So you retract the statement that anyone has ever called the ACA “perfect”. And apparently you’re ignoring the large amounts of criticism of various aspects of the ACA, on the SDMB, by supporters of Obama and the ACA.
Both of these statements are false. Liberal Dopers have criticized many facets of the ACA, while (in general) still agreeing that the ACA is better than the current system. You are very, very incorrect.
I don’t think you’re pushing a political agenda- I just think you’re highly deluded. It’s kind of mind-boggling that you continually post stuff (like liberals said the ACA was “perfect”) that is so incredibly false without giving it a second thought.
Seriously- it would be very wise of you to, from now on, make zero factual claims without an explicit cite. Don’t analyze, don’t interpret, and don’t postulate- you’re so bad at it you will inevitably get it wrong. Don’t even say something about SDMB posters without previous posts to back you up, because you get that stuff wrong too. Just a whole lot of wrongness.
But I’m sure you’re a decent fellow 
Yeah but you think a lot of things, and as we’ve shown here over about a year now, the vast, VAST majority of them are wrong. Just like you’re wrong now.
“I never said it was perfect! I just can’t think of anything wrong with it!”
If there has been criticism of the ACA from liberals, aside from complaining that it’s not single payer, I’d love to see it. I’m sure it exists, but all the threads I’ve been on, the conservatives have been the sole source of criticism. Other than the single-payer advocates, and even they don’t count as critics since they can’t think of anything ACTUALLY wrong with ACA other than that they wish it was single-payer.
Oh boy… this is gonna be fun Too bad it’s past my bed time… I’ll have to get in on this parade in the morning.
Then this would be an example of me loving to be wrong. See, here’s what some of you don’t get. Being wrong is GREAT when you’re greatest fears turn out to be wrong. I would love to be wrong about liberals seeing ACA through rose-colored glasses. That would mean that if ACA doesn’t end up being better than the current system, they’ll join us in repeal! That would be awesome! I know that for my part, if ACA works well, I’ll support it.
It is perfectly fair to infer views from statements. Liberals do it ALL THE TIME when calling Republicans racists or haters of the poor. Only they are a lot more ridiculous about it. Republicans support voter ID, therefore Republicans hate black people. Strangely, that view gets expressed daily on SDMB with none of the criticisms you would see for saying that liberals believe ACA is perfect. Yet my statement has more support, given the reasons I’ve cited.
here’s the other issue I’m having: Why is it that my “ACA is perfect” argument is evidence of bad faith, even though I’ve explained why I believe it, yet liberals calling Republicans racist is NOT evidence of bad faith?
That’s one I’d love to have explained to me.
Anyone who would make sweeping judgements about someone’s moral worth based on what they post on a discussion board is, well… small.
I couldn’t stay away. Here are a few posts, and a whole thread, with criticism of certain aspects of the ACA, by liberals who support Obama and the ACA. I found this in about 5 minutes. There are pages and pages of similar posts in the searches I did.
You are hilariously wrong here, adaher.
Now I have to go to bed.
Sure it’s fair, sometimes. You’re just really, really bad at it, and you shouldn’t do it until you get better. You shouldn’t be inferring anything, because you’ll just get it wrong.
Except for the very smart analysis of IPAB, which I hadn’t seen the first time around, all of those are criticisms about how it still uses private insurance companies. Guess what the alternative to using private insurance companies is? Single-payer.
So I’m not hilariously wrong, I’m pleasantly wrong about one poster. Hopefully there will be more such pleasant, smart analyses of the downsides of the health care bill, and hopefully before they become so bleeding obvious that they can’t be denied anymore.
It’s too complex. It diverts money to large corporations, guaranteeing them income. It doesn’t contain enough cost-cutting measures. Exceptions have been granted to religious bigots so they can deny birth control to their employees. It relies on the IRS as an enforcer, complicates the tax system, and makes too much use of the taxation authority. It should have simply been paid for out of taxes directly. It was too complex to be instituted on time (although Republican sabotage has certainly made this a lot worse.) It puts a burden on the young and healthy. It isn’t sufficiently “means tested.” (A debatable flaw: some say that rich people should have much higher deductibles; others say no. A reasonable person could argue that either pro or con.)
All of this has been said many times, by many people who still support it. No one has ever said “It’s perfect.” I’d laugh in their face if they did.
It’s a large, lumpy step in approximately the right direction. It was born of compromise, and then denied by the very people who invented it. It is the subject of more lies than the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. And you, you poor damned deluded sap, have fallen for nearly every single one of those lies!
Well. I feel confident that there is no longer any doubt that the answer to the question posed in the thread title is a resounding, unqualified, irrefutable “no.”
Congratulations, adaher. It’s an achievement of a sort.
The lesson I’ve gotten is, “do not infer what liberals believe from their statements, but liberals may infer the most ridiculous things from what conservatives say.”
It’s a board of Charlie Rangels.
Anyway, guys, I’m going to scale back my posting here. There are other boards which are far more congenial and fight ignorance just as well as this one. Despite the level of immaturity, this board has some really smart posters, plus the crazy liberal/conservative ratio here practically demands some pushback or else this place actually will become just a highbrow version of Daily Kos. But I don’t want to ruin your lives, and apparently some of you have so much invested in this discussion board that I’m causing people emotional issues by posting too frequently.
I already explained it, but you do not like the answer. Once again, it is not that all the Republicans are racists, the problem is that many are so painfully naive when they do not tell racists to take a hike, instead they elect them to office and even use them as sources when looking to win an argument in a message board.
The bad faith comes from people like you when they not even acknowledge that people like Kris Kobach should had been dismissed a long time ago.
Piffle, it took lots of your posts for me to conclude that you only did double down on defending the use of even racist organizations when you cheered the sorry ICE lawsuit.
You are not realizing that while you are not a racist in the end you follow what others see in the Republican party, that they show continuous tolerance for the intolerant in their mist.
And speaking of the ACA, one should never forget that it does there is a racist component that is a part of the opposition.
http://news.yahoo.com/racism-tinges-opposition-obamacare-050012367.html
Translation: “I’m too lazy to back up anything I say so I’m taking my ball and going home.”
You are a smart person. You’re just a horribly intellectually lazy and cowardly poster. I’ve never seen a poster here who put less effort into their discussions and debates than you.
If you wish to maintain your low standards, perhaps other boards will suit you better.
Name a few.
The classic one is that Lieberman torpedoed the public option. And what’s wrong with the single payer critique anyway? To drill down, see Ezra Klein, Kevin Drum or heck any serious commentator.
Here’s a hint adaher: your ass isn’t that smart, so you stop pulling things from it.
Town Square Exiles, US Politics Discussion Forum, Debatepolitics.com
What’s wrong with single payer is that the support for it is 99% ideological. it’s an old, obsolete model whose only virtue is that it’s cheap. Multi-payer systems are superior by most metrics.
The most significant stat, IMO, is “mortality amenable to health care”. The US is the worst, but 2nd and 3rd are the single-payer systems of Britain and Canada. Wait times kill almost as much as lack of insurance. Single payer systems also tend to have fewer physicians than multi-payer systems, and higher infant mortality rates.
If the US starts looking better than Canada and Britain after ACA has been around a decade or so, hopefully that will finally put to rest the idea that single payer is a 21st century solution.