-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
GOP ObamaCare Replacement Bill Appears to be Dead
- Thread starter InTheLight
- Start date
The Republican Neocons are still in control. Trump is calling for more wars. Look behind what's happening and you'll still see Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz waiting for Trump administration to collapse to take control once again.I will cede to the point about the GOP.
There are so many RINO, NeoCon and Turncoat "Republicans" that's why.
However the rant is also true
HankD
Has Paul Wolfowitz Learned Nothing?
I don't think the collapse is coming UNLESS the American public can be convinced that Trump is a RUSSIAN AGENT guilty of treason (very very unlikely) or a mental case or whatever. Nothing seems to be working which infuriates them resulting in an obvious stream of contrived fake news items.
However with all the garbage being thrown a juicy piece of offal from his past my stick to the wall or he may indeed fly off the handle and the public will turn against him.
Or he may indeed resign (also very unlikely)
If indeed the marxist succeed and topple Trump THEN you will see another ALL OUT WAR against VPOTUS Pence when he ascends to the office.
He is a conservative, an establishment conservative but a conservative nonetheless. An enemy to the progressive left.
Not only that I believe he will be able to finish out his term as POTUS and then be elected for two more FULL terms.
Digging into Pence past morally they will probably be hard put to find trash worthy of toppling him but their maniacal blood lust for President's Trumps demise is so blinding they can't think about the next problem they will have to face with Pence and his destruction.
In my past and looking into history this campaign of lies, deceits and fake news against a sitting POTUS is unprecedented.
HankD
I don't believe so, They passed legislation a long time ago exempting Congress from obamacare.
I don't know. That is what Rand Paul said.
Depends on timing.
"No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once." 22nd Amendment
I just looked it up and they are on Obama care.
Paul is essentially correct. Members and their staffs (under a provision inserted by Sen. Chuck Grassley) are required to participate in the exchange system. This posed something of a problem because the federal government paid a large part of the health insurance and the exchanges weren't set up to handle insurance for folks whose employers paid for all or part of their insurance. So the members and employees are allowed to participate in a local exchange despite the fact that they're receiving a subsidy from their employer — the federal government.
The biggest exception is that staff of committees are allowed to remain under the old Federal Employees Health Benefit Program because they're not specifically required to participate in the exchanges by law.
Well, the Senate outlook for 2018 is VERY friendly towards the GOP, the House is always more unpredictable in elections. Their loss there will come two years later.
It's all because of Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia (term end s in 2020), Lisa Murkowski of Alaska (2022), and Susan Collins (2020) of Maine. They are getting destroyed on twitter, as they deserve.
Correct ...with some special exceptions.
"The result of the final version of ObamaCare (the Affordable Care Act) is that members of Congress, and their staffers, have to buy their health insurance on the exchanges along with millions of other Americans… more or less. In reality, they got to follow some special rules.
Congress and their staffers use SHOP plans under the ACA (ObamaCare plans for employers). This allows them to retain their tax-payer provided “employer” contribution while still technically being on “the exchanges.” TIP: The SHOP exchange is an exchange that other normal working Americans are on, allowing Congress to be on that (rather than the individual exchanges used by non-employees) required a few special rules.
In other words, they certainly do get special treatment, but the grand result is they still have to pay a portion of their premiums and they are still on the same ObamaCare plans as normal working-class Americans."
It's the true patriots who want a return to government by the people who are demonstrating against Trump. He has neither the background nor the knowledge to function adequately as President. Only the Fascists support him.
Whatever you say.
Time will tell.
Mueller will no doubt do his best to find some offal in President Trump's past that will be transformed by The Ministry of Truth into something defined as "treason".
The kangaroo court will do the rest.
All brought to us by the DNC, the Party of Death (Abortion, euthanasia and eugenics)
You will still have to deal with Pence.
HankD
He's just as bad and probably more dangerous because he's somewhat sane.
And he will appoint more conservative justices should the opportunity present itself.
Then an attempt to overturn the Roe vs. Wade murder decision will be made by Pence as he promised.
HankD
That will not stop abortion. It will take away the federal law making it legal. Then the law will revert back to state laws just as it was before the Republican Court passed Roe vs. Wade in 1973. Besides, I've heard this for 45 years and the GOP has yet to do that. The R vs W Supreme court was not only Republican, it was conservative.
"In 1973, the Supreme Court reversed a lower-court order that had compelled Texas to fund its school districts — the poor Hispanic and African American districts and the richer, mostly white districts — equally. The vote in San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez was 5 to 4. A year later, the same Republican-appointed majority stopped the courts from extending school desegregation into mostly white suburbs. In both cases, the rulings emphasized the value of local control of schools. As a result, public schools are more segregated today than they were in 1970, and there are serious questions about the quality of the education provided in poorer districts."
The Burger Court (1969–86) marked a conservative shift.[44] It also expanded Griswold's right to privacy to strike down abortion laws (Roe v. Wade),[45] but divided deeply on affirmative action (Regents of the University of California v. Bakke)[46] and campaign finance regulation (Buckley v. Valeo),[47] and dithered on the death penalty, ruling first that most applications were defective (Furman v. Georgia),[48] then that the death penalty itself was not unconstitutional (Gregg v. Georgia).[48][49][50]
Rehnquist and Roberts
The Rehnquist Court (1986–2005) was noted for its revival of judicial enforcement of federalism,[51] emphasizing the limits of the Constitution's affirmative grants of power (United States v. Lopez) and the force of its restrictions on those powers (Seminole Tribe v. Florida, City of Boerne v. Flores).[52][53][54][55][56] It struck down single-sex state schools as a violation of equal protection (United States v. Virginia), laws against sodomy as violations of substantive due process (Lawrence v. Texas),[57] and the line item veto (Clinton v. New York), but upheld school vouchers (Zelman v. Simmons-Harris) and reaffirmed Roe's restrictions on abortion laws (Planned Parenthood v. Casey).[58] The Court's decision in Bush v. Gore, which ended the electoral recount during the presidential election of 2000, was especially controversial.[59][60] This decision stopped a justified recount and threw the election to Bush who had received less popular votes than Gore.
The Roberts Court (2005–present) is regarded by some as more conservative than the Rehnquist Court.[61][62] Some of its major rulings have concerned federal preemption (Wyeth v. Levine), civil procedure (Twombly-Iqbal), abortion (Gonzales v. Carhart),[63] climate change (Massachusetts v. EPA), same-sex marriage (United States v. Windsor and Obergefell v. Hodges), and the Bill of Rights, prominently Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (First Amendment),[64] Heller-McDonald (Second Amendment),[65] and Baze v. Rees (Eighth Amendment).[66][67] Citizens United ruled that corporations have the same first amendment rights as people.
So?
REPEAT:
And he will appoint more conservative justices should the opportunity present itself.
Then an attempt to overturn the Roe vs. Wade murder decision will be made by Pence as he promised.
HankD
So? Einstein said that the best definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again (45 years to overturn Roe vs. Wade) and expect a different outcome this time. The Republican Party leaders do not want to achieve this. It would cost them political power over the Christian Right.
Every time you post something like, "the Republicans don't want to outlaw abortion" I simply go to Google and within seconds I find something that proves you are wrong. I would guess this is my fourth or fifth time in the past year. Revmitchell has done the same thing at least as many times. Retract your statement, please. Or at least quit making the same error.
------
Abortion Fight Rages in Kentucky, Where Only 1 Clinic Remains
by Associated Press
LOUISVILLE, Ky. — Both sides in the abortion fight raging in Kentucky agree on one thing: The stakes are as high as ever in a state that could become the first in the nation without an abortion clinic.
Political pressure has intensified since the Kentucky GOP took control of state government and moved quickly to pass new restrictions on abortions. And Republican Gov. Matt Bevin makes no apologies for waging a licensing fight against a Louisville clinic that is the last remaining facility performing abortions in the state.
Abortion fight rages in Kentucky, which has just 1 clinic left
I'm talking about Republican leadership in the federal government. Yes, there are individuals and movements against it. What has that done to change the GOP Roe vs. Wade decision 45 years ago?
Ummm....lemmee see....Oh! I know! Neil Gorsuch was appointed to the Supreme Court.