The ACA needs to fail and fail fast (as designed) while Obama is still in office to complete the resultant push for single payer.
It will be tough to pull off even then but millions of Americans screaming to congress about their screwed-up healthcare may be the main impetus.
And hopefully before the insurance bailout starts (or maybe insurance co. bailout will be the immediate cause that brings about single payer).
It will be fine with me, deficit schmeficit. A trillion more or less didn't matter and 5,000 young lives lost in Iraq and already Fallujah is in the hands of al-Qaeda.
Cheney said deficits don't matter 12 or so years ago- maybe he was right.

Krauthammer says the bailout was all provided for in the ACA (did he misinterpret the law?):
Charles Krauthammer: Stop the bailout, now - The Washington Post

"First, Section 1341, the “reinsurance” fund collected from insurers and self-insuring employers at a nifty $63 a head. (Who do you think the cost is passed on to?) This yields about $20 billion over three years to cover losses.

Then there is Section 1342, the “risk corridor” provision that mandates a major taxpayer payout covering up to 80 percent of insurance-company losses."

Quote:

---

That is so devoid of reality there's nothing really to say.

---

Hello again, Steve:

Oh, I didn't think we'd agree. But, I was HOPING that instead of flapping your gums, you'd actually WRITE what you propose to DO. Certainly, you'd CHANGE something. . What would that be??? Are you afraid to actually say it, because you KNOW you'll be torn to shreds if you do???? I think that's what it is.

Over to you.

excon

You can't dismiss the question by blaming the regime. A majority of Americans voted for this regime TWICE!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Steve:

Oh, I didn't think we'd agree. But, I was HOPING that instead of flapping your gums, you'd actually WRITE what you propose to DO. Certainly, you'd CHANGE something. . What would that be??? Are you afraid to actually say it, because you KNOW you'll be torn to shreds if you do???? I think that's what it is.

Over to you.

excon

---

You'd have to ask Tom since it was he that proposed it, I was merely calling you on your BS. Only one side is actively trying to curb religious freedom. Only one side is actively trying to curb freedom of speech. Only one side is actively trying to infringe on the right to keep and bear arms, and it isn't us on any count.

Quote:

---

 You can't dismiss the question by blaming the regime. A majority of Americans voted for this regime TWICE!

---

First, the people did not vote their rights away. The president swore to protect and defend the Constitution, not undermine it. Second, I am under no obligation to explain positions I don't hold.

the real problem is that your side wants programs that are extra-constitutional (and don't give me the bs that SCOTUS ,twisting the words of constitution, has put their permanent stamp of approval on them).
My amendments would have little to do with specific laws and would only repeal one or 2 amendments ( and you can rest assured the Bill of Rights would be safe ) .

Mine would establish term limits for the rest of the national government . I'd repeal the 17th amendment and restore the Senate to what the founders intended . I'd propose a balance budget amendment like most of the states already have. I'd make an amendment to restore the balance of power in government ;specifically a provision to repeal a SCOTUS decision.
As for your nonsense about our side altering the 1st Amendment ;I'll remind you that it's our side that has been defending the 1st against your intolerance.

Quote:

---

the real problem is that your side wants programs that are extra-constitutional

---

Hello again, tom:

The real problem is your side doesn't believe in protecting an INDIVIDUALS civil rights. Stop and Frisk is the most recent example.

excon

You cannot ignore the moderate and left wing minority coalitions, that are people of color, woman, old and poor, that have aligned nationally against the right wing views, policy and laws that they hate can you?

So say it like it is, you no longer enjoy the same power and influence of abject domination you once did. The interest of the many have changed the electorate, and you guys for all the gloom and doom, and victim talk, and shenanigans have failed to win the hearts, and minds of a growing populace. The notion you can force YOUR rights on others is being rejected.

Practice whatever you want in YOUR yard, but stay out of mine. Get use to the idea of being told NO, Thanks!! Good Luck in the next election! You will need it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, tom:

The real problem is your side doesn't believe in protecting an INDIVIDUALS civil rights. Stop and Frisk is the most recent example.

excon

---

lol your side talks a good game ,but when the rubber hits the road ;even commie Bill de Blasio hired William Bratton ,the architect of Stop and Frisk as NYPD Commish .

Hello again, tom:

Quote:

---

;even commie Bill de Blasio hired William Bratton ,the architect of Stop and Frisk as NYPD Commish .

---

Big sodas'll be making a return too, huh? Betcha Bratton ENDS stop and frisk.

excon

Quote:

---

Mine would establish term limits for the rest of the national government . I'd repeal the 17th amendment and restore the Senate to what the founders intended . I'd propose a balance budget amendment like most of the states already have.

---

Let me get this straight, you think that appointing senators improves democracy, you also think removing the ability of a government to borrow to fulfill its programs improves democracy. I expect these ideas were ok back in the days when the government consisted of the privileged and there wasn't a standing army or paved roads and no one had any idea of what population pressures might bring. I seem to remember that following such ideas got you invaded and Washington burned. What a pity you didn't take the hint and not rebuild it

Quote:

---

Let me get this straight, you think that appointing senators improves democracy

---

it furthers the cause of federalism . You can keep your ideas of democracy. We are a federal republic
Besides ,there is nothing that mandates that Senators are appointed .States can decide how they select Senators .

Quote:

---

You can keep your ideas of democracy.

---

at least I have an idea what democracy might emcompass, you are obviously clueless

the founders understood that democracy is a prescription for failure . Neither the Declaration of Independence nor the Constitution even contains the word democracy.
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. (Franklin)

Democracy is a disaster for the elites and privileged maybe but democracy works for the common man and that's how we will run this republic. The founders are long gone, and no longer rule, or set policy... but thanks old dudes, for the framework and foundation for building a more perfect union where all men are created equal, and women too!!

Quote:

---

the founders understood that democracy is a prescription for failure . Neither the Declaration of Independence nor the Constitution even contains the word democracy.
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. (Franklin)

---

If this is an opinion held in your nation why would you be attepting to spread your ideas of democracy to the world. Have you ever considered that your nation is one of the wolves. I know democracy didn't exist anywhere at the time of your revolution, but it has been convenient for you to be considered a leading democracy and to promote a democratic form of government. Recent events would suggest your implementation lacks democracy

"...the Founders understood that democracy is a prescription for failure. Neither the Declaration of Independence nor the Constitution even contain the word democracy".

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting what to have for lunch. (Franklin)

I thought Plato said it first in,"The Republic". Which reminds me that one can just as easily demonstrate similar failures that were caused by Republican virtue. You know, the elites getting to decide what everyone else has for lunch.


P.S. Just in case there is any confusion. By "Republican Virtue" I don't mean a political party. Another way of saying this would be Republic virtue, or perhaps, civic virtue

I don't think Tom realises that republicanism leads to imperialism. Inevietably power becomes concentrated in fewer and fewer elites. In Rome they were called senators and yet your founders duplicated this corrupt system and called it virtuous and even adopted roman architectural forms. Democracy can be prone to this also as the most prominient citizens are elected to govern

hence the need to decentralize power and to have a constitutional government subject to amending . All that was considered at the founding .

What the left is very good at is accusing others for doing exactly what they are doing . I submit that it is the party that claims they are for the little people that demonstrate the elitism that you say I champion.

As an example ,Obamacare will be the largest entitlement program in history and it rewarded the AMA along with big insurance and big pharma for their political support. They gave about 2- 3 times more support to the emperor than to McCain in 2008 and have been richly rewarded for their support. . Jeffrey Immelt of GE was one of the biggest supporters of the emperor . Not surprisingly GE is one of the largest benefactor of the law. Obamacare eliminates all of GE's competition in medical imaging.

As I pointed out earlier ,the Dems play a good rhetorical game and don't follow through. It's easy for the wealthy libs to support the Dems because they never really have to live with the consequences of the lib policies . Quite the opposite ...it entrenches them and eliminates any upstart challengers to their positions . The rich figured out long ago that the Democrats would regulate the small businessman out of business.

Americans aren't stupid Tom, your weak central government idea is but a cover for rich guy control. They already robbed us blind with this cheap labor BS, and took their tax breaks oversea to exploit other cultures, but we are on to you and the would be oligarchs.

All you guys had to do was trickle down enough to keep the masses satisfied but NOOOOOOOOOOOO, you just had to keep it all, and call us dumb, and lazy. You'll see how well that works for ya!!