Harry Reid on Obamacare victims' stories: "All of them are untrue"

[Vlad the Impaler]

While Harry was lambasting those "super evil un-American Koch brothers"... he tends to forget... Heavy Hitters: Top All-Time Donors, 1989-2014 | OpenSecrets

Koch Brothers rank 59th in overall spending. Behind 18 different unions.

I hadn't seen that before. Youhave to ge beyond # 17 to have any that lean right at all!

 

[findingZzero]

All liberals are pederasts. Everything the Koch bros. do is above board. Harry Reid always tells the truth. I am KING OF THE WORLD! WE are made of stuff that is a minority of the stuff in the universe. Does that make you feel special or insignificant. Where am I?

 

[88GT]

I suspect that every one of us out here in RealAmerica (TM) knows someone whose insurance has been cancelled and whose premiums have risen as a result of ObamaCare. I suspect many of us can name someone whose treatment for an ongoing medical problem has been hindered by the advent of the Affordable Care Act. No matter how much play this particular lie gets, I suspect all we have to do is ask our neighbors if they know anyone whose been adversely affected to prove Harry Reid is a lying liar.

I imagine the spin response to that is simply that it is the evil insurance companies leaving their customers high and dry to make an extra buck or two.

I wonder what the "lost insurance because of Obamacare" count would be if we include the number of people who were terminated from employment so the businesses could keep their numbers under the threshold or the ones who lost hours so the businesses didn't have to provide the benefits.

 

[findingZzero]

I imagine the spin response to that is simply that it is the evil insurance companies leaving their customers high and dry to make an extra buck or two.

I wonder what the "lost insurance because of Obamacare" count would be if we include the number of people who were terminated from employment so the businesses could keep their numbers under the threshold or the ones who lost hours so the businesses didn't have to provide the benefits.

No doubt there are and will be more of those hurt by the ACA. Here's my spin. I know folks who've benefitted from the ACA. Lots of unintended consequence go with any great change. I know lots of folks who were hurt by the health care system/insurances companies before the ACA. Do you know anyone who has benefitted, but don't wanna say here...? Something needed to change. God bless America, RomneyCare, the American Heritage Foundation and their liberal jack-booted lackeys. I bet I could find a conservative lying about ACA as well. What's the point if you only cover one side.

watching the conservative circle jerk.......

 

[steveh_131]

No doubt there are and will be more of those hurt by the ACA. Here's my spin. I know folks who've benefitted from the ACA. Lots of unintended consequence go with any great change. I know lots of folks who were hurt by the health care system/insurances companies before the ACA. Do you know anyone who has benefitted, but don't wanna say here...? Something needed to change. God bless America, RomneyCare, the American Heritage Foundation and their liberal jack-booted lackeys. I bet I could find a conservative lying about ACA as well. What's the point if you only cover one side.

Of course some have benefited. Someone always benefits from wealth redistribution at the expense of those of us who are getting boned.

Tell them I said "You're welcome. Enjoy it while it lasts."

 

[jamil]

No doubt there are and will be more of those hurt by the ACA. Here's my spin. I know folks who've benefitted from the ACA. Lots of unintended consequence go with any great change. I know lots of folks who were hurt by the health care system/insurances companies before the ACA. Do you know anyone who has benefitted, but don't wanna say here...? Something needed to change. God bless America, RomneyCare, the American Heritage Foundation and their liberal jack-booted lackeys. I bet I could find a conservative lying about ACA as well. What's the point if you only cover one side.

watching the conservative circle jerk.......

The real question is, is the net effect of ACA better for Americans than before the ACA? Is there any way we could possibly know the honest answer. I wouldn't trust Harry Reid to tell the truth about it any more than FOX News or NPR. I suspect the answer is no, it's not a net win for Americans. The math just don't be workin'.

 

[88GT]

The real question is, is the net effect of ACA better for Americans than before the ACA? Is there any way we could possibly know the honest answer. I wouldn't trust Harry Reid to tell the truth about it any more than FOX News or NPR. I suspect the answer is no, it's not a net win for Americans. The math just don't be workin'.

As long as we are defining "better" as more free. I'm not interested in sacrificing freedom just so the government can "give" me what I can do/have already done for myself.

 

[traderdan]

Exactly right Stevah! My desire to be productive is shrinking everyday...

 

[88GT]

No doubt there are and will be more of those hurt by the ACA. Here's my spin. I know folks who've benefitted from the ACA. Lots of unintended consequence go with any great change. I know lots of folks who were hurt by the health care system/insurances companies before the ACA. Do you know anyone who has benefitted, but don't wanna say here...? Something needed to change. God bless America, RomneyCare, the American Heritage Foundation and their liberal jack-booted lackeys. I bet I could find a conservative lying about ACA as well. What's the point if you only cover one side.

watching the conservative circle jerk.......

Who has been hurt by insurance companies? Being denied coverage? Is that what you're referring to? Being denied coverage in accordance with the existing agreement is not being harmed. And being denied coverage just means the insurance coverage won't subsidize the cost. It doesn't mean you can't have the procedure. It's painfully obvious that when government controls health care, this ability to seek care/treatment is universally hindered. What good can come from government-administered healthcare?

 

[zippy23]

The real problem is not harry reid, he is knowingly lying, he knows that you and I know that, but guess what, his idiot voters BELIEVE EVERY WORD HE SAYS, just like Obama voters, they will not believe anything the other side says, they will only believe what their leader says. that is the real problem, and they know it. Democrats will never back down ever, because it shows weakness, therefore their followers think they have never screwed up. republicans on the other hand are different, they will eat their own. its not a surprise anymore that these liberals lie about it all, their voters will eat it up no matter what.

 

[gstanley102]

No doubt there are and will be more of those hurt by the ACA. Here's my spin. I know folks who've benefitted from the ACA. Lots of unintended consequence go with any great change. I know lots of folks who were hurt by the health care system/insurances companies before the ACA. Do you know anyone who has benefitted, but don't wanna say here...? Something needed to change. God bless America, RomneyCare, the American Heritage Foundation and their liberal jack-booted lackeys. I bet I could find a conservative lying about ACA as well. What's the point if you only cover one side.

watching the conservative circle jerk.......

I know far far far more that have been harmed than have been helped by the law being forced on us.

I for one have benefitted from the healthcare system prior to the ACA.

Remember the ACA is not about improving healthcare.

It is about getting one step closer to the ultimate dream of a single payer system.

It is what BHO wants, Dirty Harry wants, the Clintons want, Pelosi wants, ...........................................................

 

[steveh_131]

It's painfully obvious that when government controls health care, this ability to seek care/treatment is universally hindered. What good can come from government-administered healthcare?

Nothing good. None, whatsoever. The outrageous prices, long wait times and crappy service can all be traced directly back to government meddling.

 

[jamil]

As long as we are defining "better" as more free. I'm not interested in sacrificing freedom just so the government can "give" me what I can do/have already done for myself.

This is true. But if he's arguing that we must keep it because it's a net win. How could anyone possibly tell? I think it doesn't matter if it's a net win for everyone or not. It's a net loss for me. It's not the government's job to pick who gets to win and who gets to lose. In a free society that should be a crime.

 

[findingZzero]

I thought the most successful countries/economies are those that have collaborations between gov't and industry. Picking winners, or at least assisting promising industries may not be free market, but it makes good economic sense. The NIH collaborating with academia/pharmaceutical industry can spur innovation. I don't know if the ACA will result in a better system, but what we had wasn't working well. History will decide if ACA is a good idea. A gridlocked congress will impede the process.

 

[steveh_131]

I thought the most successful countries/economies are those that have collaborations between gov't and industry. Picking winners, or at least assisting promising industries may not be free market, but it makes good economic sense. The NIH collaborating with academia/pharmaceutical industry can spur innovation. I don't know if the ACA will result in a better system, but what we had wasn't working well. History will decide if ACA is a good idea. A gridlocked congress will impede the process.

No. Absolutely not. Government 'collaboration' is what doomed our medical industry.

Here, have a history lesson: https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...nt-intervention-healthcare-brief-history.html

 

[jamil]

I thought the most successful countries/economies are those that have collaborations between gov't and industry. Picking winners, or at least assisting promising industries may not be free market, but it makes good economic sense. The NIH collaborating with academia/pharmaceutical industry can spur innovation. I don't know if the ACA will result in a better system, but what we had wasn't working well. History will decide if ACA is a good idea. A gridlocked congress will impede the process.

Yeah. Worked great for Solyndra.

What we had wasn't working well because, well, I'll just let Steve 'splain it.

 

[88GT]

This might put some posts in perspective.

 

[Leadeye]

My insurance bills would argue against his statement.

 

[findingZzero]

This might put some posts in perspective.

Yep, it's socialism/redistribution of wealth/a tax......run away run away.... Yes we pay for services we don't use. I don't mind paying a bit more to help out. I can afford it. What's wrong with me?

 

[gstanley102]

I thought the most successful countries/economies are those that have collaborations between gov't and industry. Picking winners, or at least assisting promising industries may not be free market, but it makes good economic sense. The NIH collaborating with academia/pharmaceutical industry can spur innovation. I don't know if the ACA will result in a better system, but what we had wasn't working well. History will decide if ACA is a good idea. A gridlocked congress will impede the process.

I'm just a schlump, but I don't think you can provide an example to support that statement.