11
11
0
Edited 8 y ago
Posted 8 y ago
Responses: 71
Remember what America had BEFORE ObamaCare? Yup, that's right! It's called PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY! You paid for your own health insurance and medical care! Do you see how, in just 8 years, Americans were addicted to government assistance? Now someone threatens to take away your addiction and you all go nuckin' futs! Get yourself off the Federal Teat and start being responsible for your own lives again! Obama got America addicted to Something for Nothing (except that "nothing" meant someone else paid for it)
(46)
(0)
GySgt Craig Averill
SSG (Join to see) - It is YOU who reads very little of the Constitution and then believes he understands it all. WRONG!
The Centralized Government was created to be the Collective Voice and the Collective Force in Foreign issues only. The laws that Article 1 Section 7 refers to is the laws that Govern the U.S. Military, Foreign Policies, and whatever else is authorized under Article 1 Section 8 clauses 1 thru 18.
A section you should pay very close attention to is Article VI Clause II, read it very slowly and as many times as necessary to get it to sink in. There are three very important words in it and they must be read louder than the rest of the clause, "in Pursuance thereof"
Laws made within the pursuance of the Constitution are Supreme laws of the land, those that are not, are not even laws.
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
Healthcare is by no means a RIGHT, never has been and never will be, it is a SERVICE and a PRODUCT.
I am afraid you idea of what the Constitution means and that it can be changed by the Government is laughable. The Constitution is a COMPACT between all the states and any changes to the Constitution has to be done through the Ratification process that requires 75% of the existing states to pass the Bill by Majority Vote. Congress has NO AUTHORITY to ALTER, INFRINGE, DELETE OR ADD to the Constitution.
I fully understand the Constitution and what it means, it is very clear you do not.
The Bill of Rights is not up to debate whether it is 1789 or 2018, the Bill of RIGHTS was attached to the Constitution to make it clear to Government that our RIGHTS are nor open for discussion by them and that the first duty of Government is to SECURE OUR RIGHTS.
You might want to read our FOUNDING DOCUMENT that everything else is based on and that is our DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE. Here is the first part of it, read it slowly.
"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world."
One last thing, It is YOU who claim to be a Socialist and Russia was the USSR, so if you now think it is I who should move there, let me correct you, it is YOU as YOU are the self-proclaimed Socialist, I am a Constitutionist and I will stay right here in the Constitutional Republic, thank you.
You really do not have a clue, your posts are laughable as they lack any facts and are written on a twisted and warped interruption of what YOU think is the constitution, you are so far out in left field, it is funny.
The Centralized Government was created to be the Collective Voice and the Collective Force in Foreign issues only. The laws that Article 1 Section 7 refers to is the laws that Govern the U.S. Military, Foreign Policies, and whatever else is authorized under Article 1 Section 8 clauses 1 thru 18.
A section you should pay very close attention to is Article VI Clause II, read it very slowly and as many times as necessary to get it to sink in. There are three very important words in it and they must be read louder than the rest of the clause, "in Pursuance thereof"
Laws made within the pursuance of the Constitution are Supreme laws of the land, those that are not, are not even laws.
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
Healthcare is by no means a RIGHT, never has been and never will be, it is a SERVICE and a PRODUCT.
I am afraid you idea of what the Constitution means and that it can be changed by the Government is laughable. The Constitution is a COMPACT between all the states and any changes to the Constitution has to be done through the Ratification process that requires 75% of the existing states to pass the Bill by Majority Vote. Congress has NO AUTHORITY to ALTER, INFRINGE, DELETE OR ADD to the Constitution.
I fully understand the Constitution and what it means, it is very clear you do not.
The Bill of Rights is not up to debate whether it is 1789 or 2018, the Bill of RIGHTS was attached to the Constitution to make it clear to Government that our RIGHTS are nor open for discussion by them and that the first duty of Government is to SECURE OUR RIGHTS.
You might want to read our FOUNDING DOCUMENT that everything else is based on and that is our DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE. Here is the first part of it, read it slowly.
"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world."
One last thing, It is YOU who claim to be a Socialist and Russia was the USSR, so if you now think it is I who should move there, let me correct you, it is YOU as YOU are the self-proclaimed Socialist, I am a Constitutionist and I will stay right here in the Constitutional Republic, thank you.
You really do not have a clue, your posts are laughable as they lack any facts and are written on a twisted and warped interruption of what YOU think is the constitution, you are so far out in left field, it is funny.
(0)
(0)
GySgt Craig Averill
SSG (Join to see) -
Social Security has a larger than 2 trillion dollar surplus.
Look at an old Social Security card and across the top of it in bold letters is the two words ACCOUNT NUMBER. Social Security is YOUR MONEY, deposited into YOUR ACCOUNT. The Democrats borrowed $2.6 TRILLION from the Social Security Trusts and left worthless IOUs, so now Social Security has to be paid by the Annual Budget and in so doing the Democrats were trying to convince you Social Security is the Government being nice to you. Social Security is NOT a Tax, it was funded by the FICA which was an insurance and treated as a tax on your pay.
Health Care is YOUR responsibility and is a product and a service and if you want the best Products and Service, then keep Government out of it.
Nowhere in the Constitution has the Centralized Government been given any authority to be involved in our Health care or any domestic issue.
Yes! our Medical system need to be fixed, but by those who broke it???? We do NOT give authority to the government based on emotions, we do so through a Ratification Process and until that has been done, The Federal Government has no such authority whether we feel they should or not. period.
The Government works for the WILL OF THE PEOPLE and they do not rewrite their contract whenever they feel like it.
Health Care is YOUR responsibility and STATE government can police it for fraud and punish those who commit fraud against the people, but they do not have any such authority to provide or control the healthcare.
Social Security has a larger than 2 trillion dollar surplus.
Look at an old Social Security card and across the top of it in bold letters is the two words ACCOUNT NUMBER. Social Security is YOUR MONEY, deposited into YOUR ACCOUNT. The Democrats borrowed $2.6 TRILLION from the Social Security Trusts and left worthless IOUs, so now Social Security has to be paid by the Annual Budget and in so doing the Democrats were trying to convince you Social Security is the Government being nice to you. Social Security is NOT a Tax, it was funded by the FICA which was an insurance and treated as a tax on your pay.
Health Care is YOUR responsibility and is a product and a service and if you want the best Products and Service, then keep Government out of it.
Nowhere in the Constitution has the Centralized Government been given any authority to be involved in our Health care or any domestic issue.
Yes! our Medical system need to be fixed, but by those who broke it???? We do NOT give authority to the government based on emotions, we do so through a Ratification Process and until that has been done, The Federal Government has no such authority whether we feel they should or not. period.
The Government works for the WILL OF THE PEOPLE and they do not rewrite their contract whenever they feel like it.
Health Care is YOUR responsibility and STATE government can police it for fraud and punish those who commit fraud against the people, but they do not have any such authority to provide or control the healthcare.
(0)
(0)
GySgt Craig Averill
1SG Jeffrey Mullett -
Republicans support the Constitution, Democrats support Socialism ie Bernie Sanders and Communist ie Hillary Clinton.
No Republican supported the ACA because it is not CONSTITUIONAL, it is not within the LIMITED AUTHORITIES as defined in the COMPACT known as the U.S. Constitution.
The Constitution doesn't change because somebody cries THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD DO SOMETHING, it changes when a majority of the people in a minimum of 75% of the existing states decide it should change, that is how the Constitution is Ratified, not because some DUAL-CITIZEN who holds the office of the POTUS illegally demands it should change.
Republicans support the Constitution, Democrats support Socialism ie Bernie Sanders and Communist ie Hillary Clinton.
No Republican supported the ACA because it is not CONSTITUIONAL, it is not within the LIMITED AUTHORITIES as defined in the COMPACT known as the U.S. Constitution.
The Constitution doesn't change because somebody cries THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD DO SOMETHING, it changes when a majority of the people in a minimum of 75% of the existing states decide it should change, that is how the Constitution is Ratified, not because some DUAL-CITIZEN who holds the office of the POTUS illegally demands it should change.
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
I disagree with downing the poor too much. When we talk about financial responsibility let's not forget who it is that spreads that rhetoric, the wealthy! Of course they want us not to get any breaks because it cost them. As long as these greedy individuals continue the way they are I don't think government should keep bailing them out. What happens when you allow the president just gets done bailing out there manufacturing sector? You open the door hey wealthy person this is you!
(0)
(0)
Have to love checklists made of conjecture and cherry picked statistics, I love the one that says that 1/3 of Americans have pre-existing conditions. Intellectual honesty...it isn't what it used to be.
(29)
(0)
Capt Bud Adams
PO1 Joseph Glennon - The employers that cut the hours because of the ACA are the same employers that did not give health care benefits. Now it just opens the door for more employees to continue their health care, but not as effective and more costly to the employee.
The thing is, we are veterans and the U.S. Gov't. is giving us health care for the rest of our lives for spending at the minimum of serving 2 years. Why are some of you against health care that the gov't is assisting in, and you have health care as a vet? I have excellent health care, but I am not going to turn my back on people that need it, for what ever reason.
The thing is, we are veterans and the U.S. Gov't. is giving us health care for the rest of our lives for spending at the minimum of serving 2 years. Why are some of you against health care that the gov't is assisting in, and you have health care as a vet? I have excellent health care, but I am not going to turn my back on people that need it, for what ever reason.
(2)
(0)
PO1 Joseph Glennon
Capt Bud Adams - "The employers that cut the hours because of the ACA are the same employers that did not give health care benefits. Now it just opens the door for more employees to continue their health care, but not as effective and more costly to the employee."
How could it "open the door for more employees to continue their health care" if those are the "same employers that did not give health care benefits"?
I served for 20 years, Captain... *my* contract included health care for me and my family should I retire... I did, in fact, retire... but, my family is no longer covered in many / most military medical facilities. I didn't renege on my part of the agreement. My wife does still have health insurance because the government hasn't completely stripped themselves of their obligations - I pay for TriCare Prime to cover her needs...
Do you remember giving your oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States"? Health insurance is not a government mandate or suggestion in that document. I am willing to help anybody that I can, and I won't turn my back on someone's needs... but, I'm not going to suggest that the government steal from *you* just so I can make the claim that I've done something for someone else.
Charity is not the business of the government. If you want to feel good about helping someone in need, dig into your own pockets, sir - not mine.
How could it "open the door for more employees to continue their health care" if those are the "same employers that did not give health care benefits"?
I served for 20 years, Captain... *my* contract included health care for me and my family should I retire... I did, in fact, retire... but, my family is no longer covered in many / most military medical facilities. I didn't renege on my part of the agreement. My wife does still have health insurance because the government hasn't completely stripped themselves of their obligations - I pay for TriCare Prime to cover her needs...
Do you remember giving your oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States"? Health insurance is not a government mandate or suggestion in that document. I am willing to help anybody that I can, and I won't turn my back on someone's needs... but, I'm not going to suggest that the government steal from *you* just so I can make the claim that I've done something for someone else.
Charity is not the business of the government. If you want to feel good about helping someone in need, dig into your own pockets, sir - not mine.
(0)
(0)
Capt Bud Adams
PO1 Joseph Glennon. First off I want to commend you for putting in 20 of service. Second, the employee should have been employer. My error. The gov't is not in business for giving charity, but it is in business for helping it's people, in any shape, form or fashion. Yes, I remember to SUPPORT AND DEFEND the Constitution. Not only to defend it, but I read it. You may have also. May I direct you sir to the first sentence, the preamble of the Constitution. I will paste it here for you.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. insure domestic Tranquility, promote the general Welfare. Please, sir, I am not talking about welfare, welfare. That is what I signed up to do, and I will continue to do. If it involves removing money from my pocket to put where it should be most useful, I'll do it, and so will you. Ourselves and our posterity. That's plural, not singular. It is called taxes.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. insure domestic Tranquility, promote the general Welfare. Please, sir, I am not talking about welfare, welfare. That is what I signed up to do, and I will continue to do. If it involves removing money from my pocket to put where it should be most useful, I'll do it, and so will you. Ourselves and our posterity. That's plural, not singular. It is called taxes.
(0)
(0)
PO1 Joseph Glennon
I have to disagree with a couple of points you made:
"... it is in business for helping it's people, in any shape, form or fashion."
No, it's really not. Since there was a form of medical treatment back then, and there were "poor houses", "debtor's prisons", etc ... if those were to be part of the role of the federal government, they would have been codified in the document. They weren't. Nor were those obligations codified in the Amendments since then.
Removing money from my own pocket and giving it to those in need is honorable. Having money taken out of my pocket under threat of imprisonment is theft.
"... it is in business for helping it's people, in any shape, form or fashion."
No, it's really not. Since there was a form of medical treatment back then, and there were "poor houses", "debtor's prisons", etc ... if those were to be part of the role of the federal government, they would have been codified in the document. They weren't. Nor were those obligations codified in the Amendments since then.
Removing money from my own pocket and giving it to those in need is honorable. Having money taken out of my pocket under threat of imprisonment is theft.
(2)
(0)
Obviously these talking points were generated before the plan was ever completed/published. Same BS the Dems were touting when they crammed ACA through the House without even voting on the final version. Besides, how can you provide any in depth analysis when you have to "pass it to find out what's in it", according to BSC and former Speaker Pelosi?
Personally, I'd rather see repeal without a replacement. No where in the Constitution is heath care (or health insurance) a responsibility of the Federal Government.
Personally, I'd rather see repeal without a replacement. No where in the Constitution is heath care (or health insurance) a responsibility of the Federal Government.
(21)
(0)
LTC Stephen B.
SSG (Join to see) - 1) Not really correct. Insurance rates were not going up due to uninsured until AFTER the ACA passed and companies had to account for them in the actuary tables used to determine rates. Prior to that, the individual had to pay a higher rate to cover their own 'pre-existing conditions'. Dems didn't think that was "fair" so they burdened us all.
2) America works because to get ahead in a free-market system you have to produce a product or service that a: others want/need and b: offer said product or service at a price the customer can afford. Greed doesn't get you anywhere in a free-market economy if you can't produce. Where government interferes and removes market-based checks and balances you have bloated prices that are not matched by improving product. Two prime examples are the health insurance industry and the "higher education" industry.
2) America works because to get ahead in a free-market system you have to produce a product or service that a: others want/need and b: offer said product or service at a price the customer can afford. Greed doesn't get you anywhere in a free-market economy if you can't produce. Where government interferes and removes market-based checks and balances you have bloated prices that are not matched by improving product. Two prime examples are the health insurance industry and the "higher education" industry.
(1)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Sir so your saying that if Joe works under the table and doesn't have insurance, or care to purchase it, and there are say 10 million Joe s that won't effect my insurance rates at all? I agree it won't until these Joe s have to get medical attention that is too expensive for them to pay out of pocket but then What? The cost have to come back on someone because the hospitals can't go bankrupt can they? The doctors won't work for free too long will they? The law says if you really need medical attention the medical facility is obligated to assist. I acknowledge there are a lot of doctors that will make a deal with you just so they do not have to deal with the insurance b's and that there are also some that do care about people. How does this not effect me? Or am I misunderstanding you?
(0)
(0)
Patricia Overmeyer
LTC Stephen B. - Wow! Where were those higher rates for "pre-existing conditions"? I would have given you all the extra legs, canes, crutches, wheelchairs, transfer chairs, leg socks, etc. to have even been able to purchase health care insurance at a higher rate.
I, as well as millions of others, were denied the ability to purchase health care insurance because I had a pre-existing condition. Hopefully your child will not be born with a congenital heart defect, with cerebral palsy, with muscular dystrophy, with missing limbs, etc.. That's a pre-existing condition which would disqualify your child from receiving any health care paid by private insurance. (And no I didn't get this from some late night talk show host. I actually saw this multiple times in my practice where children were denied private health care coverage based on congenital birth defects, including several instances where the parents were medical doctors/nurses/health care practitioners). Hopefully your spouse doesn't get breast cancer and she is only allowed to have a lifetime cap of benefits, which she will go through in the first year of chemotherapy, etc. Ooops, you now have HIV due to unchecked blood products you use because you are a hemophiliac?
Sorry but no health care coverage in the private marketplace because you have a pre-existing condition and will most likely hit your lifetime cap of benefits in a couple of years.
If you don't believe this, then you need to purchase stock in health care insurance providers and start reading their prospectus, their quarterly earnings reports, etc. Corporate greed is what is working in the USA today.
I, as well as millions of others, were denied the ability to purchase health care insurance because I had a pre-existing condition. Hopefully your child will not be born with a congenital heart defect, with cerebral palsy, with muscular dystrophy, with missing limbs, etc.. That's a pre-existing condition which would disqualify your child from receiving any health care paid by private insurance. (And no I didn't get this from some late night talk show host. I actually saw this multiple times in my practice where children were denied private health care coverage based on congenital birth defects, including several instances where the parents were medical doctors/nurses/health care practitioners). Hopefully your spouse doesn't get breast cancer and she is only allowed to have a lifetime cap of benefits, which she will go through in the first year of chemotherapy, etc. Ooops, you now have HIV due to unchecked blood products you use because you are a hemophiliac?
Sorry but no health care coverage in the private marketplace because you have a pre-existing condition and will most likely hit your lifetime cap of benefits in a couple of years.
If you don't believe this, then you need to purchase stock in health care insurance providers and start reading their prospectus, their quarterly earnings reports, etc. Corporate greed is what is working in the USA today.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next