CONSPIRACY: Was the ObamaCare disaster intentional?

[Woods]

Really.

Yeah, really.

So, what do you call RomneyCare?

I call it Socialism.

 

[shocker315]

 

[osan]

GOT hegelian dialectic?

Been a lot of that going around these past couple thousands of years.

 

[osan]

Intentional by whom?

If you're expecting a list of names, I would not hold my breath in wait.

A whole lot of people were involved in making Obamacare the law, including the Heritage Foundation that thought it up, Mitt Romney and other phony conservatives who pushed it, hundreds of politicians too stupid to plan anything beyond putting one foot in front of the other on the way to the chow line, and millions of voters who were largely mislead into believing that it was the solution to an obviously failing health care system.

These are the side effects of the root drivers. These are the elements that need to be in place as vehicles of the power to implement the plan. None of these elements serve to identify the ultimate source.

So which one of these "intended" it to fail? Certainly not most of them.

Precisely because they are not the source architects. They are but cogs in the machinery of realization.

There were undoubtedly some high level planners who thought it was a step towards a fully-socialized system one way or another.

So you are not completely devoid of a reasoned clue as to the roots of this nonsense. Good.

But I would guess that not many intended it to fail because that is a very risky proposition.

Here your reasoning fails in a troubling way. I would add that judging by the trends since 9/11 to which we are all witness, Theye appear to fear risk no longer, as if they believe their control is sufficiently solid that they may do as they please.

Certainly Obama, to the extent he even thought about it, did not intend for his "signature" program to be a flaming train wreck. He is way too arrogant to intentionally destroy his "legacy".

Obama doesn't wipe his butt without permission and instruction. He has nothing to say about this. He is wholly expendable and if it pleases Themme to toss him casually under the bus or hang him from a piano-wire noose, so it shall be done without a second thought. Obama is nothing but cheap window dressing. Associating him with real political power is like believing the voice-over announcer for the Chevy Volt spends his time away from the mic designing and building them.

It is a terrible error to mistake a map for the terrain it ostensibly represents.

 

[osan]

I know lots of people who not only support Obamacare but support Candian-style socialized medicine. And none of them have "evil" in their hearts. Quite the opposite. They think they are doing good. They are just misguided.

This is right thinking. It is as I have been telling people for 30 years - most of the evil doers such as Stalin and Mao, Obama, and so forth are pure pragmatists. They believe that their noble goals justify and legitimize any means they see fit. To that point, the evil they do is, in their minds, not evil at all but only the doing of "god's work". This is a deeply ingrained behavioral characteristic. Whether it is inherent I cannot say, but one imprinted it seems to be nearly impossible to excise and my observations seem to lead me to speculate that the more "civilized" a society, the more impossibly entrenched the habit. Empire is a disease of the mind.

 

[Woods]

This is right thinking. It is as I have been telling people for 30 years - most of the evil doers such as Stalin and Mao, Obama, and so forth are pure pragmatists. They believe that their noble goals justify and legitimize any means they see fit. To that point, the evil they do is, in their minds, not evil at all but only the doing of "god's work". This is a deeply ingrained behavioral characteristic. Whether it is inherent I cannot say, but one imprinted it seems to be nearly impossible to excise and my observations seem to lead me to speculate that the more "civilized" a society, the more impossibly entrenched the habit. Empire is a disease of the mind.

You are both right. I used to say there is more than one type of liberal.
There is the drone - dumb and does what he is told, believes the misinformation he is fed. He watches MS-NBC, voted for McAuliffe, will tell you Cuccunelli is an extremist, but cannot cite a single issue on which Cuccinelli is in the minority. I think of that guy who was on FOX, has cancer, policy cancelled, can't afford new one, going to let nature take its course, voted for Obama.
There is useful dupe - usually well educated, but believes in utopian myth, the benevolent despot, that the "workers" are too stupid to take care of themselves. I think of Kirsten Powers, one of FOX's resident progressives thinks everything should be regulated.
There's the Megalomanic-Narcisists - This is where you find your Stalin's and Obama's, but you also find a lot of guys who couldn't rise any higher than dog catcher.

There may be more.

---
And on that mandate thing, there has been legislation requiring compulsory insurance in varied forms going back to Bismarck's Germany. In the US, there was a plan offered around the time of WWI. There was another around 1943 by Dingell (father of the current Dingell, and these two have held that seat for about 80 years). Nixon had one based on an employer mandate that could not get passed committee chairman, Ted Kennedy. It's a real stretch to say the guy at Heritage invented this in 1990.