Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kenny blankenship

(15,689 posts)
27. Medicare For All
Tue Mar 27, 2012, 02:14 PM
Mar 2012

Should have been our bottomline from Day One of the PRIMARIES.

Get real people. You cannot free yourself from servitude incrementally. You are either free or not-free. By refusing the stark choice of freedom and the pain of standing up for principle, you have sold yourselves and your children into perpetual bondage, tricked with a beautiful brochure.

As for why there were large dysfunctional flaws in the legislation like severability and so forth - it was never designed with a priority placed on ACTUALLY DELIVERING HEALTH CARE in the first place. The guiding design spec was to Lock Out Public Option competition with for-profit insurance, Enforce COLLECTION ACTIVITIES ON ALL AMERICANS on behalf of for-profit insurance with the Individual Mandate. After those goals were met, their attention naturally wandered, and details about how it was all supposed to work were skipped over. Twisting arms and emptying pockets was all it was really supposed to do. If it delivered guaranteed profits to the Insurance Mafia from every possible victim, it would be considered up to spec and working satisfactorily, no matter what else happened. "We'll fix that shit later."

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Actually, ProSense Mar 2012 #1
Thanks, Pro. elleng Mar 2012 #3
That is just wishful thinking and everyone here is clutching to it as fact joeglow3 Mar 2012 #29
It is the studied opinion of 2 experts, elleng Mar 2012 #30
I hope you're right Alcibiades Mar 2012 #4
Try understanding how they approach making decisions, elleng Mar 2012 #2
I understand quite well Alcibiades Mar 2012 #5
I'm an attorney, elleng Mar 2012 #7
Students of judicial politics Alcibiades Mar 2012 #18
Who are the 6 votes to uphold? Owlet Mar 2012 #6
Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan, Sotomayor, Kennedy, Scalia. elleng Mar 2012 #8
I think you're right jehop61 Mar 2012 #9
And he upheld an important principle here, elleng Mar 2012 #10
I'm certainy no constitutional scholar Owlet Mar 2012 #11
Underlying assumption doesn't work, elleng Mar 2012 #12
Wouldn't Roberts be likely to side with the majority to protect "his"court from claims of excessive Rowdyboy Mar 2012 #13
Possible; was listing mandatory and likely minimum. elleng Mar 2012 #14
So, after hearing the oral arguments Alcibiades Mar 2012 #22
'AFTER hearing the oral arguments?' elleng Mar 2012 #23
This message was self-deleted by its author Alcibiades Mar 2012 #24
The oral arguments on the individual mandate Alcibiades Mar 2012 #25
Yes, and it takes a while to listen to them, doesn't it? elleng Mar 2012 #26
Here's an exerpt: Alcibiades Mar 2012 #28
It was written by the insurance companies and intended to fail. JDPriestly Mar 2012 #15
The mandate was a planned bonanza for the one percent, woo me with science Mar 2012 #16
Why would they strike it down when it saved Big Insurance who were about to go bankrupt? sabrina 1 Mar 2012 #17
Because Rmoney says it's unconstitutional Alcibiades Mar 2012 #19
I disagree. It's laughable for Romney to trash a bill that is so similar to the one he sabrina 1 Mar 2012 #20
What they want is for the Republicans to win Alcibiades Mar 2012 #21
Medicare For All kenny blankenship Mar 2012 #27
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Supreme Court poised to s...»Reply #27