Rand Paul

[Boshembechle]

For the record, I like him. He is one of the few who cares about fourth amendment rights, foreign intervention, and incarceration reform. Likewise, deep down, I know he is a social conservative. He correctly understands the absurdity behind same sex marriage and rights for transsexuals who defy basic biology. However, I cannot vote for someone who is a threat to my obamacare. I am a single father of one who was priced out of healthcare for my son and I. For years, I went without healthcare and went to the ER when I absolutely needed to. (Very few people understand how belittling and embarrassing it is having to use the same medical services as poor [mod deleted] and their offspring). I have insurance now and it is almost completely free through federal subsidies. Rand Paul has a profound level of disdain for this law that is of ENORMOUS benefit for my son and I. I, like many others who have a similar story, love Rand Paul's disdain for government surveillance and the like, but will not be able to vote for him due to economic self-interest.

[Christian Liberty]

For the record, I like him. He is one of the few who cares about fourth amendment rights, foreign intervention, and incarceration reform. Likewise, deep down, I know he is a social conservative. He correctly understands the absurdity behind same sex marriage and rights for transsexuals who defy basic biology. However, I cannot vote for someone who is a threat to my obamacare. I am a single father of one who was priced out of healthcare for my son and I. For years, I went without healthcare and went to the ER when I absolutely needed to. (Very few people understand how belittling and embarrassing it is having to use the same medical services as poor [mod deleted] and their offspring). I have insurance now and it is almost completely free through federal subsidies. Rand Paul has a profound level of disdain for this law that is of ENORMOUS benefit for my son and I. I, like many others who have a similar story, love Rand Paul's disdain for government surveillance and the like, but will not be able to vote for him due to economic self-interest.

In other words, you can't vote for Rand because you like being a thief.

You may not realize this is the source of your objection, but ultimately, it is. You like having the government steal from other people in order to give to you. You should be ashamed.

Consider where your Obamacare comes from. Who pays for it? Other people. Do other people pay for it voluntarily, out of the goodness of their hearts? Of course not. They pay at gunpoint. Other people work, and the government threatens them at gunpoint in order to give money to you and your son.

If you simply took the money because government already took it, and you were simply trying to de-fund the thieves, I would not object. But to refuse to do what you can to STOP the theft is simply immoral, regardless of reason.

That's not to say there are no valid issues with Rand, but this is certainly not one of them. You can't vote for the man because he's principled enough to oppose theft. That is just sad. Repent.

[cajuncocoa]

Obamacare threatens MY economic self-interest. I stand with Rand on this.

[Brett85]

Then it sounds like you can't vote for any Republican, because every Republican in 2016 is going to be running on a platform of repealing Obamacare.

[kcchiefs6465]

Some people feel the same way with regards to military subsidies.

Or agricultural subsidies.

Or media subsidies.

Or mining subsidies.

Or fishing subsidies.

Or lumber subsidies.

Or nuclear subsidies.

Or energy subsidies.

Or security subsidies.

What a good model we have! Everyone can take from everyone. For ever. There is absolutely no chance that this is a house of cards that will come collapsing with worse off conditions than otherwise would be felt. No chance whatsoever.

[phill4paul]

Very few people understand how belittling and embarrassing it is having to use the same medical services as poor [mod deleted] and their offspring).

You make me chuckle.

[mosquitobite]

Big government sucks, except when it benefits me. That about right?

[qh4dotcom]

In other words, you can't vote for Rand because you like being a thief.

You may not realize this is the source of your objection, but ultimately, it is. You like having the government steal from other people in order to give to you. You should be ashamed.

Consider where your Obamacare comes from. Who pays for it? Other people. Do other people pay for it voluntarily, out of the goodness of their hearts? Of course not. They pay at gunpoint. Other people work, and the government threatens them at gunpoint in order to give money to you and your son.

If you simply took the money because government already took it, and you were simply trying to de-fund the thieves, I would not object. But to refuse to do what you can to STOP the theft is simply immoral, regardless of reason.

That's not to say there are no valid issues with Rand, but this is certainly not one of them. You can't vote for the man because he's principled enough to oppose theft. That is just sad. Repent.

Besides what you said, the law is doomed to fail....don't forget that Obama wants single payer/government run healthcare....the almost free healthcare won't last for long....he also doesn't realize the quality of care he will receive will deteriorate.

[MelissaWV]

For the record, I like him. He is one of the few who cares about fourth amendment rights, foreign intervention, and incarceration reform. Likewise, deep down, I know he is a social conservative. He correctly understands the absurdity behind same sex marriage and rights for transsexuals who defy basic biology. However, I cannot vote for someone who is a threat to my obamacare. I am a single father of one who was priced out of healthcare for my son and I. For years, I went without healthcare and went to the ER when I absolutely needed to. (Very few people understand how belittling and embarrassing it is having to use the same medical services as poor [mod delete] and their offspring). I have insurance now and it is almost completely free through federal subsidies. Rand Paul has a profound level of disdain for this law that is of ENORMOUS benefit for my son and I. I, like many others who have a similar story, love Rand Paul's disdain for government surveillance and the like, but will not be able to vote for him due to economic self-interest.

So it's not free, even to you, and it certainly isn't free to the people ponying up to pay for your share. Out of curiosity, have you actually tried to use this insurance yet? Or are you like a large portion who just have insurance in name only, and haven't had to do battle with what providers are and aren't willing to take "ObamaCare" for?

[fisharmor]

[Boshembechle]

Then it sounds like you can't vote for any Republican, because every Republican in 2016 is going to be running on a platform of repealing Obamacare.

The problem is that GOP moderates who would most likely keep the ACA (Christie, Jeb Bush) are twits when it comes to civil liberties.

[Christian Liberty]

Besides what you said, the law is doomed to fail....don't forget that Obama wants single payer/government run healthcare....the almost free healthcare won't last for long....he also doesn't realize the quality of care he will receive will deteriorate.

Yeah, its a pragmatic disaster too.

[fisharmor]

The problem is that GOP moderates who would most likely keep the ACA (Christie, Jeb Bush) are twits when it comes to civil liberties.

The problem is that the ones who aren't twits on civil liberties don't think that keeping your pay and deciding for yourself what health care provider to give it to are civil liberties.

[Christian Liberty]

The problem is that GOP moderates who would most likely keep the ACA (Christie, Jeb Bush) are twits when it comes to civil liberties.

Why are you surprised?

Ron Paul got to the heart of the problem in his farewell speech.

Quoting Ron:

Why do so many members [of congress] defend free markets, but not civil liberties?

Why do so many members [of congress] defend civil liberties, but not free markets? Aren't they the same?

[LibertyEagle]

For the record, I like him. He is one of the few who cares about fourth amendment rights, foreign intervention, and incarceration reform. Likewise, deep down, I know he is a social conservative. He correctly understands the absurdity behind same sex marriage and rights for transsexuals who defy basic biology. However, I cannot vote for someone who is a threat to my obamacare. I am a single father of one who was priced out of healthcare for my son and I. For years, I went without healthcare and went to the ER when I absolutely needed to. (Very few people understand how belittling and embarrassing it is having to use the same medical services as poor [mod deleted] and their offspring). I have insurance now and it is almost completely free through federal subsidies. Rand Paul has a profound level of disdain for this law that is of ENORMOUS benefit for my son and I. I, like many others who have a similar story, love Rand Paul's disdain for government surveillance and the like, but will not be able to vote for him due to economic self-interest.

It's true that the system was screwed up. I agree with you on that. But, it was screwed up because of government interference. That is why the prices went sky-high and the insurance companies were given plenty of bennies, not to mention a captive audience, by the federal government.

What would have been better than getting government even more involved would have been to get them completely out of the healthcare business. Prices would have plummeted and competition would be everywhere. You and I both would have been able to afford it. Government getting into something always causes the price to skyrocket. Look at the cost of college now, after the government started guaranteeing student loans.

[Natural Citizen]

Wasn't it the insurance companies who wrote this legislation? I mean, I know we like to just say that the government dunnit but this was the skullduggery of the insurance companies working from within government infrastructure. Right?

[angelatc]

In other words, you can't vote for Rand because you like being a thief.

This.

[Danke]

Some people feel the same way with regards to military subsidies.

Or agricultural subsidies.

Or media subsidies.

Or mining subsidies.

Or fishing subsidies.

Or lumber subsidies.

Or nuclear subsidies.

Or energy subsidies.

Or security subsidies.

What a good model we have! Everyone can take from everyone. For ever. There is absolutely no chance that this is a house of cards that will come collapsing with worse off conditions than otherwise would be felt. No chance whatsoever.

The most important: Banks

[Boshembechle]

I am not a thief. The government has offered me this. I am merely the beneficiary. I am not the one putting a gun to your head.

[MelissaWV]

I am not a thief. The government has offered me this. I am merely the beneficiary. I am not the one putting a gun to your head.

You're just standing in the background cheering them on. What moral highground you must have.

[Boshembechle]

If someone offered you a million dollars, would you accept it?

[phill4paul]

I am not a thief. The government has offered me this. I am merely the beneficiary. I am not the one putting a gun to your head.

Lol. You funny.

[LibertyEagle]

If someone offered you a million dollars, would you accept it?

If it was stolen from my neighbor, no. Come on, you know that. Just because the government is doing the stealing, doesn't let you off the hook for accepting stolen money.

[Christian Liberty]

I am not a thief. The government has offered me this. I am merely the beneficiary. I am not the one putting a gun to your head.

Read my original response. I was deliberately very specific. You are deliberately voting in such a way as to manipulate the government into stealing. That's different than trying to stop the theft but still taking what you can from government in order to defund said government.

I take financial aid. I do not think it is immoral for me to take financial aid. But, if I were to refuse to vote for a candidate because he was anti-financial aid, I would then be taking the role of a thief, because I am deliberately voting in such a way as to encourage the government to steal, rather than simply stealing from the government directly.

I hope you can make that distinction. I know of several people, some of whom are pro-tax and some of whom thinking I justify theft, that cannot make the distinction.

If someone offered you a million dollars, would you accept it?

Yes. But I would not vote in such a way as to manipulate someone into stealing a million dollars for me when I could vote in such a way as to prevent the million dollars from being stolen.

[LibertyEagle]

But people, this is what the government does. They create the problem and then their fix is more government.

[specsaregood]

I wonder if the OP even knows any of Rand's alternate proposals to Obamacarefail. If one was being honest, they would research those ideas first.

[LibertyEagle]

I think the dude is trying to survive. It's hard to be principled when the alternative is not getting any healthcare at all. Instead of turning against each other, we need to be focused on getting the government out of everything we possibly can. Then, people like this dude will see that is where the problems are coming from.

[Christian Liberty]

If it was stolen from my neighbor, no. Come on, you know that. Just because the government is doing the stealing, doesn't let you off the hook for accepting stolen money.

I think its a little trickier than that actually.

If Person A robbed Person B and offered the money to you, it seems obvious to me that you should take the money and give it back to Person B. If you kept the money for yourself you would be a thief, but not because you took the money from A, rather because you are depriving it from B.

On the other hand, if Person A stole from a person who was now dead and had no heirs, and he offered you the money, I would see no moral issue with taking and keeping the money. By keeping the money, you are not preventing the rightful owner from accessing it, but you are keeping it out of the hands of Person A, an actual thief.

In government's case, its exceedingly complicated. The government steals from a bunch of different people and offers money from a whole lot of people. Its impossible to identify who you would actually owe the money to if you actually do accept the offer. So, I don't see accepting the government's offer of money as per say making one a thief. But if you have the option to vote to make them stop stealing and you refuse to take it because you want to keep stealing, you then become a accompolice to theft.

[Christian Liberty]

I think the dude is trying to survive. It's hard to be principled when the alternative is not getting any healthcare at all. Instead of turning against each other, we need to be focused on getting the government out of everything we possibly can. Then, people like this dude will see that is where the problems are coming from.

My issue with him is not that he uses Obamacare. My problem with him is that he actually thinks Obamacare is justified, and he thinks Rand is wrong for opposing it. That's the issue.

[MelissaWV]

If someone offered you a million dollars, would you accept it?

I would look for the catch and provisions. If someone pulled $100 out of my wallet and offered me back $50 I would not be impressed. That's what's going on here.