General Discussion

ProSense

(116,464 posts)

25. Yeah,

Wed Jun 13, 2012, 10:34 AM

Jun 2012

"You are grouping people that want to overturn a major component of the law with people that don't want to overturn the law. That makes NoSense."

..."overturn the mandate, but keep the rest of the law."

Some prefer the MSM spin, especially those opposed to the health care law. See, keeping the rest of the law is a BFD. Ask Howard Dean, who supports the law, but doesn't think the mandate is necessary. Others disagree, but there is one thing they all agree on: Keep the law. It's the biggest social reform in decades.

On another note: "NoSense." Is that original? I could swear I've seen it before. Ah familiarity!

Welcome to DU, and enjoy your stay.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

73 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Wow... 48% of Dems want Obamacare all or part overturned? [View all] Laura PourMeADrink Jun 2012 OP

Many people want the give-away to private insurance companies Fawke Em Jun 2012 #1

Yes, people should remember that number includes "or in part" JHB Jun 2012 #3

Propaganda is effective liberal N proud Jun 2012 #2

Ah, so anybody who is against a mandated monopoly is a propaganda victim? MadHound Jun 2012 #5

If you don't have the mandate, who pays for the people who doc03 Jun 2012 #17

Do you think that it is right, legal and just MadHound Jun 2012 #28

Fine if someone doesn't want health insurance and doc03 Jun 2012 #35

How is it different than the laws that say you have to have car insurance. Just asking. nt Laura PourMeADrink Jun 2012 #56

Because no one is required by law to have a car. Angleae Jun 2012 #72

But you do have a living body.. sendero Jun 2012 #73

That is not the typical objection from the public. If it was, I could respect that. nt stevenleser Jun 2012 #49

Some Democrats want everything or nothing, so it will most likely be back to nothing. BlueCaliDem Jun 2012 #4

No, it's more that many Democrats balance the good with the bad, MadHound Jun 2012 #6

Yep. Back to nothing is better. eom BlueCaliDem Jun 2012 #50

Seven states have already gotten exemptions for MLR, and more are applying eridani Jun 2012 #9

As of Dec. 2011, the HHS has rejected waivers for four states already. BlueCaliDem Jun 2012 #52

You understand that the waivers are temporary, right? Bolo Boffin Jun 2012 #55

Sure. They can get new waivers after the old ones expire eridani Jun 2012 #60

Actually you demonstrate you know nothing about the waiver process. Bolo Boffin Jun 2012 #63

Why not give me an example of a state that has tried regulation by MLR eridani Jun 2012 #67

Why not deal with the actual waiver process instead of spreading BS about it? n/t Bolo Boffin Jun 2012 #68

Bottom line--regulating by MLR does not control costs, period. n/t eridani Jun 2012 #69

If that was the only thing going on here, you might have a point. Now, the waiver process. Bolo Boffin Jun 2012 #70

Gergen can't be that naive FBaggins Jun 2012 #7

Bullshit ProSense Jun 2012 #8

This is not different from what the OP said eridani Jun 2012 #11

Nonsense ProSense Jun 2012 #12

LOL DesMoinesDem Jun 2012 #22

Yeah, ProSense Jun 2012 #25

Thanks for the welcome. DesMoinesDem Jun 2012 #29

The Link-Drone gets another civilian Capt. Obvious Jun 2012 #31

My bad ProSense Jun 2012 #40

Thanks again Capt. Obvious Jun 2012 #41

Good point. thanks. let me change. nt Laura PourMeADrink Jun 2012 #58

Yes it is, 48% do NOT want the WHOLE law overturned the OP doesn't qaulify uponit7771 Jun 2012 #34

The part about buying insurance or being penalized is ridiculous qanda Jun 2012 #10

Just allow insurance to be sold across state lines raps Jun 2012 #13

Ding ding ding - we have a winner! DinahMoeHum Jun 2012 #14

And then all insurance will be based in Delaware Capt. Obvious Jun 2012 #15

Yep. GoCubsGo Jun 2012 #19

+1, conservatives are so uninformed on a number of issues it's flooring uponit7771 Jun 2012 #37

They're one step ahead. They will move to Delaware and still not lower prices. FarLeftFist Jun 2012 #20

They wrote the legislation. You bet they can find loopholes. kenny blankenship Jun 2012 #53

You don't know much about the history of credit cards, do you? jeff47 Jun 2012 #23

Why haven't other insurers (i.e. auto) done that? joeglow3 Jun 2012 #24

For auto, you usually aren't actually buying it across state lines jeff47 Jun 2012 #26

state laws raps Jun 2012 #27

True, but everyone can enter the state if they meet those requirements joeglow3 Jun 2012 #47

Because what would happen in reality is just the opposite of what you claim. Egalitarian Thug Jun 2012 #39

Race to the bottom. The Link Jun 2012 #44

Repuke talking point bullshit eridani Jun 2012 #61

Since when is 48% a plurality? The 52% that don't want doc03 Jun 2012 #16

I know a lot of Democrats jpbollma Jun 2012 #18

The survey says only 42% of Democrats think SCOTUS should keep the whole law. Bolo Boffin Jun 2012 #57

I'm ambivalent Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #21

The Supreme Court is supposed to interpret the law and the constitution. Skinner Jun 2012 #30

True. It would be disconcerting if things like polls and protests could sway judges. n/t Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #51

I want single payer... ileus Jun 2012 #32

I think many of us, deep down, understood that mandatory for-profit insurance was a Faustian deal Romulox Jun 2012 #33

It's not mandatory for-profit Orangepeel Jun 2012 #46

There is no provision in the US Constitution that allows for forced purchases--but only from Romulox Jun 2012 #48

Well said, and not hard to understand. Puzzledtraveller Jun 2012 #59

I think that's a misleading number RZM Jun 2012 #36

Lots of people think "it's a bad idea and it shouldn't be that way" = "unconstitutional" Orangepeel Jun 2012 #38

The Court has to go by the law treestar Jun 2012 #42

Thank you FoxNews and others for grievously misleading their viewers librechik Jun 2012 #43

Medicare for everyone is the only solution!! B Calm Jun 2012 #45

That's not a solution for the stockholders who own stock in the health-care companies. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2012 #54

"the supreme court has traditionally been viewed as the least partisan..." AJTheMan Jun 2012 #62

remember that Obamacare TheFarseer Jun 2012 #64

most profound post of all. ! of course Obama knows the same...wonder if even he is Laura PourMeADrink Jun 2012 #66

If only they had listened. We tried to tell them but were attacked and vilified and the sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #65

Totally agree, that's exactly the way I see it too. nt Raine Jun 2012 #71