Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 91 to 113 of 113

Thread: Did Amash just vote for Obamcare lite?

  1. #91

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William Tell View Post
    Well, Andy Biggs the freshman from AZ saw through the suicide pact and voted no. I wonder if they will kick him out of their little club. Giving your voting card to Jim Jordan isn't much smarter than giving it to Paul Ryan. The Freedom Caucus has done some good things but Amash has lost a ton of support and even more respect from both the grassroots and the independents he's been courting.
    I actually spoke with Rep. Biggs by phone after the vote to personally thank him for his principled stance. He's my rep in AZ. He told me it wasn't even a tough vote. He said it does not repeal obamacare and does not even begin to keep the promises he and the GOP made to the nation when campaigning. His stock is rising, in my book. But he's a border wall nut so I'm not under any illusions that he's a libertarian.... but at least he has balls.
    There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.
    -Major General Smedley Butler, USMC,
    Two-Time Congressional Medal of Honor Winner
    Author of, War is a Racket!

    It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours.
    - Diogenes of Sinope



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #92

    Default

    I've read this several times...I'm still not seeing where the incremental benefits are compared to the ACA.
    Protest the NSA! Send encrypted e-mails!
    My PGP Key
    PGP Fingerprint: 3A2E 6218 3722 3701 09C9 54CA 9BB3 104C 5049 B6B2

  4. #93

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EBounding View Post
    I've read this several times...I'm still not seeing where the incremental benefits are compared to the ACA.
    If I understand correctly (and I may not, so someone please correct me if I am wrong), one of the alleged "incremental benefits" is that the "individual mandate" is gone - meaning that you won't be penalized for not having insurance when you file your taxes.

    Instead, you'll be punished for not having insurance when you try to become insured (by having the insurance companies jack up your premiums by 30% for the first year or whatever). In other words, people who don't have insurance will be punished when and if they ever try to get insurance - thereby discouraging uninsured people from becoming insured.

    It seems that this can only serve to increase and reinforce support for the idea of "single payer." After all, the whole point of the ACA in the first place was in reaction to "ZOMG!1!! Lots of people don't have health insurance!!! OMG!!! Somebody's gotta do something!!!"

    How this is supposed to be an "improvement" (incremental or otherwise) is beyond me ...

  5. #94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EBounding View Post
    I've read this several times...I'm still not seeing where the incremental benefits are compared to the ACA.
    Did you see my post about how it repeals over 1 trillion worth of taxes?

  6. #95

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brett85 View Post
    Did you see my post about how it repeals over 1 trillion worth of taxes?
    Why didn't Amash mention any of these things then? My guess is that he doesn't expect the tax and spending cuts to stick because the community rating is maintained which will eventually require bailouts.
    Protest the NSA! Send encrypted e-mails!
    My PGP Key
    PGP Fingerprint: 3A2E 6218 3722 3701 09C9 54CA 9BB3 104C 5049 B6B2

  7. #96

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    If I understand correctly (and I may not, so someone please correct me if I am wrong), one of the alleged "incremental benefits" is that the "individual mandate" is gone - meaning that you won't be penalized for not having insurance when you file your taxes.

    Instead, you'll be punished for not having insurance when you try to become insured (by having the insurance companies jack up your premiums by 30% for the first year or whatever). In other words, people who don't have insurance will be punished when and if they ever try to get insurance - thereby discouraging uninsured people from becoming insured.

    It seems that this can only serve to increase and reinforce support for the idea of "single payer." After all, the whole point of the ACA in the first place was in reaction to "ZOMG!1!! Lots of people don't have health insurance!!! OMG!!! Somebody's gotta do something!!!"

    How this is supposed to be an "improvement" (incremental or otherwise) is beyond me ...
    I don't think that's correct (as I read it, anyway). If someone has insurance and they let it lapse for over 60+ days, then they can be charged the 30% premium penalty for one year. Someone who's not had insurance wouldn't be subject to such a penalty (again, as I read it) because there is no issue of lapsed coverage.

    Such a clause punishes the financially challenged (as does the Obamacare fine). PEople who can afford it are not going to let their insurance lapse. People living from paycheck to paycheck are the most likely to be faced with a crisis that requires them to chose paying critical bill over another, at times. A good example would be an expensive auto repair that has to be done or the person won't have transportation. In such a case, it's a no brainer - let the insurance lapse and fix the car. BTW, low income and people with poor credit are already punished with higher auto insurance premiums because insurance companies are allowed to use credit scores to set rates. A person could have a perfect driving record but get punished for bad credit. I see this provision in the bill as more of the same.

  8. #97

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    Why did Amash just vote for Obamacare lite?
    Who cares? Really: who cares, Matt? One congressman's vote is completely irrelevant*. Perhaps he got some sort of backroom concessions to something on his agenda. Perhaps he calculated that this would make him more powerful in one way or another. Perhaps he is, in one way or another, thinking long-term and trying to accomplish something. You're always telling us about getting power. Accumulating power. And that's great! Let's think about the topic a little more deeply.

    We've already had one Ron Paul. It was great. Do we really need another lone wolf Congressman who maintains a pristine voting record for the next 40 years as the nation utterly disintegrates? Why? To leverage into a Presidential run 40 years from now?

    Come on. Let's have a real strategy. Let's have some real strategic thinking. At minimum let's understand basic tactics. At minimum-minimum let's understand stupidly obvious, simple pre-requisites to even fighting a war in the first place. Lesson Number One:

    Know who is on your side. Be loyal to your unit. Don't turn around and start shooting at the members of your unit.

    Amash has his reasons. They're likely great reasons. I am not going to criticize Amash (nor Massie). I see them as on my side. Eh? Think about it.

    *Indeed, Congress as a whole is irrelevant, figureheads exercising no power. As is the President. D.C. just goes on the same regardless. But that's another topic.
    The rebel of the 21st Century will be old-fashioned.

    No enemies to the right

  9. #98

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    Know who is on your side.
    Amash isn't on our side here.
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  10. #99

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    Amash isn't on our side here.
    Yeah, but all of the Democrats and all of the liberal Republicans are.

  11. #100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    Amash isn't on our side here.
    Amash is only one man. He is not multiple men: one on one issue and another on another. You cannot bifurcate him into "parts I like" and "parts I don't like."

    In a war, you do not say to your trenchmate: "Hey man, I don't feel like you're on my side today. Sure, in general you are. Yesterday you were, and so I had your back. 95%, maybe even 99% of the days you are. But today you sure are messing up. I don't have your back today. Today I'm going to undermine you." That's the enemy's job.

    It's called: loyalty. It really is a value and a virtue. Even eight-year-old Cub Scouts know about it. Time we learned it.
    The rebel of the 21st Century will be old-fashioned.

    No enemies to the right

  12. #101

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    Amash is only one man. He is not multiple men: one on one issue and another on another. You cannot bifurcate him into "parts I like" and "parts I don't like."

    In a war, you do not say to your trenchmate: "Hey man, I don't feel like you're on my side today. Sure, in general you are. Yesterday you were, and so I had your back. 95%, maybe even 99% of the days you are. But today you sure are messing up. I don't have your back today. Today I'm going to undermine you." That's the enemy's job.

    It's called: loyalty. It really is a value and a virtue. Even eight-year-old Cub Scouts know about it. Time we learned it.
    Well, its time Amash learned it too. I feel like he didn't have my back here. I'm all for giving our guys some slack because we're all they got but I've got to say this was a big let down. More than any of my slight disagreements with Rand.
    Freedom index

    ~Resident Badgiraffe





  13. #102

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    Amash is only one man. He is not multiple men: one on one issue and another on another. You cannot bifurcate him into "parts I like" and "parts I don't like."

    In a war, you do not say to your trenchmate: "Hey man, I don't feel like you're on my side today. Sure, in general you are. Yesterday you were, and so I had your back. 95%, maybe even 99% of the days you are. But today you sure are messing up. I don't have your back today. Today I'm going to undermine you." That's the enemy's job.

    It's called: loyalty. It really is a value and a virtue. Even eight-year-old Cub Scouts know about it. Time we learned it.
    Actually yes you can bifurcate politicians, its done all the time. Some are good on some issues and bad on others.


    And loyalty is only due when someone is on our side consistently. Justin completely botched that (as did Rand in recent history too).
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  14. #103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    And loyalty is only due when someone is on our side consistently. Justin completely botched that (as did Rand in recent history too).
    Loyalty is only due when someone is on our side consistently. That MacArthur, he really messed up when it came to the Philippines. He just got it totally wrong. I'm not going to support him when he does stupid stuff like that. I will stand up and loudly criticize him when he deserves it. That makes me brave, right? He botched it. Let us all down. #NotMyGeneral. For that matter, my squad leader is kind of a jerk and doesn't understand anything about building unit cohesion. I'm gonna bad-mouth him, too.

    It is hard. I know. It is seriously hard for those of an individualist, contrarian temperament to understand, to comprehend, the concept of loyalty. Much less to internalize and practice it. But it's important that we do. Lack of loyalty is a severe, severe weakness; will put us at a tremendous disadvantage on the battlefield.

    You're going to throw Amash under the bus? And Rand, too? They're both just "botching" things? Your list of allies grows thin.

    You're on my side, Matt. You are in my in-group. As of now. I will back you up. You won't hear me criticizing you. Let's just let it rest. OK? Let's give at least the top ten liberty people in Congress a break. If we don't like something they're doing, let's just keep quiet about it. If we do like something they're doing, we can get out the bullhorn and give them ovations of praise. This "loyal opposition" thing doesn't work. It's counter-productive.
    The rebel of the 21st Century will be old-fashioned.

    No enemies to the right

  15. #104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    Loyalty is only due when someone is on our side consistently. That MacArthur, he really messed up when it came to the Philippines. He just got it totally wrong. I'm not going to support him when he does stupid stuff like that. I will stand up and loudly criticize him when he deserves it. That makes me brave, right? He botched it. Let us all down. #NotMyGeneral. For that matter, my squad leader is kind of a jerk and doesn't understand anything about building unit cohesion. I'm gonna bad-mouth him, too.

    It is hard. I know. It is seriously hard for those of an individualist, contrarian temperament to understand, to comprehend, the concept of loyalty. Much less to internalize and practice it. But it's important that we do. Lack of loyalty is a severe, severe weakness; will put us at a tremendous disadvantage on the battlefield.

    You're going to throw Amash under the bus? And Rand, too? They're both just "botching" things? Your list of allies grows thin.

    You're on my side, Matt. You are in my in-group. As of now. I will back you up. You won't hear me criticizing you. Let's just let it rest. OK? Let's give at least the top ten liberty people in Congress a break. If we don't like something they're doing, let's just keep quiet about it. If we do like something they're doing, we can get out the bullhorn and give them ovations of praise. This "loyal opposition" thing doesn't work. It's counter-productive.
    A-freaking-men

    I completely disagree with Amash on this vote, but I am under no illusions that he is IN FACT probably the biggest ally we have in Congress. I'm sure as hell not going to toss him to the curb unless there is a continuing pattern of bad votes and positions.
    There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.
    -Major General Smedley Butler, USMC,
    Two-Time Congressional Medal of Honor Winner
    Author of, War is a Racket!

    It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours.
    - Diogenes of Sinope

  16. #105

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    Loyalty is only due when someone is on our side consistently.
    I agree, and Justin has not been (and to be fair neither has Rand)

    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    It is hard. I know. It is seriously hard for those of an individualist, contrarian temperament to understand, to comprehend, the concept of loyalty. Much less to internalize and practice it. But it's important that we do. Lack of loyalty is a severe, severe weakness; will put us at a tremendous disadvantage on the battlefield.
    You just said yourself that loyalty is only due when someone is consistently on our side. Justin is not on our side here. Rand has left the reservation a time or two as well.



    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    You're on my side, Matt. You are in my in-group. As of now. I will back you up. You won't hear me criticizing you. Let's just let it rest. OK? Let's give at least the top ten liberty people in Congress a break. If we don't like something they're doing, let's just keep quiet about it. If we do like something they're doing, we can get out the bullhorn and give them ovations of praise. This "loyal opposition" thing doesn't work. It's counter-productive.
    If we don't hold our own accountable, then no one else will. We have to police from the inside.
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  17. #106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    If we don't hold our own accountable, then no one else will. We have to police from the inside.
    No. We. Do. Not. Not my job. Not your job. Won't work anyway. Just weakens those you're "policing."

    Tell me: which political party is more powerful in the US: the Republicans, or the Democrats?

    Oh, really?

    And it's not even close, is it?

    And how do the Democrats operate, as opposed to the Republicans? Are they a lot more cohesive? A lot more partisan? Are they much, much easier to wrangle and get to vote in a bloc? A lot less likely to publicly in-fight and criticize and undermine each other?

    Maybe we could learn something from the most successful political operation in the most successful country in the world. Eh? You think?

    Loyalty is only due when someone is on our side consistently.
    I was mocking this idea with the contempt it deserves, not agreeing with it. Take the idea to its logical conclusion and where does it lead us? To a situation where there is no "our side." Everyone of our "sides" is a little different, after all. Everyone's agenda is unique. No one is going to be on it "consistently" except for one man: you. So with your Purist Policing Principle, there is and can be no "our side." There is only "my side." Just Matt, against the world. An army of one. How much power do you think you will accumulate like that?
    The rebel of the 21st Century will be old-fashioned.

    No enemies to the right

  18. #107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    No. We. Do. Not. Not my job. Not your job. Won't work anyway. Just weakens those you're "policing."

    Uh no, they weaken themselves when they sell out and compromise. Part of Rand's 2016 problem was that he ran a lousy campaign. But a big part of it was also that he had shifted his rhetoric in a way that ignored his base and didn't win any support from other voting blocs. He weakened himself by selling out (at least on messaging in this case).

    Justin will find it harder to fundraise after this.


    And yes it is absolutely our job to hold our elected officials accountable.


    It is obvious to me that you have never worked or done anything significant in the political process.



    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    I was mocking this idea with the contempt it deserves, not agreeing with it. Take the idea to its logical conclusion and where does it lead us? To a situation where there is no "our side." Everyone of our "sides" is a little different, after all. Everyone's agenda is unique. No one is going to be on it "consistently" except for one man: you. So with your Purist Policing Principle, there is and can be no "our side." There is only "my side." Just Matt, against the world. An army of one. How much power do you think you will accumulate like that?

    https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  19. #108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    It is obvious to me that you have never worked or done anything significant in the political process.
    OK. Thanks. Noted.

    You're still in my in-group anyway. I've got your back.

    See how that works?
    The rebel of the 21st Century will be old-fashioned.

    No enemies to the right

  20. #109

    Default

    Keep up with all the great work you are doing right now, Matt. I do understand your point about holding feet to fire, and it is a great one. Great, wonderful point. We will just have to disagree, but that's OK.
    The rebel of the 21st Century will be old-fashioned.

    No enemies to the right

  21. #110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    I was mocking this idea with the contempt it deserves, not agreeing with it. Take the idea to its logical conclusion and where does it lead us? To a situation where there is no "our side." Everyone of our "sides" is a little different, after all. Everyone's agenda is unique. No one is going to be on it "consistently" except for one man: you. So with your Purist Policing Principle, there is and can be no "our side." There is only "my side." Just Matt, against the world. An army of one. How much power do you think you will accumulate like that?
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc


    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  22. #111

    Default

    You aren't going to find or get someone in DC more liberty leaning than Amash. The big worry here is he gets caught up in the politics of the Freedom Caucus, the "greater good," lesser of two evils, etc.

    He definitely went against the precedent set by Ron of only forming coalitions and not compromising, but so did Rand a while ago. Everyone should certainly hold his feet to the fire and voice their disapproval, but I wouldn't dump him.

    Friends who loudly let you know when you are wrong form a strong base. Friends who dump you at the first sign of you making a mistake are ones I wouldn't want to have.

    Too many times, libertarians fall into the latter category.

    If you want someone of the caliber of Ron Paul again, start getting your kids into Liberty Classroom, Mises Institute reading and concurrently teach them pubic speaking and ways to influence people. Other than that, you have to work with what we have got. If you want to get Justin out of these positions where he feels like he can accomplish something without working with the Freedom Caucus, send him some help so they can beef up the Liberty Caucus.

    If all of this craziness in DC is too much for you, then focus on local politics and issues being brought forward by the 10th Amendment Center.
    Find liberty candidates to support:
    http://www.candidates4liberty.com

  23. #112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jurgs01 View Post
    You aren't going to find or get someone in DC more liberty leaning than Amash.
    Massie > Amash

    Quote Originally Posted by jurgs01 View Post
    The big worry here is he gets caught up in the politics of the Freedom Caucus, the "greater good," lesser of two evils, etc.
    Massie has wisely declined membership in the so-called House Freedom Caucus, perhaps (in part or on whole) for this very reason.

  24. #113

    Default

    This is now two strikes against Amash in short succession. He is one of the best and liberty orientated politicians we have in Washington, which is why this is sad. Playing the neocon/establishment game and voting for garbage like this is eroding the integrity that he spent the last 7 years building with us. I suppose not everyone can be Mr. Consistent like RP.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234





Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-22-2017, 04:30 PM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-14-2017, 03:26 PM
  3. Obamcare Horror Stories are lies?
    By Paulbot99 in forum Obamacare
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-21-2014, 11:24 AM
  4. Obamcare Outreach Plumbing the Depths
    By AuH20 in forum Obamacare
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 12-21-2013, 09:08 AM
  5. Obama Admin Wants the NBA To Promote Obamcare
    By AuH20 in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06-21-2013, 11:49 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •