Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

The Real Reason to Fear Obamacare

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Real Reason to Fear Obamacare

    As recently demonstrated, the Secretary of Health and Human Services at direction from the POTUS has the power to mandate rules for the private insurance industry. This is what the contraceptives controversy was all about. The administration spun the issue into a Republican ‘war on women’, distracting from the real issue at hand. But here is why conservatives were upset: Kathleen Sebelius at direction of the President demonstrated the enormous power of the federal government acquired via ‘Obamacare’ by mandating all US insurance providers cover birth control free of charge.

    For those of you who do not understand why republicans had a problem with the birth control rule – you must understand the disagreement was not specific to birth control but rather a growing concern over the apparent limitless power handed to the federal government through the Health Care Reform Act. Every time I see an article like this (USA Today) chills run down my spine.

    WASHINGTON – A new forecast on obesity in America has health experts fearing a dramatic jump in health care costs if nothing is done to bring it under control.
    The projection, released Monday, warns that 42% of Americans may end up obese by 2030 (up from 36% in 2010), and 11% could be severely obese, roughly 100 or more pounds over a healthy weight (vs. 6% in 2010).

    "If nothing is done, it's going to hinder efforts for health care cost containment," says Justin Trogdon, a research economist with RTI International, a non-profit organization in North Carolina's Research Triangle Park

    Extra weight takes a significant toll on health. It increases the risks of type 2 diabetes, heart disease, stroke, many types of cancer, sleep apnea and other debilitating and chronic illnesses.

    "The obesity problem is likely to get much worse without a major public health intervention," says the study's lead researcher, Eric Finkelstein, a health economist with the Duke University Global Health Institute.

    In an earlier study, Finkelstein and experts from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that medical-related costs of obesity may be as high as $147 billion a year, or roughly 9% of medical expenditures.

    If the obesity rate stays at 2010 levels instead of rising to 42% as predicted, then the country could save more than $549.5 billion in weight-related medical expenditures from now till 2030, says study co-author Trogdon.

    Obesity could affect 42% of Americans by 2030
    In the name of health care savings, how much power does the government have over our lives? Notice the quotes above are made by economists, not doctors. When the new healthcare system is running out of money – which it most certainly will – who will they come after for additional revenue? When these economists talk about ‘public health intervention’ what kind of things do they have in mind? Do the answers to these questions no frighten anyone else?

  • #2
    Re: The Real Reason to Fear Obamacare

    So you post a quote like this

    "If nothing is done, it's going to hinder efforts for health care cost containment," says Justin Trogdon, a research economist with RTI International, a non-profit organization in North Carolina's Research Triangle Park

    Extra weight takes a significant toll on health. It increases the risks of type 2 diabetes, heart disease, stroke, many types of cancer, sleep apnea and other debilitating and chronic illnesses.

    "The obesity problem is likely to get much worse without a major public health intervention," says the study's lead researcher, Eric Finkelstein, a health economist with the Duke University Global Health Institute.
    And your big fear is that government might do something about it..............

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #3
      Re: The Real Reason to Fear Obamacare

      Originally posted by goober View Post
      So you post a quote like this



      And your big fear is that government might do something about it..............
      That's right, you got it, Goober. Lets see the government will tell you to lose weight and that you can only weigh a certain amount compared to your height. And if you don't comply, they will fine you, take away you're kids, take away your food, raise your taxes, make you join a gym, make you run 10 miles a day, work on weekends for the government, etc etc shall I go on.

      But of course you love the power of government over the people

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #4
        Re: The Real Reason to Fear Obamacare

        Originally posted by goober View Post
        So you post a quote like this



        And your big fear is that government might do something about it..............
        MIGHT?

        Have.

        I am diabetic, insulin dependent. I got notice that next year when another phase of Obamacare goes live my insulin pump will no longer be covered by Insurance due to regulations in Obamacare.

        I have brittle diabetes and my sugar levels spike up and down making it very hard to maintain a even keel. The insulin pump has tuned a spiking graph of sugar numbers into a more mellow sign wave which makes it easier to control my diabetes and avoid the health problems from spiking sugar. With the new regulation in Obamacare, I can no longer have the pump. If I buy the pump for myself out of my pocket they will not cover my insulin for it.

        So yes I fear what the government will do with the control over how people get health care.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #5
          Re: The Real Reason to Fear Obamacare

          Originally posted by goober View Post
          So you post a quote like this

          And your big fear is that government might do something about it..............
          Forplay skillfully responded already . . . but I am still amazed at the niavety it takes to ask this question. World history answers this question. US history solidifies that answer in case any doubt lingers. Even if one remains confident that our government will never turn on the people, you can be certain the solution to every problem will create ten more complications while failing to solve the original and costing exponentially more than predicted. All of this, by the way, in addition to stomping all over individual freedoms.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #6
            Re: The Real Reason to Fear Obamacare

            Are not the rules of health insurance already legislated by meetings between state consultants and health insurance consultants?

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #7
              Re: The Real Reason to Fear Obamacare

              Originally posted by Forplay View Post
              That's right, you got it, Goober. Lets see the government will tell you to lose weight and that you can only weigh a certain amount compared to your height. And if you don't comply, they will fine you, take away you're kids, take away your food, raise your taxes, make you join a gym, make you run 10 miles a day, work on weekends for the government, etc etc shall I go on.

              But of course you love the power of government over the people
              Being as I already workout 3 times a week, maybe having Obamacare pick up a piece of my gym membership would be a benefit.
              As for obesity, despite your proclivity for fascist state daydreams, there are a lot of things that can be done to reduce obesity that don't involve breaking down your front door and carting you off to the gym.


              It is funny, if you had to say who would support obesity as a political choice, I'd guess you'd get the same folks who think global warming is a hoax, and believe that tax cuts raise revenues....and wonder of wonders here they are, willing to fight for your right to an unhealthy lifestyle, and for the right to feed children unhealthy foods.......

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #8
                Re: The Real Reason to Fear Obamacare

                Originally posted by goober View Post
                Being as I already workout 3 times a week, maybe having Obamacare pick up a piece of my gym membership would be a benefit.
                As for obesity, despite your proclivity for fascist state daydreams, there are a lot of things that can be done to reduce obesity that don't involve breaking down your front door and carting you off to the gym.

                It is funny, if you had to say who would support obesity as a political choice, I'd guess you'd get the same folks who think global warming is a hoax, and believe that tax cuts raise revenues....and wonder of wonders here they are, willing to fight for your right to an unhealthy lifestyle, and for the right to feed children unhealthy foods.......
                The issue has nothing to do with Obamacare in it at all reading the article. However, since Obamacare does deal with insurance, you can bet a fat ass they'll factor that into premiums because they already do regardless of Obamacare.

                There's plenty things the government can do. For example, how about cleaning up the school cafeterias of all the shit food they serve and provide a better menu that turn our kids into school buses themselves, never mind better students who aren't hyper and then sugar crashed and/or larded out asleep at the desk after bulking up on shit?

                SuperSize Me 5/8 - YouTube

                (at 5:30)

                and whilst they're at it, why not address all the vending machine shit they're being fed with junk food, high sugar, salt and caffeine drinks, etc?



                Last edited by O'Sullivan Bere; 05-09-2012, 04:01 PM.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #9
                  Re: The Real Reason to Fear Obamacare

                  Originally posted by O'Sullivan Bere View Post
                  The issue has nothing to do with Obamacare in it at all reading the article. However, since Obamacare does deal with insurance, you can bet a fat ass they'll factor that into premiums because they already do regardless of Obamacare.

                  There's plenty things the government can do. For example, how about cleaning up the school cafeterias of all the shit food they serve and provide a better menu that turn our kids into school buses themselves, never mind better students who aren't hyper and then sugar crashed and/or larded out asleep at the desk after bulking up on shit?

                  SuperSize Me 5/8 - YouTube

                  (at 5:30)

                  adn whilst they're at it, why not address all the shit they're being fed with junk food, high sugar, salt and caffeine drinks, etc?



                  Ketchup ISN'T a vegetable?

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #10
                    Re: The Real Reason to Fear Obamacare

                    Originally posted by goober View Post
                    . . . here they are, willing to fight for your right to an unhealthy lifestyle, and for the right to feed children unhealthy foods.......
                    With who in charge of deciding what a 'healthy' lifestyle is? Yeah, bring the children into this - that is always the statists way of regulating behavior. I think it is unhealhty for teenagers to ride bikes made for an eight-year-old doing tripple flips off a 6 foot ramp with hopes of landing perfectly, but if not drop crotch first on a steel railing before twisting head first into the concrete. But the same parents who encourage their kids to go play at the skate park want child protective services to investigate me for hitting the McDonald's drive-thru after baseball practice. Again, who decides what a healthy lifesyle is?

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #11
                      Re: The Real Reason to Fear Obamacare

                      Originally posted by SupPackFan View Post
                      As recently demonstrated, the Secretary of Health and Human Services at direction from the POTUS has the power to mandate rules for the private insurance industry. This is what the contraceptives controversy was all about. The administration spun the issue into a Republican ‘war on women’, distracting from the real issue at hand. But here is why conservatives were upset: Kathleen Sebelius at direction of the President demonstrated the enormous power of the federal government acquired via ‘Obamacare’ by mandating all US insurance providers cover birth control free of charge.

                      For those of you who do not understand why republicans had a problem with the birth control rule – you must understand the disagreement was not specific to birth control but rather a growing concern over the apparent limitless power handed to the federal government through the Health Care Reform Act. Every time I see an article like this (USA Today) chills run down my spine.



                      In the name of health care savings, how much power does the government have over our lives? Notice the quotes above are made by economists, not doctors. When the new healthcare system is running out of money – which it most certainly will – who will they come after for additional revenue? When these economists talk about ‘public health intervention’ what kind of things do they have in mind? Do the answers to these questions no frighten anyone else?
                      But the article doesn't really have anything to do with Obamacare directly, although it will as explained above and already will anyway.

                      IMO this is actually a traditionally conservative issue as much as a liberal one. It's one reason IMO the neither the GOP nor the so-called 'conservative base' today is really conservative anymore. Rather, both are filled with too many 'liberals' that traditional conservatives used to condemn who don't like personal responsibility, want to do what they want when they want how they want regardless of consequence to others --i.e., selfish fucks who transfer the costly consequences their irresponsible decisions onto others--, people who are really another version of people just looking for 'free shit' who want things but don't want to pay for them in taxes, etc.

                      It's not an accident 'jokes' like this abound:



                      It's bad business for the country to be that overweight except for the food industries doing it. And they are fair game to an extent to not go so far as to act like Big Tobacco did too such as quietly putting special shit in food to hook you, using unnecessarily unhealthy stuff, making sure they aren't put in schools like cigarette machines used to be, etc.
                      Last edited by O'Sullivan Bere; 05-09-2012, 03:47 PM.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #12
                        Re: The Real Reason to Fear Obamacare

                        Originally posted by SupPackFan View Post
                        With who in charge of deciding what a 'healthy' lifestyle is? Yeah, bring the children into this - that is always the statists way of regulating behavior. I think it is unhealhty for teenagers to ride bikes made for an eight-year-old doing tripple flips off a 6 foot ramp with hopes of landing perfectly, but if not drop crotch first on a steel railing before twisting head first into the concrete. But the same parents who encourage their kids to go play at the skate park want child protective services to investigate me for hitting the McDonald's drive-thru after baseball practice. Again, who decides what a healthy lifesyle is?
                        A conservative by traditional nature is a 'statist'. It believes in fair regulation of human behaviour where it causes excessive harm to others due to irresponsibility. That's why it was traditionally the 'law and order' view to things, an essential aspect of a successful society. The government also is intended to play a role in that obviously. It's not a question of that the government is entrusted to do that...it already is entrusted to do that. It's merely a question of how and to what extents. Part of the traditional answer is that a responsible society is partly the work of government and partly the work of society. The government aspect provides where society chooses those who will use the enforcement policies aspects on matters where society alone can't stop the evil due to social pressure and persuasion and where otherwise matters are left to the public to perform the social acceptability parameters.
                        Last edited by O'Sullivan Bere; 05-09-2012, 04:06 PM.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #13
                          Re: The Real Reason to Fear Obamacare

                          Originally posted by USCitizen View Post
                          Ketchup ISN'T a vegetable?
                          Just shows us once again how whored out so many of our politicians are who have no problem personally harming society for the right price or with the long term belt busting budget, etc. Next it will be a high source of both vegetables and grain given the high fructose corn syrup. See, what a wholesome product . . .

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #14
                            Re: The Real Reason to Fear Obamacare

                            Originally posted by SupPackFan View Post
                            As recently demonstrated, the Secretary of Health and Human Services at direction from the POTUS has the power to mandate rules for the private insurance industry.
                            Well, and at direction from Congress. HRSA was directed by Congress to identify preventive care and screenings for women, above and beyond those already promoted by the US Preventive Services Task Force, that should be covered by insurance plans without cost-sharing. That isn't part of any "limitless power" granted to HHS, it arises from a specific provision passed by Congress to encourage a modicum of value-based insurance design:
                            SEC. 2713. COVERAGE OF PREVENTIVE HEALTH SERVICES.

                            `(a) In General- A group health plan and a health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage shall, at a minimum provide coverage for and shall not impose any cost sharing requirements for--
                            `(1) evidence-based items or services that have in effect a rating of `A' or `B' in the current recommendations of the United States Preventive Services Task Force;
                            `(2) immunizations that have in effect a recommendation from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention with respect to the individual involved; and
                            `(3) with respect to infants, children, and adolescents, evidence-informed preventive care and screenings provided for in the comprehensive guidelines supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration.
                            `(4) with respect to women, such additional preventive care and screenings not described in paragraph (1) as provided for in comprehensive guidelines supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration for purposes of this paragraph.
                            `(5) for the purposes of this Act, and for the purposes of any other provision of law, the current recommendations of the United States Preventive Service Task Force regarding breast cancer screening, mammography, and prevention shall be considered the most current other than those issued in or around November 2009.

                            Originally posted by Wlessard View Post
                            I am diabetic, insulin dependent. I got notice that next year when another phase of Obamacare goes live my insulin pump will no longer be covered by Insurance due to regulations in Obamacare.
                            Out of curiosity, which regulations did they cite?

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #15
                              Re: The Real Reason to Fear Obamacare

                              Originally posted by Greenbeard View Post
                              Well, and at direction from Congress. HRSA was directed by Congress to identify preventive care and screenings for women, above and beyond those already promoted by the US Preventive Services Task Force, that should be covered by insurance plans without cost-sharing. That isn't part of any "limitless power" granted to HHS, it arises from a specific provision passed by Congress to encourage a modicum of value-based insurance design:
                              SEC. 2713. COVERAGE OF PREVENTIVE HEALTH SERVICES.

                              `(a) In General- A group health plan and a health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage shall, at a minimum provide coverage for and shall not impose any cost sharing requirements for--
                              `(1) evidence-based items or services that have in effect a rating of `A' or `B' in the current recommendations of the United States Preventive Services Task Force;
                              `(2) immunizations that have in effect a recommendation from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention with respect to the individual involved; and
                              `(3) with respect to infants, children, and adolescents, evidence-informed preventive care and screenings provided for in the comprehensive guidelines supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration. `(4) with respect to women, such additional preventive care and screenings not described in paragraph (1) as provided for in comprehensive guidelines supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration for purposes of this paragraph.
                              `(5) for the purposes of this Act, and for the purposes of any other provision of law, the current recommendations of the United States Preventive Service Task Force regarding breast cancer screening, mammography, and prevention shall be considered the most current other than those issued in or around November 2009.
                              Extending my analogy a couple posts ago, siting (3) above, as Sec of HHS would I be able to close down skate parks? At direction from Congress, of course.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?

                              Working...
                              X