![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsThe Affordable Care Act, commonly dubbed Obamacare, turned 1 year old last week. The confusion over this law has gone from 55% to 53% in that year's time. There has been a lot of discussion surrounding the law, but not a lot of information about it. There has been mischaracterizations about it with monikers such as "Death Panels" and "Government Run Healthcare". There are claims that the government, as opposed to insurance companies, come between you and your doctor. There has been attempts to adjudicate from the floor of Congress by declaring the law unconstitutional before the Supreme Court has had an opportunity to rule on it; and calling for its repeal. Some claim that the law has gone too far; and others, like consumer activist Ralph Nader, who claims it didn't go far enough.
Nancy Pelosi stated "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy.”. The statement seemed pretty ridiculous at the time, but considering the ongoing confusion, the discussion seems to have been about the ideology surrounding it and very little about the substance of the law itself.
Many Americans count on Consumer Report reviews of products before making a market decision. Many find the Consumer Reports review to be the final and determining factor in some of their biggest buying decisions. This is what Consumer Reports had to say about the Health Care law. Interestingly enough, they also include a descriptive PDF download that includes the features in plain English.
What do you think it would take for America to have a discussion about what the Affordable Care Act is and away from personal opinion of what it should be?
Nancy Pelosi stated "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy.”. The statement seemed pretty ridiculous at the time, but considering the ongoing confusion, the discussion seems to have been about the ideology surrounding it and very little about the substance of the law itself.
Many Americans count on Consumer Report reviews of products before making a market decision. Many find the Consumer Reports review to be the final and determining factor in some of their biggest buying decisions. This is what Consumer Reports had to say about the Health Care law. Interestingly enough, they also include a descriptive PDF download that includes the features in plain English.
What do you think it would take for America to have a discussion about what the Affordable Care Act is and away from personal opinion of what it should be?
(no subject)
Date: 30/3/11 00:47 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 30/3/11 02:59 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 30/3/11 11:32 (UTC)http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030205-1.html
(no subject)
Date: 30/3/11 20:34 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 30/3/11 20:47 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/11 00:33 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/11 01:22 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/11 01:29 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/11 01:30 (UTC)More to the point, how can you unintentionally lie? Can you be ignorantly honest?
(no subject)
Date: 31/3/11 01:35 (UTC)Ignorance is never an excuse.
how can you unintentionally lie?
By being ignorant and stating a falsehood while being ignorant.
Can you be ignorantly honest?
Yes.
(no subject)
Date: 31/3/11 22:06 (UTC)http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/blumenthal/2007/09/06/bush_wmd
No doubt this, too, must be a lie from that all-powerful Liberal Jew Soros.
(no subject)
Date: 31/3/11 22:22 (UTC)Even if we take these people at their word, Powell didn't know, so he couldn't have been lying. This still isn't evidence, of course - we know full well there was contradictory evidence, and we know full well what the international consensus was.
(no subject)
Date: 31/3/11 22:26 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/3/11 22:36 (UTC)According to some guy, yeah.
Bush had an unfortunate predilection to dismiss his officials if they contradicted what he fervently wished was true, Tenet probably did the rational thing and decided to preserve his job at the expense of principle.
If only. Bush was, to our detriment, too willing to listen too often.
(no subject)
Date: 1/4/11 00:46 (UTC)2) What timeline are you *from*, exactly? In mine Bush fired people across the board for not being insufficiently brown-nosing of Bush. Not to mention he hired a horse-trader as director of FEMA because he *was* a sufficient brown-noser of Bush (not that whoever Obama has vetting his appointees is that much better, mind). Not to mention when he exposed a covert CIA agent for her husband showing his yellowcake claims were a lie. The most notorious incident, however, was when Bush fired generals for claiming his plans would not work and this after most of an Administration saying the US military could do no wrong.