I am now totally confused. Does DU support the ACA or not?

[LWolf]

22. I don't know why you'd be confused.

Unless you think of DU as some sort of superorganism with a hive mind.

DU existed before Obama came to prominence as a Democrat, and will exist after he's left office. DU is not about Barack Obama. DU is also not of one mind about his presidency or his legacy.

The ACA...is not what DU advocated for up to the point that it became law. It's not what much of DU thinks we SHOULD do. The division is among those who think it's a good first step and those that don't, or between those that embrace it for Obama's sake and those that don't, and those that actually think it's the cat's pajamas.

While many DUers are fiercely partisan and equate all politics to fierce loyalty to one party and hatred of the other, there ARE DUers who are more focused on issues. I'm one of them. I don't support a position, an action, a law, or anything else because it was said or done by a Democrat. When I support something or someone, it's because of soundness on issues. When I don't, it's because of the issue, not the party. I think a majority of DUers fall somewhere between those two.

This DUer neither "supports" nor opposes the ACA. I support universal non-profit national health care. I'm opposed to for-profit health insurance. I'm opposed to the wrong-headed practice of equating insurance with care. I'm opposed to premiums that cost as much as a mortgage; I'm opposed to all forms of deductibles and copays. So the ACA is no solution for me. It's also not the enemy; if the net number of people getting care for the same or less money increases under the ACA, it's better than before. That doesn't mean it's the solution though; not until anyone can walk into a facility anywhere at any time and get access to high quality care free at point of service will we have reached the solution.

I also think that making the ACA about Obama instead of about actual health care for people is intellectually and ethically bankrupt.