Californians like Obamacare

August 20, 2012

A majority of Californians support the Affordable Care Act but most don’t believe the law will affect them very much. (Sacramento Bee)

The most recent Field Poll shows 54 percent of registered voters favor the federal effort to overhaul health care, and 37 percent oppose it.

Conducted for the California Wellness Foundation, the poll found that many Californians remain uninsured in a heavily Democratic state, and that support for the Obama administration’s reform measure increased substantially among voters following the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling upholding the law.

The poll’s authors said their work has a plus-or-minus margin of error of 2.9 percent.

The Gimlet Eye

It’s easy to take other people’s money, especially when the government does it for you.

Ted Slanders


Yeah, you’re right. Like taking money to build the infrastruture of this country in the way of roads, VA Hospitals, fire departments, police departments, ambulances, State Parks, Social Security, Medicare, Army, Air Force, ah hell, you get the picture.


Listen..there is a woman that posts here that is uncontestably a smart person: Intelligent, an undeniable competent business person.

She is a second-class citizen in the eyes of these Republican cavemen. She is a nobody, or maybe chattel in their eyes and thinking. Yet, time after time, she supports her aggressors.

Why ?

Stockholm syndrome ? Co-Dependence ? Tradition ?

I’m not being ad hominem here. I think the chrysalis needs to metamorphose.

American women have to recognize their…and our enemies.

Republicans are the enemy. Republicans are the problem !


Seriously? You wasted all of your energy to print that drivel?


Two words for all of you dirtwad Republicans:


Hey, Guilt by association fits when it does. You like to be classified with evil dummies ? Your choice, but it won’t prevent citizens for calling people out.

If people choose to congregate, fund, and otherwise support these Republican extremist anti-Americans…then the rest of us can band together and FIGHT them !

We are not cowards.


uh oh, worse than that, if they lose the election they are calling for using guns for the win ,


If what you say is true, that would make you the co-pilot of the car that went into the water with Mary Jo back in 1969.

Please, get real.


I’ve posted this before. Do a Google search of “Mick Huck’, deputy sherrif on Chappaquidick. Teddy Kennedy was nowhere near that ‘accident’. It was character assassination. If America knew that the fascists were killing the liberal leaders there would be a revolution, and the people would start attending to the fascists as we should be doing.


I googled “Mick Huck” Chappaquiddick” and exactly one reference posted — your comment above.


LOL! I also “googled” Mick Huck and nothing. Too funny.


You are correct. I got the name mixed up. The correct one is deputy sherrif Christopher “Huck” Look….the ONE eyewitness that testified in court as to what he saw that night.


Ted Kennedy testified that he had left the scene and had friends drive him home. It was a matter of hours before he reported the accident the next morning. Read his own account of the story. Sheriff Huck Look testified that he had seen a similar car in the area near the time of the accident.

John Farrar, the diver who recovered Kopechne’s body and captain of the Edgartown Fire Rescue unit, asserted that Kopechne did not die from the vehicle overturn or from drowning, but rather from suffocation, based upon the posture in which he found the body and its position relative to the area of an ultimate air pocket in the overturned vehicle. Farrar also asserted that Kopechne would likely have survived had a more timely attempt at rescue been conducted.[29] Farrar located Kopechne’s body in the well of the backseat of the overturned submerged car. Rigor mortis was apparent and her hands were clasping the backseat and her face was turned upward.[30] Farrar testified at the Inquest:

It looked as if she were holding herself up to get a last breath of air. It was a consciously assumed position. … She didn’t drown. She died of suffocation in her own air void. It took her at least three or four hours to die. I could have had her out of that car twenty-five minutes after I got the call. But he [Ted Kennedy] didn’t call.

— diver John Farrar, Inquest into the Death of Mary Jo Kopechne, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Edgartown District Court. New York: EVR Productions, 1970.



The trouble with polls is that they invariably reflect the opinion of the pollster. The same question answered by 20 random people on Prado Road at midday would give you quite different results when asked of the first 20 people you see driving Mercedes Benz.


To date, the administration has granted waivers to 1,433 health plans covering 3.2 million people.

If the law is so good, why are more and more employers begging for a waiver to get relief from its burdensome mandates? Americans need waivers from the president’s law because it causes health premiums to go up. You can pass a mandate but you can’t force people to stay in business. If it was a good idea, then people would be doing it. I know that the unemployment situation will become worse from Obama Care. This will show everyone a lesson in economics which is about what happens and not about what everyone thinks should happen.


Another strawman argument.

When there is no adequate defense of a losing proposition, change the subject.



How is your current insurance and how much has it gone up in the last four years? Insurance is the most money I pay out every month…

My own is Blue Cross PPO and it has gone up considerably, 30% just since January, then another 12%. Blue Cross openly admited these were in anticipation of obamacare becoming mandatory in 2014.

I guess on the bright side I should admit I got a rebate for $8.70…


Here you go. From Google news today. Her you go. From Google news today. Ask McCarthy and other GOPers to vote for this if you are concerned about rising premiums. Except..they won’t vote for anything that would help America if it also helps Obama. Kind of traitorous, the things they have pulled during Obama’s entire administration. Also, those Anthem/Blue Cross folks contribute mightily and need the Ryan/1% tax cut. Fun to cut and paste, isn’t it? Get away from Fox and Forbes op/ed folks. Expand your view.


The results of this poll are unsurprising. Once people find out the particulars of Obamacare, or any new system…and get past the shrieking rhetoric of the doomsayer profiteers, they like it. Same thing happened with Medicare when it was first debated. The screaming banshees on the right were bloviating that it ( Medicare ) would destroy…literally destroy the health care in the United States. of course, it did no such thing..and now even Republicans of Medicare eligibility are all for it. Would not give it up if they could.

Similar happened with Canada’s comprehensive version of their Medicare as proposed by Tommy Douglas. The reactionaries were shouting catastrophe, so the program was implemented incrementally; first in only one province: Saskatchewan. Obviously, once Canadien Medicare was in place there, the people in the other provinces wanted it, too.

Ted Slanders

Brother Slowerfaster,

The adage below is so true with the Right Wing. :(

“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” -Arthur Schopenhauer


“California’s Likely Voters”

“Forty-four percent are registered as Democrats, 30.9% as Republicans, 20.4% as decline-to-state or independents, and 4.7% as other parties. ”

Ted Slanders


“Republican registration has decreased from 34.2% in 2007 to 30.9% today.” :

“Among likely voters in our surveys, 40% say they are conservative, compared to 32% with liberal leanings and 29% who say they are middle-of–the-road.”

The GOP (God’s Own Party) has the lead in percentages, praise! All Republicans must fight against Obamacare, even though it directly and unequivocally goes against Jesus’ teachings in the New Testament! Please don’t call Republican Christians hypocrites because of this blatant fact, okay? They have enough on their proverbial plate to deal with at this time, and to somehow remain intelligent looking in the aftermath. Thank you.

Ana di Plosis

Ted: Didn’t Jesus heal people regardless of their employment status? Seriously, sir, are you arguing that the Jesus presented in the New Testament would side with the GOP on the ACA? Please provide a scriptural basis for your opinion, if you can.

Ted Slanders

Ana di Plosis,

If you want me to be serious, then let me be frank, and you can still be Ana, okay?

Why of course Jesus healed regardless of anything! But, until Jesus arrives on planet earth anytime soon to heal His creation, then we’re going to have to rely upon HEALTHCARE.

Relative to healthcare, there is another way to heal thyself. But, it rarely works because the Christian that initiates the biblical axiom of the following passage obviously doesn’t “believe strongly enough”. To wit; Jesus stated; “And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, BELIEVING, ye shall receive.” (Matthew 21:22) Comprende?

No, my dear Sister of Eve, I am not proposing that Jesus would side with the GOP; all I am saying is that the GOP are hypocrites when they don’t side with Jesus, aka, Affordable Health Care Act! Get it?

The passages below equal Obama’s Affordable Healthcare Act, that the Republicans are against! Do you get the nexus of the proposition?

Jesus said; “If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him? Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth.” (1 John 3:17-18)

Jesus said: “Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves. Protect the rights of all who are helpless.” ( Proverbs 31:8)

“For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, ‘You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land.’ (Deuteronomy 15:11)

Oh, and the next time you question Brother Ted, use a capital “S” in the word “Sir”. Thank you.

Ana di Plosis

Sir Slanders: Thank you for the clarifications. It appears that we are on the same side of this issue.

Ted Slanders


If our little princess from Alaska, Sarah Palin, is against the Affordable Healthcare Act, then all Republicans should be too! Afterall, she has her healhcare, and doesn’t have ANY plan to implement for the ones that can’t afford healthcare. So what, who cares?

“Obama promised the American people this wasn’t a tax and that he’d never raise taxes on anyone making less than $250,000,” wrote Palin. “We now see that this is the largest tax increase in history.”

Our little “bird brain” Sarah, I say that in a loving manner, states that both the premium and the penalty of the AHA are considered a “tax”, then the mandate becomes the largest tax increase in U.S. history. Conversly, then Romneycare is the largest tax increase in Massichusetts history as well! Get it? Do your homework. Romney and Sarah are very quiet upon this factoid. Shhhhhhh.

If one is going to swallow the Kool Aide in conveniantly calling this money for the Affordable Healhcare Act a “tax”, then when you make your payments to your corporate healthcare provider, such as Blue Cross, etc., remember, you’re not paying a “premium or a fee, or a late fee” as they state in their bills to you, but, you’re paying a tax! REVOLT AGAINST YOUR HEALTHCARE PROVIDER FOR TAXING YOU WITHOUT GOVERNMENT APPROVAL! That’s the governments job!

President Obama has argued that people who behave responsibly should not be forced to pay the healthcare bills of those who do not. Wait!!! This Obama axiom has Republicanism written all over it, doesn’t it? Sure it does.


…but did it not get approval of the Supreme Court AS A TAX?

Sure, the government argued in the opening days that AHA is not a tax, but in the end (in order to get passed the SCOTUS) they decried it be a tax?

So confusing…

Ted Slanders


It “logically” got the approval of the Supreme Court, but it’s like, okay, if we’re going to pass this thing, we’re going to give it a black eye on the way out of town! When it’s called a “tax”, then of course, Obama is raising your taxes! If it’s not a tax, then Obama is only asking you to pay a “fee” to join in and be responsible.

If it’s a tax for the Affordable Health Care Act, then it is most certainly a tax for Romneycare as well!

If you have a healthcare provider, don’t forget to pay your “taxes” when your premium is due!


“FREE”… well, who doesn’t love that word? However, what is needed in California now is JOBS… jobs pay for what is free.

Ted Slanders


One has to be “healthy” to be able to have a job, wouldn’t you say? Sure you do.

Damn, the Republicans continue to hold back any job production nationally. In fact, they haven’t brought forth even one bill in their controlled Congress, even when their election in 2010 was based upon jobs, jobs, jobs, remember? Yeah, you do.

Wait, they have even voted down job bills brought forth by those damn Democrats as well with cloture, or hanging enough pork on them to sink a ship, and by hanging more tax breaks to the wealthy on those Democrat job bills! But, president Obama had to veto them. Back to square one.

Yeah, the Republican party of moral virtues continues to stand against this president on any form of jobs to fix this economy and the nation.

Don’t worry, I don’t expect you to engage in this topic, because you know that if you did with Brother Ted, it would not be a pretty sight for you in the aftermath. :(


Many people who are “unhealthy” hold jobs.

Ted Slanders




Because many “unhealthy” people are not lazy bums looking for a government hand-out. They pay their own way as best they can. That’s why.

Ted Slanders


Could it also be that they may have healthcare with their job, and since they’re “unhealthy”; if leaving, they don’t want to lose it, even though it’s costing them dearly?

Of course, your admirable opinion is just but one reason. Do you have any other opinions on why some “unhealthy” individuals stay with their position of employment?


Ted, people with diabetes, asthma, heart disease, etc. work because they want to better themselves, or feed their families, or make the mortgage payments on their homes. Just because you are unhealthy, doesn’t mean you have to give up and go on unemployment. Many illnesses can be controlled, and people often work while undergoing treatment for cancer and other diseases.

Most people stop working when they are too sick to work, not because they are unhealthy. Have you ever held a job?


Welfare for the rich shames what we give the poor, who often cannot get the education and resources to make a livable wage. There are many lazy bums out there but the real money goes to the sneaky rich.


Please list the “welfare” programs that are available for the rich. I’m not familiar with any.


Lyndon Johnson’s former Great Society press secretary explains .


Well, Ted, unhealthy people need to make money to purchase Bibles to speak to the majority of your posts! : )

Ted Slanders


They can save the money because what I bring forth is the direct, unadulterated, literal, and historical intended word of the Hebrew-Christian God, bar none!


Ted, are you suggesting people have no need for the Bible, just pay more attention to YOUR interpretation of the “intended word of the Hebrew-Christian God”?

Ted Slanders


Dear, what part of LITERAL don’t you understand? In essence, what our Hebrew-Christian God said once within scripture, He did NOT mean for His creation to take in many different and contradicting ways. Get it? Hence, the many “divisions” of Christianity, aka, denominations.

When it comes to resolving a bible contradiction, or a blatantly disturbing verse, like I bring forth ad infinitum, many pseudo-christians are satisfied with any explanation that sweeps the problem under a rug of “could- have-been” scenarios.

Whether any of the explanations that one can come up with actually capture the intended meaning of a disputed passage IN HISTORICAL CONTEXT is irrelative, as long as one can save face with their “pee wee hermeneutic” spin doctoring and it is technically preserved.

The truth in this situation, becomes incidental to what may be the intended doctrine in TRUE HEBREW TRADITION, of which they rarely consult. This alone speaks volumes about the validity of this familiar method of resolving biblical difficulty known as hermeneutics and apologetics. :(

“For the time will come when men will not put up with SOUND DOCTRINE. Instead to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.” (2 Timothy 4:3)

Bottom line, other than some parables, there is no decoder ring needed when reading the Judeo-Christian bible.


Where in the article is the word ‘free’ even written ?

I think someone woke up this morning and started free-basing …continuing last night’s binge.

Where in the article are jobs mentioned ? Never. Total red herring.

Now, run to your hidey-hole !