Oops. Looks like we were lied to about Obamacare after all.

[adaher]

@jayjay

Or Sarah Palin’s. If that doesn’t frighten you you’re not capable of fright.

Apparently not, actually. John’s still alive and kickin’.

[adaher]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

I would say the opposite, if anything.

The Democrats might take a bit of a hit over the ACA, but they got an important part of their agenda enacted. The purpose of politics is to get your agenda enacted, not to win elections. Sometimes you have to accept a bit of a tradeoff.

By contrast, the Republicans shut down the government, took a hit over it, and did not advance their agenda at all.

To the extent that “ineptitude” applies, it applies to the Republicans.

If you enact your agenda and it’s botched, then the public not only loses fait h in your party, but in the particular program, and the idea of activist government. Obama has done as much damage to activist government as GWB did to interventionism.

If this thing fails completely and gets repealed, Democrats won’t get another bite at that apple.

[Terr]

@adaher

If this thing fails completely and gets repealed

Not gonna happen. We’re past the inflection point and in full downhill slide.

[magellan01]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

I didn’t mean to imply that. As I said, I’m sure he did make a better job of it in context but I’m sure he was perfectly happy for people to understand whatever they wanted to from his words.

You’re sure of that? Okay, can you provide a link to show Obama saying those things in the context you assume is there?

I don’t think you’ll find any such context. I know he’s your guy and all, but he simply lied about this—repeatedly. In fact in many instances, after he said we can all “keep your doctor”, “keep your health plan”, he emphasized it by adding the word “Period!” after each phrase.

But if you recall him saying that, with the appropriate context that would erase the lie, I’d be happy to see it.

[Lightnin]

@adaher

If this thing fails completely and gets repealed, Democrats won’t get another bite at that apple.

And if it succeeds, it’ll be the Republicans going hungry. Which is, of course, exactly why they and their voters are doing everything they can to insure that it doesn’t. As others have pointed out, if the ACA is so very, very bad, all the GOP would have to do is let it fail on its own… and then sweep the next election. Hell, it’d probably be the end of the Democratic party as we know it.

But no. Instead we have the right holding the entire country hostage to kill something which, in their protestations, is a complete and utter failure. Pull the other one, it’s got bells on.

[adaher]

@Terr

Not gonna happen. We’re past the inflection point and in full downhill slide.

I don’t think so. There are parts that will stand simply because Republicans always supported those parts, and Democrats can call that a policy victory if they want to. But if the GOP wins it all by 2016, the law is gone, unless it vastly exceeds expectations.

[adaher]

@Lightnin

And if it succeeds, it’ll be the Republicans going hungry. Which is, of course, exactly why they and their voters are doing everything they can to insure that it doesn’t. As others have pointed out, if the ACA is so very, very bad, all the GOP would have to do is let it fail on its own… and then sweep the next election. Hell, it’d probably be the end of the Democratic party as we know it.

I think that’s exactly what the GOP should be doing. They lost in 2012. They need to deal with that reality. If the law is as bad as they say, it will fall apart on its own.

Hopefully they’ve learned that their antics distract from ACA’s problems rather than drawing attention to them.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@adaher

And speaking of governing well, now we find out that security was one of the things that was not tested, and the administration was warned that this presented a significant risk:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/30/politics/obamacare-website-warning-memo/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

For people putting their private information on the site to not be told this is unconscionable. Republicans could make a good case that people should not give any info to the site and it wouldn’t be sabotage. It would just be good sense.

There is a quote in that piece from a Republican representative speculating about personal information being at risk. There is no other information in that article suggesting any such risk was ever present.

[adaher]

They didn’t test security. In the IT world, that means it doesn’t work. And would subject a company to massive fines and lawsuits in the private sector.

[jayjay]

@adaher

Apparently not, actually. John’s still alive and kickin’.

Yeah, without five years of the stress of the office of president on his shoulders (and without Sweet Sister Sarah at his elbow with the stiletto in her belt).

[adaher]

I have yet to hear of a President dying in office due to stress-related causes.

[Airbeck]

How many presidents were as old as McCain would have been had he been elected?

Any?

[adaher]

Reagan wasn’t much younger. Clinton won’t be either. Bob Dole was 76 when he ran and he’s still kicking.

[elucidator]

Only given a generous definition of “kicking”.

[John_Mace]

@Airbeck

How many presidents were as old as McCain would have been had he been elected?

Any?

Not sure exactly what your point is in continuing this hijack, but if you are trying to imply that there was a strong likelihood McCain would have “died of stress” in office had he been elected president, well… prove it. Don’t ask questions. Make an assertion and prove it. If you don’t want to make an assertion, then fine.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@adaher

That’s because Medicaid is currently a state/federal program and states can’t be forced to do expand it, or even have it in the first place.

However, if it was re-federalized, the federal government could do whatever they wanted with the program, plus it would provide a nice short term stimulus to the states, since their budgets would no longer be burdened by it.

I’m sure the Republicans’ objections would have evaporated overnight in the face of a plan to take power from the states and back to the federal government. :rolleyes: Anyway, there would be no “stimulus”. The feds fund at least 50% of Medicaid in every state, and much more than 50% in most (especially red states.)

@magellan01

You’re sure of that? Okay, can you provide a link to show Obama saying those things in the context you assume is there?

I did try, but after quite a bit of googling I couldn’t find the full text of any of the times he said it (it appears to have been more than once.)

[adaher]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

I’m sure the Republicans’ objections would have evaporated overnight in the face of a plan to take power from the states and back to the federal government. :rolleyes: Anyway, there would be no “stimulus”. The feds fund at least 50% of Medicaid in every state, and much more than 50% in most (especially red states.)

I was speaking for myself, not the Republican Party. But also for simplicity’s sake. Making Medicaid an insurer of last resort would have resulted in universal care and wouldn’t have interfered with existing insurance arrangements.

[Drunky_Smurf]

@adaher

They didn’t test security. In the IT world, that means it doesn’t work. And would subject a company to massive fines and lawsuits in the private sector.

It’s ok. The government gave itself a waiver.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@adaher

I was speaking for myself, not the Republican Party. But also for simplicity’s sake. Making Medicaid an insurer of last resort would have resulted in universal care and wouldn’t have interfered with existing insurance arrangements.

I have no problem with that - but then, I have no problem with expanding Medicaid/Medicare to cover everyone and leaving private insurers to offer supplemental coverage.

[adaher]

But that would disrupt insurance arrangements, and be so expensive as to require broad-based tax increases.