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

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

MadHound

(34,179 posts)
Mon Jun 25, 2012, 12:54 PM Jun 2012

"We warned the president -- don't ever, ever agree with the Republicans," [View all]

"The individual mandate in the health care law was originally proposed by the Heritage Foundation, the most conservative think tank in the country. It was supported by almost every Republican in the country, including the first President Bush, Mitt Romney and conservative stalwarts like Orrin Hatch. Simply put, it was a conservative idea. There is no question about that; it is a fact.

Let me immediately digress to point out how terrible our media is since about 2% of the country knows that fact. If you asked the average American now, I'm sure they would say it was a liberal idea originally proposed by Barack Obama. Another fact -- Barack Obama was originally opposed to the mandate during his campaign for president."
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/06/25-5

It amazes me how many Democrats continue to defend the mandate. A radical RW proposal that guarantees corporations huge profits, yet somehow, someway, this became a Democratic idea, bill, law. A sad statement on Democrats in general, and a damning indictment of this administration, that the party and this president has willingly embraced, and now fought for, Republican policies.

What is liberal or progressive about forcing people to buy a product from a for profit institution simply as a condition of being alive? A proposal, crafted by the Heritage foundation, supported by Bush, Romney and Hatch among others, yet since Obama flip-flopped and supported it, somehow, someway the mandate is supposed to now be all good? I don't think so.

It is for actions like this that many feel that there isn't a dime's worth of difference between the two parties. When you have a Democratic president and Congress pushing supporting and advocating for Republican policy, it becomes difficult to discern where those political lines fall.

Hopefully the Supreme Court allows their hatred for all things Obama to rise up and strike this mandate down. Otherwise I fear that a corporately controlled Court will allow this monstrosity of a mandate to become law of the land, and we will see even more and more of our money go trickling up to the top. We will become poorer and poorer, while the elite will become richer. That is what this Republican mandate means.

229 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
It was easier to scapegoat the uninsured.. girl gone mad Jun 2012 #1
Yeah, that poor pooor 38% of uninsured who are in the top 45%... joshcryer Jun 2012 #64
they never even talked about the real solution- remove the middle man insurance company Ghost of Huey Long Jun 2012 #2
Wendell Potter is an all-American hero! He really is because he was the first to bring Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2012 #24
wow, what a great guy! Ghost of Huey Long Jun 2012 #40
and who will pay for it. Social Security and Medicare are paid for by us. It is mandatory, and in still_one Jun 2012 #155
Please stop repeating corporate media manufactured lies Ghost of Huey Long Jun 2012 #161
B.S. I have used free ER to save my life plus more freebees! chknltl Jun 2012 #175
Very interesting use of words there newbie. chknltl Jun 2012 #180
Stop spreading corporate propaganda. girl gone mad Jun 2012 #199
Am I lieing about my medical history chknltl Jun 2012 #202
most people have jobs, where the money can and will be taken from paychecks, tax refunds etc. Ghost of Huey Long Jun 2012 #208
Simple answer: A single change in Medicare. chknltl Jun 2012 #211
and isn't that what I said in the first place? still_one Jun 2012 #215
I defended a different part of what you said AND.... chknltl Jun 2012 #216
Right ProSense Jun 2012 #3
Nice to see you popping up again, MadHound Jun 2012 #5
Want ProSense Jun 2012 #6
Facts, LOL! MadHound Jun 2012 #7
Facts: ProSense Jun 2012 #8
oh jesus. is all this because he's a bitter and jaded smoove johnny supporter? dionysus Jun 2012 #97
Uhm... kenfrequed Jun 2012 #167
best to ingore people who want to put things in your face nt msongs Jun 2012 #11
arguing with a table leg again, MadHound? Skittles Jun 2012 #123
In theory, the individual mandate makes sense. I support a public option, at the very least. Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2012 #26
I understand the logic behind the individual mandate Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2012 #133
False equivalency. Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2012 #170
Not when you consider the motive is money Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2012 #174
This works in other developed countries because the government DICTATES-- eridani Jun 2012 #135
All other nations which mandate the purchase of health insurance make it illegal to profit from Bluenorthwest Jun 2012 #148
Bingo unapatriciated Jun 2012 #217
I would accept being forced to pay for it if quinnox Jun 2012 #4
Does this ProSense Jun 2012 #9
Why are you fighting so hard for a Republican policy? MadHound Jun 2012 #10
Actually ProSense Jun 2012 #12
You are fighting for a Heritage Foundation mandate, MadHound Jun 2012 #13
No ProSense Jun 2012 #15
Yes, you are, MadHound Jun 2012 #17
No, ProSense Jun 2012 #19
unfortunately choie Jun 2012 #72
CORRECT Skittles Jun 2012 #203
I think a lot of liberals supported mandate, especially to get something of value enacted. Hoyt Jun 2012 #78
Face facts, you are going to have to pay for it one way or other Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2012 #136
Let's be real. Of course, everyone decent in health care would provide services to the injured. Hoyt Jun 2012 #144
people fighting in the streets for power. Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2012 #173
I guess you've never read any right wing Tbag, gun or "militia" websites. Hoyt Jun 2012 #176
I know of those types Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2012 #182
That's it exactly. Let's hope they fade away someday. Hoyt Jun 2012 #184
That type will never fade away Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2012 #187
MLR has been tried in 15 states and failed abjectly in cost control eridani Jun 2012 #137
I doubt if most states have the ability to monitor and enforce it. Feds do. Plus -- Hoyt Jun 2012 #145
You sound like someone who expects to have access to the exchanges TheKentuckian Jun 2012 #168
I disagree. With no pre-existing exclusion, you can move Hoyt Jun 2012 #177
How do you freely move among plans unless you are allowed exchange access? TheKentuckian Jun 2012 #179
Employer health plans have to meet new federal standards. Small businesses can buy from exchanges. Hoyt Jun 2012 #196
Yes, but the final Senate version stripped this from the feds eridani Jun 2012 #204
Add this to the long list of other right-wing, corporate, and neocon policies woo me with science Jun 2012 #219
Were you unconscious in the 90s? jeff47 Jun 2012 #21
Big difference between the nineties and now MadHound Jun 2012 #27
When ProSense Jun 2012 #29
Oh, when that pendulum swings again, MadHound Jun 2012 #32
Ah ProSense Jun 2012 #36
Or have the individual mandate upheld, MadHound Jun 2012 #37
Utter ProSense Jun 2012 #38
Pro, explain in your own words why you support the only Mandate on Earth to purchase for profit Bluenorthwest Jun 2012 #149
Also, in what ProSense Jun 2012 #39
The better idea is to hope it is upheld and work to change it davidpdx Jun 2012 #109
The mandate is forcing the middle class to SHOP. That's a good thing. nt patrice Jun 2012 #171
The mandate is going to create pressure from the Middle Class demanding Long-Term Care coverage. nt patrice Jun 2012 #172
It doesn't matter who wants it or not. The present system cannot sustain for any length TheKentuckian Jun 2012 #102
"The Wealthcare and Profit Protection Act is designed to prop up and perpetuate the insurance cartel woo me with science Jun 2012 #220
The people want a lot of things jeff47 Jun 2012 #34
Sooner or later you're going to have to sell it to red states anyway, MadHound Jun 2012 #35
We can sell it to the red states much more easily when we can point to successes in blue states. jeff47 Jun 2012 #43
How can your idea of "real change" pass the Congress TODAY? You don't live in REALITY. RBInMaine Jun 2012 #154
I agree, that is the true devastation that Obamacare will leave (regardless of the SC decision) stockholmer Jun 2012 #42
Stockholmer, Actually Roosevelt's progressive movement JDPriestly Jun 2012 #47
interesting points stockholmer Jun 2012 #48
Agreed. JDPriestly Jun 2012 #49
Interesting ProSense Jun 2012 #53
I am not singling out Democrats, just pointing out both sides dance to the oligarch's tune, albeit stockholmer Jun 2012 #58
Kolko is a great but forgotten voice. Warren Stupidity Jun 2012 #156
a REAL FDR-style jobs/protect Social Secuity-Medicare/rebuild USA/end the banks grip/fair tax Plan stockholmer Jun 2012 #50
Utopia revisited. Well, I'm no expert, and seems like the government JDPriestly Jun 2012 #83
You may be interested in ... Fantastic Anarchist Jun 2012 #186
Also want to add: Fantastic Anarchist Jun 2012 #195
thank you for the links, I will deffo read up stockholmer Jun 2012 #200
"fast track" is an absolutely HUGE assumption. & Have you ever heard of taking someone's game patrice Jun 2012 #166
I'm with you, ProSense, on this one. JDPriestly Jun 2012 #44
Well, first of all, most folks who don't have health insurance can't afford to have it. MadHound Jun 2012 #45
Yeah, it's too bad there wasn't any price-support mechanism in the ACA....oh wait, there was (nt) jeff47 Jun 2012 #46
I think I made it clear that I would prefer a single payer system JDPriestly Jun 2012 #51
The trouble is this interim step, MadHound Jun 2012 #52
The amount of time it takes depends upon the size & composition of the pools. As demand for higher patrice Jun 2012 #164
The big for profit "health" insurance corporations will eat up the small ones as that industry Uncle Joe Jun 2012 #189
The MLR is on the premium dollar, not on the costs of services. It will force prices down. patrice Jun 2012 #190
Most people I know without HC are without it because they cannot afford it. sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #62
The plan is to subsidize health care for those who can't afford it. JDPriestly Jun 2012 #84
And do you really feel good about the fact that only some will get fair subsidies? Bluenorthwest Jun 2012 #152
I would be interested in the article if you can dig it up. girl gone mad Jun 2012 #108
I wish I could remember where I saw it. If it helps, it stated that Obama was 'encouraged to sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #120
You are so damn right. FedUp_Queer Jun 2012 #117
ROFLMFAO... seriously... SomethingFishy Jun 2012 #212
FYI Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2012 #20
Pro sincerely believes (for some reason) that all the R's are correct AS LONG AS the POTUS agrees Dragonfli Jun 2012 #70
Here is Newt Gingrich supporting the Dokkie Jun 2012 #87
non-profit government backed option- exactly! Ghost of Huey Long Jun 2012 #25
I think adopting a Japanese-style system would be a start Art_from_Ark Jun 2012 #122
Well said. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2012 #14
I agree with you on all points but in regards Uncle Joe Jun 2012 #16
Yeah, the Court is in a tough place, MadHound Jun 2012 #18
Obama is a temporary inconvenience, at most only four more years, on the other hand Uncle Joe Jun 2012 #22
That sounds right to me. n/t EFerrari Jun 2012 #54
Why ProSense Jun 2012 #23
Being Republican and white is always their first choice, furthermore Uncle Joe Jun 2012 #28
This message was self-deleted by its author Tuesday Afternoon Jun 2012 #98
I agree with you, Uncle Joe. This Court cannot strike down anything that benefits the Corporations. sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #124
Maybe it's a "bait and switch." Thav Jun 2012 #30
Nixon signed into law the creation of the EPA. Should we abolish this Republican program? Freddie Stubbs Jun 2012 #31
Is the EPA a corporate friendly program? MadHound Jun 2012 #33
Yesterday's repub. Today's repub totally different. Kingofalldems Jun 2012 #41
I guess you can't pay attention very well, the topic is health care. just1voice Jun 2012 #57
Nixon would be a Democrat today. More so than a lot of "Democrats" we have Autumn Jun 2012 #88
Rec'd, most Americans want single payer/universal health care, not for-profit hell just1voice Jun 2012 #55
Odd that the Heritage Foundation would support any such thing treestar Jun 2012 #56
this may help explain the support stockholmer Jun 2012 #59
The amicus briefs to the SCOTUS to shoot down the law tell you which side is REALLY right wing. joshcryer Jun 2012 #63
They don't support a mandate, their original plan was a "tax credit." joshcryer Jun 2012 #61
The Heritage Foundation 'mandate' was a TAX CREDIT. joshcryer Jun 2012 #60
You are incorrect. Maven Jun 2012 #65
That's dubious at best. The Heritage Foundations Health guy denies ever supporting it. joshcryer Jun 2012 #66
No he doesn't. What I see there is an elaborate and pained effort to pivot. Maven Jun 2012 #68
A tax credit is not the same thing as a tax penalty. The pivot is on you. joshcryer Jun 2012 #69
Perhaps you missed the part where he used the word "fine" in his paper. Maven Jun 2012 #71
One is a penalty for not doing something. The other is a reward for doing something. joshcryer Jun 2012 #73
Butler's clearly stated intention was to fine people who failed to insure themselves Maven Jun 2012 #79
The "penalty" is not being able to have a tax credit! By law they don't get a tax credit! joshcryer Jun 2012 #80
No, again you are incorrect. Maven Jun 2012 #81
Yep, good old post-partisan Obama. joshcryer Jun 2012 #82
The right didn't really drive the narrative. girl gone mad Jun 2012 #85
I disagree. I've seen the points originate from guys like Timothy P Carney and Avik Roy. joshcryer Jun 2012 #92
Well it's a good thing Maven Jun 2012 #90
The public option was still alive until Scott Brown got seated. joshcryer Jun 2012 #94
Ideologically they wouldn't dig it much but as constituted TheKentuckian Jun 2012 #112
The public option has a 95%+ MLR, so it would be the cheapest by far. joshcryer Jun 2012 #115
There is no public option so I can't say what the MLR might be. TheKentuckian Jun 2012 #178
You're right, it's a disaster of a policy.. girl gone mad Jun 2012 #119
Fascinating. The new Consumer Protection Agency needs to look in to that shit. joshcryer Jun 2012 #121
Obama disagreed with you. sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #125
As Krugman pointed out, Obama fed the right wing meme with his Harry and Louise ads. joshcryer Jun 2012 #126
Bs, if he was that naive, he did not belong in the race. sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #127
"he did not belong"? Anyone can run. joshcryer Jun 2012 #128
BTW, I have made it clear to you on several occasions that PARTISANSHIP is what we need. joshcryer Jun 2012 #130
You're absolutely right on the partisanship issue. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2012 #138
Can't disagree with anything you said there. sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #222
No damn wonder this was trashed re: 'Butler's clearly stated intention was to fine people clang1 Jun 2012 #131
As usual, the right wing lies treestar Jun 2012 #91
It doesn't JUST guarantee profits to a completely parasitic industry. bvar22 Jun 2012 #67
THANK YOU Skittles Jun 2012 #74
I fully support the mandate. It's usu. young, healthy people who don't buy ins. Honeycombe8 Jun 2012 #75
And certainly don't lay down with one, it'll eat your face! There are plenty of differences, lonestarnot Jun 2012 #76
Agreed. k&r n/t Laelth Jun 2012 #77
like NAFTA, a Republican could never have pulled this crap off upi402 Jun 2012 #86
That's precisely what worries me about Social Security. (n/t) WorseBeforeBetter Jun 2012 #99
Yep! Wait for it. Come Dec. SammyWinstonJack Jun 2012 #151
Yup. nt Poll_Blind Jun 2012 #100
I disagree. The mandate is essential for the health care act to work. rhett o rick Jun 2012 #89
Sorry, a mandate to pay taxes to pay for a public good eridani Jun 2012 #142
I am not happy with the Affordable Health Care Act rhett o rick Jun 2012 #150
The way to make it better would be to have the feds DICTATE a single comprehensive eridani Jun 2012 #205
Yes I agree with you. rhett o rick Jun 2012 #207
Many nations employ a mandate for health insurance, yet not one of them allows profit from Bluenorthwest Jun 2012 #157
I will be glad to discuss if you refrain from putting words into my mouth. rhett o rick Jun 2012 #159
My question is specific and yet you walked around it. Bluenorthwest Jun 2012 #160
Your "specific" question was asked in multiple ways. rhett o rick Jun 2012 #162
You realize i hope that the mandate will affect a very small rhett o rick Jun 2012 #163
Rhett, it is very different from the SS tax. That goes into a public fund for the people. sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #181
You know, I may have been wrong on this. I think I am beginning to see some light. rhett o rick Jun 2012 #188
It's a very complex situation Rhett, and I always love your posts sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #191
I am still thinking this thru rhett o rick Jun 2012 #206
You make a good point, which is often over-looked, that the mandate covers a relatively sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #209
Pffft clang1 Jun 2012 #93
So, what do you think of a little thing called The Constitution, which was proposed by WEALTHY patrice Jun 2012 #193
i.e. Aristocrats looking to get out from under regulation by the crown. patrice Jun 2012 #194
I am not sure where you are headed with this, but our Constitution rhett o rick Jun 2012 #197
The point was that the mandate should be rejected because it was proposed by the Heritage Fndtn. patrice Jun 2012 #198
Wow that's quite a bit to absorb in one sitting. I am thinking the mandate isnt such a good idea. rhett o rick Jun 2012 #201
he's given in on so many issues it's discouraging Doctor_J Jun 2012 #95
The 'mandate' of course should be an entirely government-run health system Rosa Luxemburg Jun 2012 #96
Agree n/t clang1 Jun 2012 #103
RIGHT FUCKING ON! Drunken Irishman Jun 2012 #101
That sure took up a lot of screen space for sarcasm clang1 Jun 2012 #104
Nope. I guess I don't... Drunken Irishman Jun 2012 #106
Depends how you look at it is all. But you're right clang1 Jun 2012 #107
It can't be all or nothing... Drunken Irishman Jun 2012 #110
Nope. Not even at the top. Maybe with a once in a generation president, clang1 Jun 2012 #113
"Do liberals really believe...whether liberals want to admit it or not". So you're not a liberal? AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2012 #140
Not mine and therein is the whole damn problem to clang1 Jun 2012 #146
You know, though how things APPEAR does depend upon how you look at them, that doesn't make patrice Jun 2012 #192
i disagree veganlush Jun 2012 #105
The mandate is not like auto insurance. No one is forced to buy sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #114
Yes, the existence of health insurance companies is itself the problem. Zalatix Jun 2012 #129
when an uninsured person goes to the er veganlush Jun 2012 #213
You are wrong. When an uninsured person goes to the ER, they must be treated with or without sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #214
Utter nonsense: the idea that there's no difference between D and R PBass Jun 2012 #111
"I would prefer single payer' they all say. Why? Few actual single payer programs exist while Bluenorthwest Jun 2012 #158
Crickets. woo me with science Jun 2012 #221
Hatred for all things Obama? How about hatred for all things Romney(Care)2.0? Zalatix Jun 2012 #116
Romney vetoed the mandate in Mass. joshcryer Jun 2012 #118
Wikipedia has it different.. Fumesucker Jun 2012 #134
He vetoed Section 5. Chapter 17, rendering 111M unenforcable. joshcryer Jun 2012 #139
Tax the rich to pay for heathcare for all Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2012 #132
Solution: Nationalize the health insurance companies. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2012 #141
The Republicans hate the ACA. DCBob Jun 2012 #143
would definitely be ironic to have the SC support the mandate. the joke's on us. StarryNight Jun 2012 #147
Here is where you are off base: First, low income folks get a SUBSIDY to pay their premiums, and RBInMaine Jun 2012 #153
Isn't the other thing about the pools, not just downward pressure on premiums, but also upward patrice Jun 2012 #165
But before those funds get to the poor, they now pass through the hands of the Middle Men sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #183
I think you and others like you have a kind of naive idea of what threats accomplish. You help those patrice Jun 2012 #169
Defending the constitutionality of the individual mandate is not defending Bolo Boffin Jun 2012 #185
K&R YoungDemCA Jun 2012 #210
DU Rec. Thank you for this post. nt woo me with science Jun 2012 #218
The ACA is good. The mandate is not. Still, I'm reccing this because I HATE the fucking mandate. Zalatix Jun 2012 #223
Everyone who reced this thread has drawn a line. UnrepentantLiberal Jun 2012 #224
Your argument appears to me to be largely based on buzzwords in the form of labels. ZombieHorde Jun 2012 #225
Good thing ProSense Jun 2012 #226
I don't normally rec political posts any more but this one is so clear, bright and linear... Fumesucker Jun 2012 #227
Lol, I'm still looking for the 'line'! sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #228
If you happen upon it UnrepentantLiberal Jun 2012 #229
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"We warned the presi...