healthcare, there is nothing in the bill that says government is not trying to takeover healthcare. I'm sure many of you will take that as proof that they are. Nothing will convince you otherwise. For myself, I can't see that private industry is doing such a great job of handling the problem. Unless you consider huge profits a great job.
We spend more money on health care than any other industrialized nation. Our outcomes in various categories rank in the thirties. Just this morning I heard of a survey that says our wait times rank behind France, United Kingdom, Australia and several other countries with a public health care system.

Most...you continue to be blinded by the ENTIRE scope of this administration....whats gonna happen when the dems (and please don't say that they aren't) get legislation through on the amnesty bills??? Then all those illegals...WONT BE UNDOCUMENTED ANYMORE. Last time I brought this up to you, you didnt reply....
Anxiously awaiting...

[mostpost]

A hardcore narcissist cannot see any other path other than his own

I learned a new word from JustRalph yesterday. Your opinion that Obama is a narcissist is a CANARD . I am in the process of reading "Dreams From My Father" Nothing in the book supports your claim. Not only does Obama seek counsel from those around him, and respect those opinions, but he is filled with doubts about his place in the world.

Even his actions on the issue of health care are the opposite of a narcissist.
To a far greater degree than I would have, he opened the debate up to rivals and supporters alike. And to what effect? The anti-Obama crowd used the opportunity to spread false and malicious rumors. They offered zero solutions.
They said "even if we write the bill, we won't support it."
"Narcissist"? Turn in your Psychiatry Degree> :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown:

[mostpost]

Most...you continue to be blinded by the ENTIRE scope of this administration....whats gonna happen when the dems (and please don't say that they aren't) get legislation through on the amnesty bills??? Then all those illegals...WONT BE UNDOCUMENTED ANYMORE. Last time I brought this up to you, you didnt reply....
Anxiously awaiting...
I don't know of any amnesty bills. I know there are immigration reform bills pending but everything I've heard is there is no provision for a blanket amnesty in any of them. There are provisions to legalize aliens who meet certain criteria. Criteria very similar to ones proposed by John McCain.
Assuming that one of these bills passes-by no means a certainty-those people would be documented and they would be eligible to participate in the program. ILLEGAL immigrants would not.

I think if anyone is "Blinded by the Right" it's you. Time and again, it has been proven that what you are being told about these billls is untrue. And time and again you insist that you know the hidden agenda.

There is no hidden agenda. The agenda is to get as close to health care for everyone as possible, and to control the costs of health care.

[Indulto]

... I think if anyone is "Blinded by the Right" it's you. Time and again, it has been proven that what you are being told about these billls is untrue. And time and again you insist that you know the hidden agenda.

There is no hidden agenda. The agenda is to get as close to health care for everyone as possible, and to control the costs of health care.mp,
Your efforts to insert some reason/logic in the proceedings here and not let yourself be shouted down is appreciated and admired.

[NJ Stinks]

http://reason.com/news/show/135529.html


Excerpt:

Everyone needs someone to mischaracterize while engaging in political battle—remember all those Islamists who "hate our freedoms"? But the strangest thing about Obama's cynics-and-naysayers gambit is that it's no gambit at all. Every single time Obama implies (or says outright) that the people who disagree with him are confused, that they aren't listening properly to what he is saying, they they are in the thrall of liars, or that they are fearful or mean-spirited—he's doing it in good faith.

Obama's path is so clearly illuminated by the light of his own reason, he simply can't entertain another possible way of being, a different set of beliefs, held by an intelligent person who is well-informed and well-intentioned—or so his language about cynicism, fear, and lies strongly implies. His assumption of bad faith or idiocy on the part of his opponents is done, it seems, with a pure heart.

When Obama starts saying God told him to do something I'll start worrying. :rolleyes:

[andymays]

When Obama starts saying God told him to do something I'll start worrying. :rolleyes:


He's coming close with the meeting he had yesterday!

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/74035.html

Excerpt:

President Barack Obama participated in a scripted online discussion of his health care overhaul with a friendly audience of religious voters and pastors Wednesday. It ended with him bemoaning those who bear "false witness" against his plans — and then making a claim of his own that's been widely shown to be false.
"There's been a lot of misinformation," Obama said, complaining about people who are "bearing false witness."

[LottaKash]

Bo, reminds me of the Emperor in the movie; "The Gladiator", when he asked, "why don't they love me ?"...I gave them a hundred days of games (bailouts in this case)....:D

best,

[NJ Stinks]

He's coming close with the meeting he had yesterday!

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/74035.html

Excerpt:

President Barack Obama participated in a scripted online discussion of his health care overhaul with a friendly audience of religious voters and pastors Wednesday. It ended with him bemoaning those who bear "false witness" against his plans — and then making a claim of his own that's been widely shown to be false.
"There's been a lot of misinformation," Obama said, complaining about people who are "bearing false witness."

Andy, I am very impressed that you came back with that in 8 minutes! :cool:

[andymays]

Andy, I am very impressed that you came back with that in 8 minutes! :cool:


I try to stay out of the mix because I'm so invested in the Horse Racing sections but I like to throw the "red meat" into the pit so you guys can slug it out! Entertaining. ;)

[mostpost]

mp,
Your efforts to insert some reason/logic in the proceedings here and not let yourself be shouted down is appreciated and admired.
Shucks!! :blush: :blush: :blush:

[lamboguy]

obama is right on, the republican's love his health care plan, its just another way to keep the status quo intact. a matter of fact the republicans must have taylor made this plan for obama to deliver.

[boxcar]

I learned a new word from JustRalph yesterday. Your opinion that Obama is a narcissist is a CANARD . I am in the process of reading "Dreams From My Father" Nothing in the book supports your claim. Not only does Obama seek counsel from those around him, and respect those opinions, but he is filled with doubts about his place in the world.

Even his actions on the issue of health care are the opposite of a narcissist.
To a far greater degree than I would have, he opened the debate up to rivals and supporters alike. And to what effect? The anti-Obama crowd used the opportunity to spread false and malicious rumors. They offered zero solutions.
They said "even if we write the bill, we won't support it."
"Narcissist"? Turn in your Psychiatry Degree> :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown:

Do you ever stop sipping on the kool-aid? Or are you a non-stopper?

Boxcar
P.S. Tell BO to get in touch me, so I can help him remove all those doubts. I'll gladly tell him where and how he'll best fit in to this crazy world.

[newtothegame]

I don't know of any amnesty bills. I know there are immigration reform bills pending but everything I've heard is there is no provision for a blanket amnesty in any of them. There are provisions to legalize aliens who meet certain criteria. Criteria very similar to ones proposed by John McCain.
Assuming that one of these bills passes-by no means a certainty-those people would be documented and they would be eligible to participate in the program. ILLEGAL immigrants would not.

I think if anyone is "Blinded by the Right" it's you. Time and again, it has been proven that what you are being told about these billls is untrue. And time and again you insist that you know the hidden agenda.

There is no hidden agenda. The agenda is to get as close to health care for everyone as possible, and to control the costs of health care.

Most....I truly do enjoy our back and forth. And please don't think that your arguements fall on deaf ears. I do attempt to go back and check on things. As I have said and will continue to say, I do NOT affiliate myself with dems or repubs. I think the whole bunch have lost their way when it comes to who they serve.

But above, you say "time and again it has been PROVEN that what I am being told about these bills is untrue". And right above that, you say that "everything I have HEARD".....do you not see the irony in that? That is the essence of my arguement. I never said anything about hidden agendas. I am not sure where you got that statement from. But I do believe this....
I believe that there are very few if any of our congressional membership who have the PEOPLE'S best interest at heart. This would include the President of the United States.
I have seen him speak and say one thing and turn around and say the opposite depending on who he is speaking to. Not once but time and time again. When he is asked a Legit question such as the student from Colorado at one of the recent town halls, he AVOIDS the question by ducking an answer. If he wants the support of the people, where is the REAL transparency he spoke about on his run to the white house? Why all the vague answers?
Look at what this administration has done so far. Please (as I mentioned in another thread in discussion), tell me what you admire about this president. Tell me what he has done that has you singing his praises.
And as I also mentioned in that thread...I am not concerned about what Bush has done. BUSH IS NOT IN OFFICE NOW.
I choose not to live in the past although history has a way of rearing its ugly head when people become complacent.
And like the president....please don't avoid the question....tell me what you admire about Obama and what he has done that just has you spreading the kool aid.

[Lefty]

Andy, those lobbyists you mention. They are all working on Obama Care.
I thought Obama distanced himself from lobbyists?

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aZdbr0YXz5jI

[mostpost]

Most....I truly do enjoy our back and forth.
As do I. It keeps me young and my mind nimble. And I'm a much better typist now. Over nine words a minute on a good day. :D
And please don't think that your arguements fall on deaf ears. I do attempt to go back and check on things. As I have said and will continue to say, I do NOT affiliate myself with dems or repubs. I think the whole bunch have lost their way when it comes to who they serve.

But above, you say "time and again it has been PROVEN that what I am being told about these bills is untrue". And right above that, you say that "everything I have HEARD".....do you not see the irony in that?
There were two different things I was referring to. Proven (IMO) were the facts that there was no health care for illegals in the current health bills; that there were no provisions to force "death consultations on the elderly; and that abortions would not be funded. I agree that "Proven" was too strong a word for my belief that the government (Obama) is not trying to take over health care.

I used the phrase "Everything I have heard" in reference to your assertion that illegal aliens would be covered when dems made them legal. I used that phrase, in that discussion, because I am not familiar with bills before Congress on the immigration issue. I did briefly look at HR 264 sponsored by Sheila Jackson-Lee. That Bill has no provision for a blanket amnesty. What I have "heard" from listening to news reports and pundits is that everyone pretty much agrees amnesty is off the table.

I will answer your question of what I admire about Obama's performance, but now I am heading for bed. A hint, it is probably the same things you don't admire. :lol: :lol:

[mostpost]

Andy, those lobbyists you mention. They are all working on Obama Care.
I thought Obama distanced himself from lobbyists?

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aZdbr0YXz5jI
They're not lobbyists; they're ADVISORS :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[mostpost]

And like the president....please don't avoid the question....tell me what you admire about Obama and what he has done that just has you spreading the kool aid.

See my reply in the new thread: "Answer To Newtothegame"

[boxcar]

They're not lobbyists; they're ADVISORS :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

One thing you gotta say about BO: He's consistent. Once a liar, always a liar -- literally!

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Oh, yeah...while on the subject of liars, this is how BO is pissing down our backs while trying to convince us it's just raindrops we're feeling:

[boxcar]

Sure, the government may not directly force us to give up our insurance plans, but the government, through it's "public option" would make private insurance plans through employers extremely uncompetitive and the vast majority of employers, most especially in a very weak economy like this one, will simply quit providing that little perk to their employees in order to save a ton of money. This in turn would mean millions would have to go out and buy their own or seek appreciably cheaper coverage under the "public option". This is what I was telling Robert a few days ago. This is how every American, sooner or later, will be forced unto the state plantation. It has to eventually happen. The government will need every red cent it can get to get this monstrosity off the ground.

Read all about it. It all makes perfectly good sense. BO, in essence, is telling us a half-truth, which as most of know is really not the truth at all, is it? He's lying by omission -- by what he's not revealing to us.

http://brightlightsearch.blogspot.com/2009/08/keep-your-health-plan-not-likely-pres.html

Boxcar

[mostpost]

Sure, the government may not directly force us to give up our insurance plans, but the government, through it's "public option" would make private insurance plans through employers extremely uncompetitive and the vast majority of employers, most especially in a very weak economy like this one, will simply quit providing that little perk to their employees in order to save a ton of money. This in turn would mean millions would have to go out and buy their own or seek appreciably cheaper coverage under the "public option". This is what I was telling Robert a few days ago. This is how every American, sooner or later, will be forced unto the state plantation. It has to eventually happen. The government will need every red cent it can get to get this monstrosity off the ground.

Read all about it. It all makes perfectly good sense. BO, in essence, is telling us a half-truth, which as most of know is really not the truth at all, is it? He's lying by omission -- by what he's not revealing to us.

http://brightlightsearch.blogspot.com/2009/08/keep-your-health-plan-not-likely-pres.html

Boxcar
I keep hearing conservatives say two things. The first is "We don't want a public Option. The Government can't do anything right. Any plan it runs will be a failure and the costs will spiral out of control" The second thing I here is,
"It's not fair to private insurers to have to compete against a public Option. The government can always do things cheaper" Those are two exactly opposite sentiments. And as far as costs spiraling out of control, what do we have now? Insurance premiums will double in the not too distant future.

The link you provided is replete with illogic and fantasies. The first is where the author says the penalty for not insuring workers is so small that employers
will gladly pay it and forego offering insurance to employees. One, we don't know precisely what that penalty will be. The 8% in the house bill would be about what the post office was paying for my insurance, if I recall.
Two, suppose employers are able to secure a substantial savings on health care costs by not offering insurance. When it comes time for contract negotiation, any union negotiator worth his salt will say, "Mr. employer, you have X dollars that you are no longer paying in benefits. We want those dollars as part of our salary.
The second dumb thing he says is private insurance companies can not compete with a taxpayer subsidized program. The public option will NOT be taxpayer subsidized. It will be required to pay its operating expenses and benefit out of premiums collected and investments made. Just like private companies. And if you think government has an advantage, I point you to UPS and Fedex.

[boxcar]

I keep hearing conservatives say two things. The first is "We don't want a public Option. The Government can't do anything right. Any plan it runs will be a failure and the costs will spiral out of control" The second thing I here is,
"It's not fair to private insurers to have to compete against a public Option. The government can always do things cheaper" Those are two exactly opposite sentiments. And as far as costs spiraling out of control, what do we have now? Insurance premiums will double in the not too distant future.

You forgot the third complaint: Most Americans don't want to ruled by a tyrannical government. (Keep this one close to your, naive, self-deceived little heart.)

The link you provided is replete with illogic and fantasies.

From getting to know you on this forum, my educated guess is that the last time you ever had an encounter with logic (or truth for that matter), you became so horrified, you ran to hide yourself under a rock out of fear and have been numb from the neck up ever since. But let's look at what you think passes for "logic". :rolleyes:

The first is where the author says the penalty for not insuring workers is so small that employers
will gladly pay it and forego offering insurance to employees. One, we don't know precisely what that penalty will be. The 8% in the house bill would be about what the post office was paying for my insurance, if I recall.

Now, answer me these questions, Mr. Brainiac: Why would liberals, generally and BO, even more specifically, who are on the public record as saying they are in favor of a single-payer system, want to give any incentives to corporations to continue providing health care insurance? Why? Aren't we constantly being told by libs that costs are out of control and it's all the fault of crooked doctors and greedy insurance companies? Have not doctors and insurance companies been constantly demonized by the Left? Would it not, therefore, be in the best interest of the state to provide every incentive to companies to discontinue their health care packages to employees ,whereby these corporations would save billions upon billions of dollars in a very short period of time? What is it that makes you believe that the government would provide every incentive for companies to continue with the status quo, which libs have been criticizing continually? Since the libs obviously believe that the state would be in a better position to provide appreciably cheaper services, what purpose would it serve liberals to continue with the status quo?

Two, suppose employers are able to secure a substantial savings on health care costs by not offering insurance. When it comes time for contract negotiation, any union negotiator worth his salt will say, "Mr. employer, you have X dollars that you are no longer paying in benefits. We want those dollars as part of our salary.


Two things: Are all businesses unionized? :bang: :bang: You talk as though they are.

Secondly, you're very quick to postulate the unions going after employers, but obviously you're oblivious to the fact that the unions would aggressively pursue the liberal politicians who are beholding to unions! Ever hear of political favors? Do you really believe the unions would stand by idly and not scream like a banshee stuck in a church while politicians take away union members superior benefits? :bang: :bang: Are you really this naive? Union members would no more lose their superior plans than would federal employees or politicians. Next case.

The second dumb thing he says is private insurance companies can not compete with a taxpayer subsidized program. The public option will NOT be taxpayer subsidized. It will be required to pay its operating expenses and benefit out of premiums collected and investments made. Just like private companies. And if you think government has an advantage, I point you to UPS and Fedex.

Really? Not "taxpayer subsidized", eh? And just who pays these "premiums"? And from whose investments do these deductions come?
What's ironic here is that liberals have been playing it very, very close to the vest on this very issue of funding because too many Americans now are sick and tired of all this government spending and taxation. In fact, I only heard one politician say (although others may have, too) that the "rich" would be TAXED. (But those of us who understand government code know what he really meant.) So...show me in print where the specifics are laid out for this "public option" funding.

Boxcar

[Tom]

In 5 years, the definition of an authorized health care provider will change, and are as yet undefined. This is where the one "you like and keep" goes under. Don't you guys listen to Obama? He specifically has said he is "a single payer guy" and that "it would take a few years to eliminate all the private providers and implement a total government system."

For all the water you guys carry for him, not too many of you have ever listened to what he has said.

[boxcar]

In 5 years, the definition of an authorized health care provider will change, and are as yet undefined. This is where the one "you like and keep" goes under. Don't you guys listen to Obama? He specifically has said he is "a single payer guy" and that "it would take a few years to eliminate all the private providers and implement a total government system."

For all the water you guys carry for him, not too many of you have ever listened to what he has said.

No, I believe they listen carefully to their messiah. All they're doing is emulating the liar by propagating his lies. Would you expect anything different from drones?

Boxcar