Vegas Free-for-All - 2014***ObamaCare***2014

2014***ObamaCare***2014

BobOrme

Feb 12, 2014
5:13pm

Quote

Originally posted by: forkushV

Quote
Originally posted by: BobOrme
Quote
Originally posted by: forkushV
Quote
Originally posted by: BobOrme
Quote
Originally posted by: forkushV
Quote
Originally posted by: BobOrme
The real question that no liberal will honestly answer is, why did ObeyMe change his signature legislation again?
Same reason Bush changed the implementation of Medicare Part D after unforeseen foul-ups in that law. Because it needed changing. And don't pretend this is about "blaming" Bush.

Bush did the right thing. Ditto Obama.

Exactly which unforeseen ACA "foul-ups" will the delays fix?
I think it's about getting major stakeholders on board with the change-over. Like the National Retail Federation and the National Restaurant Association, who gave it a thumbs up.

Bush was right when he adjusted his signature health care initiative. Ditto Obama. People who criticize one president but excuse the other are sleazy hypocrites - but their still not as bad as Boilerman's scummy friend Nick.

You still didn't answer the question, unless there is nothing wrong with the legislation, and there are no unforeseen "foul-ups". If there were "foul-ups", the legislation would actually change, not be delayed and implemented exactly as written at a later date.

Are you referring to Bush's Medicare Part D implementation, or Obama's ACA implementation? Please be specific, because your criticism applies to each.

ObeyMe's ACA.

forkushV

Feb 13, 2014
1:49am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: BobOrme

Quote
Originally posted by: forkushV
Quote
Originally posted by: BobOrme
Quote
Originally posted by: forkushV
Bush was right when he adjusted his signature health care initiative. Ditto Obama. People who criticize one president but excuse the other are sleazy hypocrites - but their still not as bad as Boilerman's scummy friend Nick.

You still didn't answer the question, unless there is nothing wrong with the legislation, and there are no unforeseen "foul-ups". If there were "foul-ups", the legislation would actually change, not be delayed and implemented exactly as written at a later date.
Are you referring to Bush's Medicare Part D implementation, or Obama's ACA implementation? Please be specific, because your criticism applies to each.

ObeyMe's ACA.

"ObeyMe?" Wow, that's almost as witty as "Nobama." And who can forget "Barrack HUSSEIN Obama?" Ah memories.

For the record, when I refer to President Bush, I usually refer to him as "Bush," "George W. Bush," "President Bush," and so on. I find that engaging in junior high type name twisting detracts from one's argument. But, to each his own.

As far as me claiming that there is "nothing wrong with the [Obamacare] legislation," where'd you get that from? I've criticized it multiple times here, mostly because it should have been a single payer program, instead of a gift to the insurance industry. And at first, the ACA website was crap.

Major pieces of legislation require, like Medicare Part D and Obamacare require tweeks after the fact, and tweeked they were. Bush did the right thing. Ditto Obama.

hoops2

Feb 13, 2014
10:47pm

Block User

obama has made 27 changes to a law that was passed 4 years ago.

Remember last fall when the Republicans wanted to delay implementation but obama & company said the law was the law and couldn't be changed?

forkushV

Feb 13, 2014
11:48pm

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: hoops2
obama has made 27 changes to a law that was passed 4 years ago.

Remember last fall when the Republicans wanted to delay implementation but obama & company said the law was the law and couldn't be changed?

wouldn't

Major pieces of legislation, like Medicare Part D and Obamacare require tweeks after the fact, and tweeked they were. Bush did the right thing. Ditto Obama.

hoops2

Feb 14, 2014
12:43am

Block User

forky - is ignoring the question

Remember last fall when the Republicans wanted to delay implementation but obama & company said the law was the law and couldn't be changed?

alanleroy

Feb 14, 2014
1:17am

Block User

I'm not so sure multiple year+ postponements should be considered 'tweaks'... On all of the projects I've managed it would be considered poor planning or poor execution.

But that aside, I'm wondering if there are any details on why these postponements were necessary. What wasn't ready? WHY wasn't it ready? Who was responsible for that part of the implementation? Who is being held accountable? How is it being changed? How much does it add to the costs?...You know the kind of questions people who pay the bills should be asking...

Without those kinds of details one might even start to think that it's not just a question of readiness, but that the delays just beyond key elections have some kind of political motivation....either that or there truly are 'tweakers' trying to implement this legislation.

forkushV

Feb 14, 2014
1:19am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroy
I'm not so sure multiple year+ postponements should be considered 'tweaks'... On all of the projects I've managed it would be considered poor planning or poor execution...

Are you referring to Bush's Medicare Part D or Obamacare?

alanleroy

Feb 14, 2014
1:40am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: forkushV

Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroy
I'm not so sure multiple year+ postponements should be considered 'tweaks'... On all of the projects I've managed it would be considered poor planning or poor execution...

Are you referring to Bush's Medicare Part D or Obamacare?

BOTH...if it's actually true that multiple aspects of Part D were postponed by over a year. I can't believe you are holding up George Bush as a model of Presidential Competence. My personal opinion is we've had two of the least competent US Presidents in US History...IN A ROW. The fact that neither of them could implement big government healthcare projects without multiple year long delays is just further evidence of that. If I was that far off on my estimates, I wouldn't have any clients.

forkushV

Feb 14, 2014
2:05am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroy

Quote
Originally posted by: forkushV
Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroy
I'm not so sure multiple year+ postponements should be considered 'tweaks'... On all of the projects I've managed it would be considered poor planning or poor execution...
Are you referring to Bush's Medicare Part D or Obamacare?

BOTH...

Oh I agree. The Obama administration made several big mistakes, although that big Supreme Court case delaying everything may have had something to do with it. I'm not sure.

But the talking point du jour* isn't about competence. It's that "ObeyMe" (can it get any sillier?) is acting unconstitutionally, illegally, and usurping power. Which is just stupid, if multiple presidential precedents mean anything at all.

*Previous Obamacare talking points du jour include Death Panels (Sarah!), It will bankrupt the country! (shot down by the CBO), The website is broken forever! (not so much now), This is an insurance company BAILOUT!! (except that the treasury will make $9 billion on the deal), and It will cost a zillion jobs! (it will reduce job-lock, just as McCain advocated in 2008).

alanleroy

Feb 14, 2014
2:33am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: forkushV

Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroy
Quote
Originally posted by: forkushV
Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroy
I'm not so sure multiple year+ postponements should be considered 'tweaks'... On all of the projects I've managed it would be considered poor planning or poor execution...
Are you referring to Bush's Medicare Part D or Obamacare?

BOTH...

But the talking point du jour* isn't about competence. It's that "ObeyMe" (can it get any sillier?) is acting unconstitutionally, illegally, and usurping power.

Right. Doesn't he owe the legislature a detailed explanation WHY it's important to change some things that were actually codified? That's what we're missing. Send the project mangers to spend a day with Republicans and Democrats on the hill.

Show them what went wrong. Show them how this long delay is in the best interest of the nation. Show them how it's being fixed. Show them who is being held accountable..and even show them what it's costing. Then how about some key milestones which we can all follow along with to make sure it stays on track?

Otherwise, it makes it look like this project is being managed to avoid political fallout by the seat of the President's slacks.

«‹31 ›»

Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:

Diamond Membership

$3 per month

Unlimited access to LVA website

Exclusive subscriber-only content

Limited Member Rewards Online

Join Now

Platinum Membership

$50 per year

Unlimited access to LVA website

Exclusive subscriber-only content

Exclusive Member Rewards Book

Join Now