out of context eh.

:1orglaugh Way to make my point. You snipped out the part where I pointed out that I am suffering because of ACA and I find it disturbing that some people have zero compassion for others.

I guess you should have quoted her.

But again...a libertarian is not a Republican. Not even close.

We actually had the guy who ran as the Vice Presidential candidate with Gary Johnson for the Libertarian Party speak at the CEO dinner at Internext 2013.

He spoke before a crowd of pornographers and said flat out that the Libertarian Party is on our side.

Betcha there will NEVER be a Republican politician do that. Nor a Democrat.

And neither Dems or Repubs are anti-war and anti-drug war.

The only thing a Libertarian has in common with a Republican is that the Republican Party is SUPPOSED to be for smaller govt.
But as history has shown...they are NOT. They grow the govt. every time. Just like the Dems.

Please stop with acting ignorant about politics. I AM a Libertarian. And I can fucking assure you that I'm more liberal minded than YOU or anybody you know. And definitely more than any Democrat or Republican.

are you labelling me as having zero compassion for your uninsured plight?

while arguing against a system attempting to fix that plight?

cause politicians don't lie.

robbie, i am seriously regretting taking it easy on the way you read that poll yesterday.

Don't. You acted like an asshole about the whole goddamned thing.

I "read that poll" EXACTLY as it stood.

I don't know what the fuck you are babbling about. But go ahead...act like a fucking jerk some more to me. If that makes you feel good. :)

Your table is percentage of the population not actual number of people insured.. Do I really have to explain to you the difference between percentage of the population vs actual numbers?

In 1999 the population was 272,690,813 In 2014 it is 318,434,000. This is the same stupid ass shit the right wing tries to pull all the time by taking cherry picked stats as their proof when they don't even understand what they are talking about.

you did? you said it showed the affordable healthcare act wasn't working. it did.

I'm not labeling you. I am not pre-judging you. I am responding to your actual personal words.

Universal healthcare would fix it.

A right-priced free market would fix it.

ACA only attempts to make insurance companies richer. Goldman Sachs predicts 60 percent growth for shareholders in the top 5 insurance companies over the next few years.

ACA has decreased my access to healthcare.

Also something to add Robbie about your claims more people are uninsured. Your table doesn't even include 2013 & and more importantly 2014 which is the only year that Obamacare has affected the stats.

Meaning not only are you bad at cherry picking data, you didn't even cherry pick data that was relevant.

also from your own link...

congrats for proving yourself wrong.. but I know you will insert head in sand and ingore your own link..lol

There was nothing cherry picked. I didn't say a word about 1999 other than that graph showed the numbers going back that far.

I was more concerned with recent history. Like starting in 2009 when Pres. Obama took office.

And brother...I've pretty much come to the conclusion that you don't have the intellectual weight to try and tell me a damn thing. You have shown yourself to be an absolute sheep to the Democrat Party.

And just like Chris Matthews...I bet you get a "thrill running down your leg" when you hear Pres. Obama give speeches.

"Cherry Picked" What a goddamned idiotic thing to say.

You sure seem to think "percentage" is the correct way to do taxes instead of actual dollars. LOL

I got some news for you genius: if a higher percentage of the population from 2009 to the first quarter of 2014 had no insurance...the ACTUAL NUMBERS are way bigger than any that you are babbling about from 1999.

You said it yourself. Goddamn the foolishness of this. Why are you deliberately making yourself look so fucking bad?

because.. the only way it was passed was due to the concessions made to appease the companies/lobbists/republicans/libertarians who fear change?


yes, i can see how you're not labelling and not prejudging very clearly. i am saddened that you haven't gone after a art forms.. as well as your easy jab at standard vs margin. or the insinuation after. but, live and learn.

The original Gallup Poll I posted showed all of that (as does the more recent one that shows the current quarter and more people insured now). And 2013 was the worst year.

I didn't "cherry pick" a damn thing. I googled it. Disregarded any right wing sites and chose a graph from the Wiki page. It only went up to 2012.

How the fuck can I "cherry pick" that? I don't even know what the latest stats are. But I still was able to show you what was happening.

As for ObamaCare being implemented. Isn't that what he is getting in trouble for? He keeps exempting and delaying it to be effective on certain groups for political reasons?

Hey...if it's such a great thing...why is the President the one who keeps delaying it?
And if it's so great...then what the fuck is your problem? Why can't anyone have a discussion about anything to do with Pres. Obama without you coming in spewing hate?

Where in the fuck did you get that from?

Libertarians aren't even in office! And Pres. Obama had full control over the House and the Senate. What on Earth are you talking about man?

There were no "concessions" made to any Republicans. That is why they were so fucking pissed off.

Remember Nancy Pelosi told Congress that they would have to "Vote for it before you can read it"

NONE of them even read the goddamned thing before it was passed.

Fuck this. It's no wonder so many people are fucked in this world.

ok, robbie, where did the public option go.

it started as being apart of the affordable health care act

what happened to it.

i didn't say they were, but you don't miss anything.

My understanding is that they removed the public option because many moderate democrats were worried about it. At that time there were a large contingent of what they called "Blue Dog" democrats who had won seats in what were often republican and conservative areas. These democrats were a lot more moderate than many others. They were worried that if they passed a public option and basically gave government healthcare to everyone that they wouldn't get re-elected so they threatened to vote against it unless it was changed.

Why would you choose a graph that only went up to 2012 when Obamacare didn't even start until 2014. Also from that very page you choose, it shows that Obamacare has lowered the percentage of uninsured meaning "MORE" people are insured which makes your claim wrong.

So will you now admit that you are wrong and that more people are insured under Obamacare than before Obamacare?

Why don't you ask Sen. Harry Reid the leader of the Democrat controlled Senate:

"President Barack Obama promoted the idea of the public option while running for election in 2008. Following his election, Obama downplayed the need for a public health insurance option, including calling it a "sliver" of health care reform, but still campaigned for the option up until the health care reform was passed.

Ultimately, the public option was removed from the final bill. While the United States House of Representatives passed a public option in their version of the bill, the public option was voted down in the Senate Finance Committee and the public option was never included in the final Senate bill, instead opting for state-directed health insurance exchanges."

And no...Sen. Reid is NOT a Republican. He is a Democrat, the LEADER of the Democrats. He is the Senator from Nevada where I live. Of course he lives in the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Washington D.C. in the penthouse suite.

Now to further address your comment:
NO Republicans voted for Obamacare in the House. Total partyline vote. So IF your theory about why there was no public option was to appease Republicans...guess what? That's BULLSHIT. None of them voted for ObamaCare.

NO Republicans voted for ObamaCare in the Senate. It was a complete partyline vote as well. So again...this myth that ObamaCare was "watered down" to make Republicans happy is BULLSHIT.

No Republicans voted for it. And nobody read it before it was passed.

So that means that IF there were anything to appease the Republicans...they never saw it and didn't vote for it.

Face it....this baby not only is named after Pres. Obama...it TOTALLY belongs to him and the small group of people he HANDPICKED to write it behind closed doors (after telling the nation that the writing of healthcare law would be transparent and televised on CSPAN)

Maybe Joe Biden was right when he said that in a few years everyone will look back and be so happy with ObamaCare.
I hope so.

Right now...the numbers aren't adding up. It was supposed to save people money AND save the govt. money.

I don't know how that is going to happen.

EDIT: The quoted passage is from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_...surance_option

I didn't "Choose" it. I googled up for the info. First page was almost all right winger sites attacking ObamaCare

The only one I could find that I THOUGHT would be acceptable to Obamapologists was the Wiki page.
Obviously I was wrong.

I guess I could put Youtube vids of Pres. Obama giving speeches telling us how ObamaCare was going to work (and lying) and you wouldn't accept that either.

I'm starting to think that if you, me, and Pres. Obama got drunk and he laughed and told us that he thinks it sucks too...you'd probably blame George Bush. lol

Harry Reid.. isn't that the guy who sent a bunch of snipers to take out that rancher? and the bizarre land troop/fficers who were tazing pregnant women and the like?

the guy with a bunch of people surrounding him getting investigated for campaign donation fraud?

the guy all wrapped up in fracking, big oil, and basically everything bad?

'obamacare' is very much a republican propaganda tool. but i apologize using the term. i believe it was democrats who killed this due voter bases and a series of other reasons. however, with how i have laid out the 'leader' of democrats.. these guys seem as bad as 'republicans' now.

ahh, thank you sir. i believe lobbyists heavily come into this as well, as a lot of the democrats are funded by the health industry? i could be mistaken

Answer this simple question....regardless of whether or not Obamacare is actually working(or not)

-- do YOU want it to work, or have any kind of hope that it could work?

The answer to this question may have something to do with how you present "facts". You look at a chart and instantly see the facts skewed to fit what you want the answer to be. Then you find out you're wrong. It's been in the news quite a bit that Obamacare is doing pretty well, despite how badly conservatives (that's you) want it to fail.

I have no doubt in my mind lobbyists played a huge role in this. They shit their pants when they thought it was going to have a public option, but once that went away the insurance industry shut up because they knew they were about to be handed a bunch of cash.

exactly how i remember it. and since i shouldn't even bother with any of this at all, i definitely can't spend the time digging all the articles up that proves it.

especially considering today, 2+2=5

Nice dodge of my question about if you will admit you were wrong about less People being covered when I fact it is more. Then again, I knew before I asked, that you would never admit that you were wrong. I knew you would do just what you did, dodge the question and change the topic.

Why is it so hard to admit it might be working Robbie?

Hell I openly support Obamacare, but I'm not so stuck up with my own agenda to not admit that it's not perfect and yes it does have problems. Meanwhile you just can't bring yourself to ever say that Obama might have managed to do something even half right..

Pretty much. Unlike Obamacare a public option would have actually provided a good form of cost control. There is NO WAY they wanted the competition. They know government run health insurance would actually be pretty good and would eat into their profits, much better to jump through a few hoops to get the government to force them to have tens of millions of new customers with weaker cost controls.

Otherwise you'd think the idea would be theoretically possible to sell to freedom loving americans being only an "option" in the market they could take or leave. Although judging by the propaganda around obamacare it would probably still get called a "GUBMINT TAKEOVER" or the "DEATH PANEL OPTION".

Personally I think as long as people are free to take out private health insurance it shouldn't matter what poorer people do on government based options.

We have single payer in my country and it works quite well but I also have private health insurance so for example when we had our baby we had a nice hotel-like room to ourselves both me and my partner slept in for a week at the hospital with the baby with ocean views and nurses who took the baby out of the room to settle her and let us catch up on sleep after the birth. No sharing a room with another couple who's visiting family might come in with coughs and colds to give to the newborns like you might have to in a public hospital (you can get single rooms in public hospitals but not guaranteed.) I can claim back all sort of crap on private health insurance, eg massages and acupuncture (although I don't believe in it) and it doesn't cost a lot because it has to compete with the free single payer system and things like MRI's don't have a bloated cost around it as both single payer and private health people use the same machines in most towns.

The only real issue is they kinda force you onto it if you're high income. Basically they make you pay a levy if you're rich enough to afford it but don't choose to take it up. The levy is about the cost of private health insurance so it's a bit silly not to take it up. But that's how good the underlying public system is in the public's eye, not enough wealthier people were taking up private insurance instead favoring the public system! (not rich rich.. but like if your family income is 175-200k is starts to kick in at a low level)

I didn't "find out I was wrong".

Up until THIS last quarter less people were insured than ObamaCare.

How the hell can you see it as I was "wrong"?
I don't make the data. I just googled it and presented what I thought was the latest data.

Do I want it to "work"? You mean the way it was presented to us by the President? Hell yes!
If we like our insurance we can keep it.
We can keep our doctor.
The cost for the average family will go DOWN $2,500 a year
It won't cost the taxpayers "One thin dime" (the President's quote that he used in speech after speech)

That version of ObamaCare sounded wonderful to me.

But this isn't a case of "wishing". I don't live in fantasyland. I live in reality.

And in reality, the numbers aren't adding up.

I want the answer to be that everybody is doing great!
I also would like to skip amongst unicorns and rainbows.

I'm sorry if reality is trumping good intentions. That's not my fault.

But to simply ignore that the President made a shit ton of assurances and they haven't come to pass is just foolish.
And to read some of the posts on here with people thinking that the healthcare bill was somehow changed to be what it is because of "republicans" is just amazing to me.

I HOPE that it somehow works out.

I question whether the huge influx of new people on medicare is going to allow the numbers to work. And "yes", it's going to cost the taxpayers way more than "one thin dime".

I also find it amusing that some of the guys on here, who seem to worship the Pres. like a God, don't seem to understand the consequences of all of this.

Putting this in place when the economy was pretty much in shambles wasn't the smartest thing. At a time when what we REALLY needed was more good paying, full time jobs...this extra burden on employers is risky to say the least.

Just heard today on the news that the IMF has now lowered the forecast for growth in the U.S. economy for 2014 to the lowest since 2009.
Most of that they are attributing to "weather related problems" in the first quarter (half the country was frozen for weeks...blame it on "global warming" lol).

Do I think that the economy is Obama's fault? Nope. It was the housing market collapse in 2008 that pushed us into hell.

Do I think he could have done a much better job at creating opportunities for business to recover? Hell yes I do.

Do I think he should have put the majority of his time and effort for the first two years into a law that forces people to buy expensive health insurance when they didn't even have a job? Fuck no.

I also question WHY he keeps changing the law to suit his own needs. It's a law passed by Congress. And he keeps changing it to keep Democrats out of hot water in elections because people don't like it.

If it's so damn good...then WHY does he keep doing that? Why not implement it fully and let us all bask in the goodness of ObamaCare?

I'm serious about that. Do you know why?
Is it the EVIL Republicans that are causing him to unilaterally change and delay the law so he can get the fuck out of office before it ever takes hold?

These are questions that I think a rational person should ask. Especially when I see my health insurance premium jumping higher at a faster rate than ever before.

I'm just a member of an "average American family". We don't have any health problems. So why the hell is mine going up instead of going down by $2,500 like the President promised?

But apparently, if I dare to bring any of this up...I'm a "conservative" a "rightwinger" and I'm "cherry picking" stuff.

Why the fuck would I intentionally cherry pick stuff when I'm talking to a bunch of people on a porn webmaster board? I don't know you. Or half of these people.

And you don't know me.

So why would I bother to try and slant a discussion to some "agenda" that doesn't exist?

But I swear...unless you conform and agree 100% with whatever the Democrat Party says...then you are branded a "conservative".
It's frustrating to say the least.

I feel depressed over the whole thing. It appears to me that many people are engaged in "group think" and of course can't see it happening. But what else would you call it when you are instantly a "conservative" if you don't agree with something that the Democrat Party decrees?

This was my post right after Barry found the updated graph with the latest quarter listed.
And fuck you:

Please name one Libertarian Party member who had significant impact on the ultimate form of ACA.

The insurance and big pharma companies do not "fear change". This was change they wanted, change which will make them very rich.

Are you attempting to defend something bad by saying that the people who made bad policy did not like it either?

What are you talking about regarding art forms???

If you didn't want to get into a conversation about survey methodologies because you don't actually know anything about them, why did you go all ballistic on Robbie about what Gallup's methodology is?

Have you googled your preferred Standard Oil yet?

ballistic? :upsidedow

Richard, you obviously have no idea how you are making yourself look in this thread.

Bad for you personally and bad for business all the way around.

right.

anyway..

The way Gallup polls are performed is pretty standard. You went all ballistic cross-examining attorney on Robbie for basically not including a footnote saying: Like all Gallup polls and similar polls of the last near century, this one probably used the same methods anyone who knows anything about polls would expect.

Organizations like Gallup and Pew Research have been fairly transparent about their methodologies for almost 100 years. Everyone familiar with survey systems knows this. Most people are not familiar with the finer points of statistical modeling and yet they can still have a civil conversation which includes survey results.

You don't know probability theory, but you want to go ballistic at Robbie for not appending it to his survey chart embed.

You can't name a Libertarian who impacted ACA, but you assert they did.

You can't name a Republican who impacted ACA, but you assert they did.

Your avatar text suggests you are Canadian, but you think it is okay to be contemptuous of Americans sharing their actual experiences.

You say an offshoot of Standard Oil is probably more reliable than Gallup. I don't believe anyone is that stupid, so I think you said that just to act like you'd be open to a reasonable survey if it slapped you in the face. Have you googled Standard Oil yet?

i didn't want to point out a series of reasons why it was hilarious he was trying to use the poll the way he was.

is that ok Amelia

Richard, I'm done with you man. Don't talk to me anymore. And don't come near me at shows.

Insulting my intelligence when you are the one on here posting like a retard is laughable at best. Fuck you.

sounds good

It is customary to quote what you are replying to. Is that okay?

You think it is hilarious that, according to survey data, ACA was behind 2008 numbers through the end of 2013, but fractionally rallied at the beginning of 2014 and everyone seeing that was pleased that at least it is a little better? Why is that funny? Why is it easier to act like you never heard of Gallup and demonstrate that you never heard of Standard Oil?

You still haven't answered any if the questions I asked, but that is okay because I understand that the reason is that you either do not know or are a bad person or both.

lol wow .

You are right, Robbie.

I listen to perspectives other than my own. I like to learn and I keep an open mind.

Unfortunately, trying to parse the ranting of imbeciles who are too stupid and incompetent to even quote reply, much less discuss issues ... well, it's kind of a waste of mental energy.

One more for the ignore list. That guy just sig whore for Sextronix or that his?