Bill Clinton Nominates Obama For Re-Election At Dnc

[koheesti]

Romney has always said repeal it and replace it with something better. I am all for keeping the best parts of Obamacare and getting rid of all the stuff that was rammed through the house with tricks, bribes, lies and backroom deals.

Mr. Romney won't explain what the something "better" is.

Perhaps if he was more specific, people would be more receptive.

Obama got a bump out of a convention that had no specifics whatsoever.

[samran]

He played the defence attorney well, but Obama is still guilty of the chrages of a pathetic economy.

So what the people need now is a Richie McRich, give it all to the rich only, Outsourcer in Chief, is that it?

BTW, that propaganda meme about defense attorney is from Dick Morris on Fox News. That man is such a sleazeball. Your side can get as dirty as they like now, the speech is in the can and Americans loved it and correctly believed it.

Richy McRich?

I was more thinking 'Darren' from Bewitched!...

[samran]

Well, he was specific about protecting preexisting conditions and young adults staying on their parent's insurance.

Unlike Obamacare, Romneycare was funded by existing revenues and did not raise taxes. It does not regulate healthcare providers and private insurance companies. It works with them. It was only 70 pages long (as opposed to 3,000). It had bipartisan support. Maybe he will base his new plan on that.

God forbid you'd write healthcare legislation which actually works for the people rather than the companies? Just saying...

[Chicog]

Well, he was specific about protecting preexisting conditions and young adults staying on their parent's insurance.

Unlike Obamacare, Romneycare was funded by existing revenues and did not raise taxes. It does not regulate healthcare providers and private insurance companies. It works with them. It was only 70 pages long (as opposed to 3,000). It had bipartisan support. Maybe he will base his new plan on that.

"Obamacare" was put together by the team that put together Romney's Health care plan.

Care to enlighten us with some links here?

My pleasure:

Jonathan Gruber, an MIT economics professor, was one of the architects of the Massachusetts health care overhaul initiative of 2006 and a consultant to the Obama administration and Congress during the crafting of the federal plan.

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/politics/2011/11/4156059/architect-obamas-health-care-plan-fears-political-decision-supreme-

Jonathan Gruber, an M.I.T. economist hired by Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney to help craft health care reform, sharply criticized the Republican presidential candidate for distinguishing between his bill and President Barack Obama's in an interview with Capital New York published Wednesday.

"They're the same f***ing bill. He [Romney] just can't have his cake and eat it too," Gruber said. "He can try to draw distinctions and stuff, but he's just lying. The only big difference is he didn't have to pay for his. Because the federal government paid for it. Where at the federal level, we have to pay for it, so we have to raise taxes."

The Huffington Post's Andrea Stone reported in May that Gruber called Romney's opposition to the health care law the president signed "largely political." Gruber also said Romney was "subtly hypocritical" and "misleading" for suggesting that if Massachusetts could devise its own health care law, then other states should be allowed to develop their own plans.

The health care bill Romney signed and the Affordable Care Act signed by Obama have substantial similarities. Both have individual and employer mandates and subsidies, establish health insurance exchanges, allow young adults to stay on their parents' insurance and prohibit insurers from denying people based on pre-existing conditions.

In fact I would recommend you read his book about the subject, you might actually find that either Romney is more socialist than you think - or Obama is more conservative.

http://www.amazon.com/Health-Care-Reform-Necessary-Works/dp/0809053977/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1347258290&sr=8-1&keywords=health+care+reform

[Chicog]

Well, he was specific about protecting preexisting conditions and young adults staying on their parent's insurance.

Unlike Obamacare, Romneycare was funded by existing revenues and did not raise taxes. It does not regulate healthcare providers and private insurance companies. It works with them. It was only 70 pages long (as opposed to 3,000). It had bipartisan support. Maybe he will base his new plan on that.

God forbid you'd write healthcare legislation which actually works for the people rather than the companies? Just saying...

Funny he should say that, Massachussetts is look at putting limits on healthcare providers' price rises. I call that regulation.

[Chicog]

There's a comment here that really hits home, I've highlighted it below.

When Mr. Romney succeeded Ms. Swift in 2003, he proposed using an individual mandate to help the state achieve universal health care coverage. Mr. Gruber was again brought in to analyze the idea, which he had not formally modeled before.

“Romney saw it as a traditional Republican moral issue of personal responsibility, getting rid of the free riders in the system, not as much of an economic issue,” Mr. Gruber said. “Not only were the Republicans for it, the liberals hated it. People forget that.”

Mr. Obama had vehemently opposed an individual mandate before his election in 2008.

It really sums it up. One side feels it *has* to hate something the other side did, without actually bothering to find out what's good and what's bad about it.

I wonder how many Republicans in the Mass. state apparatus are personally in agreement with the ACA, even if they publicly have to state they are against it, just to keep the baying pitchfork mob happy.

[Ulysses G.]

Clinton played the defence attorney part well, but Obama is still guilty on all charges of a pathetic economy and voters will not forget that in November.

I suppose you are of the view that if you use the word "pathetic" enough, people will believe your incorrect assertion that it has been reported in the news that way.

The problem is, even Romney has said the economy is better now that it was when Obama took over. Although in front of baying crowds of fans, of course he always lies and says it's worse.

It has been reported exactly that way and on top of that I have posted links on this very thread that called the economy dismal and from a nonpartisan news agency. In case you do not realize it, dismal is a synonym for pathetic. Here is another:

The latest numbers were “downright dismal,” TD Economics senior economist James Marple said in a description echoed by many others.

The economy remains hobbled in the aftermath of the deepest recession since the 1930s and simply isn’t expanding fast enough to spark more hiring. Washington (Associated Press) http://www.mohavedai...1c401774865.txt

As for your claim about Romney, please provide some proof for a change.

Edited September 10, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[Ulysses G.]

Again, Romneycare was funded by existing revenues and did not raise taxes.

As to lies, the Obama campaign is far ahead on that front.

And Mr. Romney left the Commonwealth with a massive deficit.

According to PolitiFact, your statement is rated as "False".

In other words, another blatant lie among many spread by the Obama campaign.

Edited September 10, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[chuckd]

"Obamacare" was put together by the team that put together Romney's Health care plan.

Care to enlighten us with some links here?

My pleasure:

Jonathan Gruber, an MIT economics professor, was one of the architects of the Massachusetts health care overhaul initiative of 2006 and a consultant to the Obama administration and Congress during the crafting of the federal plan.

http://www.capitalne...cision-supreme-

Jonathan Gruber, an M.I.T. economist hired by Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney to help craft health care reform, sharply criticized the Republican presidential candidate for distinguishing between his bill and President Barack Obama's in aninterview withCapital New York published Wednesday.

"They're the same f***ing bill. He [Romney] just can't have his cake and eat it too," Gruber said. "He can try to draw distinctions and stuff, but he's just lying. The only big difference is he didn't have to pay for his. Because the federal government paid for it. Where at the federal level, we have to pay for it, so we have to raise taxes."

The Huffington Post's Andrea Stonereported in May that Gruber called Romney's opposition to the health care law the president signed "largely political." Gruber also said Romney was "subtly hypocritical" and "misleading" for suggesting that if Massachusetts could devise its own health care law, then other states should be allowed to develop their own plans.

The health care bill Romney signed and the Affordable Care Act signed by Obama havesubstantial similarities. Both have individual and employer mandates and subsidies, establish health insurance exchanges, allow young adults to stay on their parents' insurance and prohibit insurers from denying people based on pre-existing conditions.

In fact I would recommend you read his book about the subject, you might actually find that either Romney is more socialist than you think - or Obama is more conservative.

http://www.amazon.co...lth care reform

Thanks for the link. See how easy that is?

One quick question comes to mind. Was Mr. Gruber the entire "team" that put together the Romney plan or were there others? If there were others, how many of them served as "Consultants" to the Obama plan?

[Ulysses G.]

Well, he was specific about protecting preexisting conditions and young adults staying on their parent's insurance.

Unlike Obamacare, Romneycare was funded by existing revenues and did not raise taxes. It does not regulate healthcare providers and private insurance companies. It works with them. It was only 70 pages long (as opposed to 3,000). It had bipartisan support. Maybe he will base his new plan on that.

"Obamacare" was put together by the team that put together Romney's Health care plan.

Maybe so, but again, unlike Obamacare, Romneycare was funded by existing revenues and did not raise taxes. It does not regulate healthcare providers and private insurance companies. It works with them. It was only 70 pages long (as opposed to 3,000). It had bipartisan support. It is not the same plan.

Edited September 10, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[Jingthing]

Well, he was specific about protecting preexisting conditions and young adults staying on their parent's insurance.

Unlike Obamacare, Romneycare was funded by existing revenues and did not raise taxes. It does not regulate healthcare providers and private insurance companies. It works with them. It was only 70 pages long (as opposed to 3,000). It had bipartisan support. Maybe he will base his new plan on that.

"Obamacare" was put together by the team that put together Romney's Health care plan.

Maybe so, but again, unlike Obamacare, Romneycare was funded by existing revenues and did not raise taxes. It does not regulate healthcare providers and private insurance companies. It works with them. It was only 70 pages long (as opposed to 3,000). It had bipartisan support. It is not the same plan.

Existing revenues includes MANDATES. Mandates are the core of Romneycare. They are the core of Obamacare as well. It's hilarious that right wingers call Obaba a communist. Obamacare is a right wing pro big business solution to health care access, just like Romneycare. The republicans have gone radically right wing that even that conservative idea is too far left wing for them. They whine about a government takeover of health care as if Obamacare is anything like what we SHOULD have done -- UNIVERSAL health care like the civilized nations. Cheaper, better, and full access. The American people aren't fooled. In these very hard times, they know which party really CARES about the people and their access to health care, including the already sick, and buddy it ain't the party of Romney.

Of REAL liberals like me don't like Obamacare. We wanted something so much better. We wanting something like the civilized nations. Obama did too but he felt there wasn't a chance to win that in the environment of right wing opposition. So he used the right wing idea -- Mandates modeled directly on ROMNEYCARE. And then the opposition turned poisonous. The right wing doesn't care about the good of the people or their health. They are ALL about a total power grap for the tiny rich elites and really they really do not care one bit if millions of people die well before their time because of their shamefully immoral public policies.

Edited September 10, 2012 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

The American people aren't fooled.

You are right about that. They hate Obamacare and they know who shoved it down their throats by manipulating the legal process.

[Jingthing]

The American people aren't fooled.

You are right about that. They hate Obamacare and they know who shoved it down their throats by manipulating the legal process.

They hate Obamacare BUT they love the goodies in it. Don't be fooled that Romney will preserve the goodies. He can't do that if he kills mandates and medicaid expansion. I hope I made it clear here to non-biased people that Romney did NOT promise to protect people with pre-existing conditions. He was only talking about people with EXISTING, current, and CONTINUOUS insurance. Nothing like the REAL Obamacare.

What people hate about Obamacare is the MANDATES. Romney's right wing idea. Obama copied it. Now the right wing cynically demonizes it. Clearly the only solution is universal health care like the civilized countries, cheaper, better, and full access but the USA is so exceptionally and shockingly BACKWARDS on health care access and cost control issues that it might take another 100 years to finally see the light. It really is a crying shame. So much suffering because of so much stupidity.

And now I present something really, really sickening. Romney the founder of Romneycare, the model for Obamacare now running on an noxious platform to KILL Obamcare goes to ISRAEL and praises (correctly so) one of the best health care systems on the planet. ISRAEL. Socialized medicine!

http://www.boston.co...ama_health_law/

Romney’s praise for Israel’s health care system was greeted with some surprise.

“We’re laughing — for a Republican to praise the Israeli health care system, which is managed care, universal coverage, with no small amount of federal government control and oversight,” said Karen Feinstein, president and chief executive of the Pennsylvania-based Jewish Healthcare Foundation, which has been studying the differences between the Israeli and US health care systems.

Israel’s national health care system, created in 1995, provides universal coverage by requiring citizens to join one of four competing insurance plans that, by law, have to provide certain base-level services. The plans cannot reject customers because of preexisting conditions.

Romney: we want a world class system too that covers ALL of our citizens and that has effective cost controls as well! It so funny that the right wing party presents itself as the more "moral" party when anyone with any common sense can see that the health care policies which result in millions of premature deaths that they advocate are massively immoral.

Edited September 10, 2012 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

Don't be fooled that Romney will preserve the goodies.

That is pure biased speculation. Your claims and predictions about politics have never been reliable in the past and it would be a real shock if they are this time.

Edited September 10, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[Jingthing]

Don't be fooled that Romney will preserve the goodies.

That is pure biased speculation. Your claims and predictions about politics have never been reliable in the past and it would be a shock if they are this time.

I provided you a link in this very thread directly from the Romney campaign which EXPLICITLY said they are not for offering insurance to people with preexisting conditions that don't ALREADY have insurance. We also know that Romney is for KILLING Medicaid expansion which is actually a popular goodie because it allows many millions of people currently without insurance to have it. So you not only attack me as a source but also the Romney campaign itself. I think that won't wash.

[Ulysses G.]

Romney wants to make sure that people can't be dropped if they have a pre-existing condition. That is a "goodie" compared to now. As far as covering people who refuse to buy insurance and only apply when they are already sick, isn't that is a good way to go bankrupt when we are already 16 trillion dollars in the hole?

Edited September 10, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[Chicog]

Well, he was specific about protecting preexisting conditions and young adults staying on their parent's insurance.

Unlike Obamacare, Romneycare was funded by existing revenues and did not raise taxes. It does not regulate healthcare providers and private insurance companies. It works with them. It was only 70 pages long (as opposed to 3,000). It had bipartisan support. Maybe he will base his new plan on that.

"Obamacare" was put together by the team that put together Romney's Health care plan.

Maybe so, but again, unlike Obamacare, Romneycare was funded by existing revenues and did not raise taxes. It does not regulate healthcare providers and private insurance companies. It works with them. It was only 70 pages long (as opposed to 3,000). It had bipartisan support. It is not the same plan.

If you are going to use Google, then perhaps look at where FEDERAL FUNDING supported Romneycare. The only difference is that there is no body above the Federal government that can fund Obamacare, so it requires taxes.

And as I said above, Mass. are looking at reining in the health care providers and insurance companies because they don't give much of a flying fart about whether people get well or not, they are all about making money.

I'd urge you to read Gruber's book, "Health Care Reform". It explains how it all works, and it's the same economist that designed Romneycare with Republican support.

It would be interesting to see your opinion after reading it.

It's funny. The number of times I've heard Romney deriding "You didn't build that", and yet with this and the Olympics you have two major projects he led, both of which relied on significant federal funding.

He didn't build that!

Edited September 10, 2012 by Chicog

[Chicog]

There is a brief summary in this video. It all seems perfectly reasonable to me. What's your problem with it Ulysses?

[Ulysses G.]

The American people aren't fooled.

You are right about that. They hate Obamacare and they know who shoved it down their throats by manipulating the legal process.

They hate Obamacare BUT they love the goodies in it.

Everyone loves free stuff when it is truly free, but Obamacare is far from free and the American people do not want to pay for it and due to the economy they can not really afford to even if they did.

Edited September 10, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[Ulysses G.]

It's funny. The number of times I've heard Romney deriding "You didn't build that", and yet with this and the Olympics you have two major projects he led, both of which relied on significant federal funding.

Romney is not the one who decided to hold the Olympics in Salt Lake City. He came in to save it after it was already underway. However, the federal government encourages US cities to hold the Olymics and a city would not be able to afford to hold it without federal funds anyway, so blame it on them, not Romney.

[Ulysses G.]

There is a brief summary in this video. It all seems perfectly reasonable to me. What's your problem with it Ulysses?

I will watch it when I have time, but, personally, I have no problem with providing free health care if the country can afford it. I'm just afraid that with the dismal economy,now is not that time.

[Scott]

I have no intention of weighing in on the discourse between Obamacare and Romneycare. I really don't know a lot about either, but do you think that the US citizens don't already pay for the health care of the uninsured?

People suffering from debilitating illnesses are covered under a variety of welfare programs. Many of these illnesses are either preventable or the impact can be greatly minimized (and the person continuing to work) with appropriate and reasonably early intervention.

The people who do not get this kind of care are usually the working poor. They do not qualify for welfare-related medical benefits and can't afford health insurance.

In the end, US citizens pay for the cost of their health care and by that time, it ain't inexpensive.

[Ulysses G.]

That is why Romney wants to come up with a healthcare plan that is affordable, but that doctors are OK with as they are threatening to quit in droves. We already have a doctor shortage and there is every indication that Obamacare will make it much worse. .

[Neurath]

That is why Romney wants to come up with a healthcare plan that is affordable, but that doctors are OK with as they are threatening to quit in droves. We already have a doctor shortage and there is every indication that Obamacare will make it much worse. .

This claim is rated as a lie by Politifact: http://www.politifact.com/subjects/health-care/?page=3

and here:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jul/12/jeff-duncan/gop-lawmaker-jeff-duncan-repeats-survey-finding-83/

[Jingthing]

Romney wants to make sure that people can't be dropped if they have a pre-existing condition. That is a "goodie" compared to now. As far as covering people who refuse to buy insurance and only apply when they are already sick, isn't that is a good way to go bankrupt when we are already 16 trillion dollars in the hole?

The solution was Obamacare with the proper mandates.

[Ulysses G.]

That is why Romney wants to come up with a healthcare plan that is affordable, but that doctors are OK with as they are threatening to quit in droves. We already have a doctor shortage and there is every indication that Obamacare will make it much worse. .

This claim is rated as a lie by Politifact: http://www.politifac...th-care/?page=3

and here:

http://www.politifac...vey-finding-83/

No is isn't. Read the article. It is about a specific claim about a specific poll that was not specifically about Obamacare.

4 Pinocchios for that post.

Edited September 10, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[Credo]

The number of students admitted to medical school is part of the problem. There are not enough slots and this is partially controlled by the AMA, as I understand it. It is also difficult for an overseas educated Dr. to do a residency in the US.

A friend of mine works for a medical school which is located outside the US. The entire program is approved by the US, but recent political wrangling means that graduates cannot do their residency in the US.

And all these Dr.'s who are quitting in droves are going to go where....to one of the countries with socialized medicine? I think not.

[Ulysses G.]

Romney wants to make sure that people can't be dropped if they have a pre-existing condition. That is a "goodie" compared to now. As far as covering people who refuse to buy insurance and only apply when they are already sick, isn't that is a good way to go bankrupt when we are already 16 trillion dollars in the hole?

The solution was Obamacare with the proper mandates.

The estimates for the costs of Obamacare keep going up and up and up.

Earlier this week, the Congressional Budget Office released its revised estimates of what Obamacare will cost, now that the Supreme Court has weighed in.

Today, the CBO believes that Obamacare will spend more money, raise more tax revenue, and reduce the deficit less than the agency thought in 2010. And things could get worse. http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2012/07/27/cbo-obamacare-will-spend-more-tax-more-and-reduce-the-deficit-less-than-we-previously-thought/

Edited September 10, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[Chicog]

Earlier this week, the Congressional Budget Office released its revised estimates of what Obamacare will cost, now that the Supreme Court has weighed in.

Today, the CBO believes that Obamacare will spend more money, raise more tax revenue, and reduce the deficit less than the agency thought in 2010. And things could get worse. http://www.forbes.co...iously-thought/

That's a strange interpretation, given that this came out at the same time:.

Posted: Tue, Jul. 24, 2012, 4:47 PM

CBO says Obama's health law will reduce deficit

RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR and ANDREW TAYLOR

Republicans have insisted that "Obamacare" will actually raise deficits — by "trillions," according to presidential candidate Mitt Romney. But that's not so, the Congressional Budget Office said.

The CBO gave no updated estimate for deficit reductions from the law, approved by Congress and signed by Obama in 2010. But it did estimate that Republican legislation to repeal the overhaul — passed recently by the House — would itself increase the deficit by $109 billion from 2013 to 2022.

"Repealing the (health care law) will lead to an increase in budget deficits over the coming decade, though a smaller one than previously reported," budget office director Douglas Elmendorf said in a letter to House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.

Tuesday's budget projections were the first since the Supreme Court upheld most of the law last month. The CBO said the law's mix of spending cuts and tax increases would more than offset new spending to cover uninsured people.

As expected, the budget office said the law will cover fewer uninsured people because the Supreme Court ruled that states won't have to sign on to a planned expansion of Medicaid for their low-income residents.

Thirty million uninsured people will be covered by 2022, or about 3 million fewer than projected this spring before the court ruling, the report said.

As a result, taxpayers will save about $84 billion from 2012 to 2022. That brings the total cost of expanding coverage down to $1.2 trillion, from about $1.3 trillion in the previous estimate.

Democrats immediately hailed the findings as vindication for the president. "This confirms what we've been saying all along: the Affordable Care Act saves lots of money," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

Republicans said they remain unswervingly committed to repealing what they dismiss as "Obamacare." When combined with other budget-cutting measures, GOP leaders say that repeal will ultimately reduce deficits. Mitt Romney says if elected he will begin to dismantle the law his first day in office.

Medicaid has been one big question hanging over the future of Obama's law since the Supreme Court ruled.

Some GOP-led states, such as Texas and Florida, say they will not go forward with the expansion. Others are uncommitted, awaiting the voters' verdict on Obama in November.

Although the federal government would bear all of the initial cost of that expansion, many states would have to open their Medicaid programs to low-income childless adults for the first time.

CBO analysts did not try to predict which specific states would jump in and which would turn down the Medicaid expansion. Instead, they assumed that many states would eventually cut deals with the federal government to expand their programs to some degree.

As a result, the budget office estimates that more than 80 percent of the low-income uninsured people eligible under the law live in states that partially or fully expand their programs.

Associated Press writer Laurie Kellman contributed to this report.

[geriatrickid]

That is why Romney wants to come up with a healthcare plan that is affordable, but that doctors are OK with as they are threatening to quit in droves. We already have a doctor shortage and there is every indication that Obamacare will make it much worse. .

Quit? I don't think so. The doctors that are making the threats are those taht have a vested interest in their private clinics where they make small fortunes slicing and dicing. I have a relative like that. I also have a relative that really cares about the delivery of healthcare.What would these doctors do that quit? They have expensive lifestyles and need the money to support those lifestyles. What exactly would they do? I can't see them working as greeters at Walmart. I find it interesting that the same people who are raising this "fear" supported the termination of FAA flight controllers by Reagan when the personnel went on strike. The physicians making the threats are not the ones that are working in the rural communities or at public hospitals, nor are they the physicians volunteering for the community service outreach programs.