Many hospitals and doctors not accepting obamacare

[Ltl89]

Some food for thought... the constant conservative bashing of liberals is one of the things that turns me off to this site.  I'm fine with people having different opinions and love a good debate, but it gets tiresome to see endless bickering on topics that are totally unrelated to the mission of the site.  We do have sub-forums and welcome various conversations; however, sometimes people should take a look at whether or not they are contributing to a support site or creating walls.  Personally, I have avoided this forum sometimes because I see how close minded and biased some people can really be (including myself at times which bothers me when I recognize it).  Is that what we want here?  Does this accomplish anything other than stroking our egos?   Shouldn't conservatives, liberals, dems, republicans, socialists, iibertarians or any other group be welcome here? Again, conversation is fine and sometimes helpful, but it really hasn't been too productive on this topic and is only creating walls.  Shouldn't we be grown up to recognize this and move on?  I may be a naive 24 year old, but I know enough to see this is going nowhere good. 

[Jamie D]

The unbiased ones just a little research will tell you.

The White House?  MSNBC?  Democratic Underground?  Pravda?

Please, I'd like to know which you consider "unbiased."

Are "facts" in the eyes of the beholder?

[Eva Marie]

I am sorry but anyone could put that on youtube and pretend to be anyone.
It may be true but how can you be for sure?

Wiki:The Weekly Standard is an American neoconservative opinion magazine published 48 times per year. Its founding publisher, News Corporation, debuted the title September 18, 1995. Currently edited by founder William Kristol and Fred Barnes

But you consider wikipedia to be a trusted resource? Many don't.

[michelle gee]

How about youtube with an interview of the navigator?

Anyone can put up a Youtube video.
I am looking at Colorado news for this and have yet to find it.

[michelle gee]

But you consider wikipedia to be a trusted resource? Many don't.

The Weekly Standard made its debut on September 18, 1995. Edited by William Kristol and Fred Barnes, the magazine is published 48 times a year by Clarity Media Group. The Weekly Standard is available by subscription. The price of a single copy is $4.95.

This is from their own website.

[Jamie D]

Correction Michelle: The video report was from Al Jazeera!  It has a direct quote from someone whose job it is to sign people up.  The eyewitness testimony, acceptable in a court of law.

Al Jazeera reporter question: "How many people have you enrolled here through the exchange?"

Jennifer Abbot, Family and Intercultural Resource Center: "So far no one... Thus far everybody has taken a look at the rates and they've walked out the door... It's sticker shock.  They just can't afford it."

[Lauren5]

Great, just great, now since my insurance has dumped me I'm not going to be able to get inexpensive insurance.
Time to move to Canada.

[michelle gee]

The video report was from Al Jazeera!  It has a direct quote from someone whose job it is to sign people up.  The eyewitness testimony, acceptable in a court of law.

It could be anybody  and do you have proof they are in fact a real navigator?

[Jamie D]

The psychological term for that is "denial."

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/jennifer-abbott/7a/aab/98a

http://www.summitfirc.org/FIRC/ContactUs
Jennifer, Health Coverage Guide, cell 970-368-0906 jennifera@summitfirc.org jennifera@summitfirc.org

Feel free to message her.

[Missy~rmdlm]

Oh dear the ACA thread is revived. How about a hard fact for once. My "Cadillac plan" through my employer is "unchanged" for next year, with a $8 per month increase in premiums (to $42 for myself.)

[michelle gee]

Oh dear the ACA thread is revived. How about a hard fact for once. My "Cadillac plan" through my employer is "unchanged" for next year, with a $8 per month increase in premiums (to $42 for myself.)

Nice!

[Devlyn]

Just a reminder, as is usual on a busy night at a support site, we have people in need. Elsewhere on the site are people with their heads in their hands looking for a kind word. While kind words are at a bare minimum in this thread, I will ask each of you to please leave this thread for a moment and help fulfill the mission of this site. Go make a supportive post, and if it then feels right to return to this bickering, feel free to do so.  Thank you, hugs, Devlyn

[Ltl89]

In order clarify my previous statement to someone, I want to elaborate a bit.

Consistent put downs on democratic policies and values on a support site may very well make some liberals feel unwelcome.  Even if the tone isn't always hostile, it doesn't contribute to a positive atmosphere or do anything productive.  We should talk about what comes to our mind, but it's almost everyday.  And I'm aware it happens to conservatives as well which is why you will usually see me defend people for both sides.  It wouldn't be cool for that to happen unless there was something trans specific going on.  It's a matter of principal at the end of the day.  Making everything a debate and isn't always a good thing and this site has beaten this topic to death.  Is it really doing anything good?  Bashing was the wrong word for it and sorry for using the wrong phrase.  What I intended to say maybe we should consider whether what we are saying is conducive to a support site and welcoming everyone.  Isn't there a better place for these things?  And are we really going to change the minds of others here?  It's clear some are stuck so far on one side or the other that they will purposefully spin whatever is said for political purposes.  Let's not do that here; after all, there are more appropriate forums for such a thing.  Anyway, just my opinion. 

By the way, even though I am a lefty, I work in a conservative medical practice with doctors who despise the legislation and understand the concerns of both sides very well.  It's not a black and white issue and just wish people would actually consider different perspectives; instead, we get biased conversations that border on ranting and bickering.  For a group of open minded people, we can still be stubborn and myopic.  And there is no reason to make character assessments based solely on the political views of other posters. In any event, I will leave you to your discussion.

[Jamie D]

I see no "bickering."  I see the exchange of ideas on a topic important to the TG/TS community.

And I have about 10,000 "supportive" posts, so I think I will look out for myself in this topic, before I get lubed and tubed by the Federal Government.

[Devlyn]

Well, feel free to stay and bicker then.

[Jamie D]

In order clarify my previous statement to someone, I want to elaborate a bit.

Consistent put downs on democratic policies and values on a support site may very well make some liberals feel unwelcome.  Even if the tone isn't always hostile, it doesn't contribute to a positive atmosphere or do anything productive.  We should talk about what comes to our mind, but it's almost everyday.  And I'm aware it happens to conservatives as well which is why you will usually see me defend people for both sides.  It wouldn't be cool for that to happen unless there was something trans specific going on.  It's a matter of principal at the end of the day.  Making everything a debate and isn't always a good thing and this site has beaten this topic to death.  Is it really doing anything good?  Bashing was the wrong word for it and sorry for using the wrong phrase.  What I intended to say maybe we should consider whether what we are saying is conducive to a support site and welcoming everyone.  Isn't there a better place for these things?  And are we really going to change the minds of others here?  It's clear some are stuck so far on one side or the other that they will purposefully spin whatever is said for political purposes.  Let's not do that here; after all, there are more appropriate forums for such a thing.  Anyway, just my opinion. 

By the way, even though I am a lefty, I work in a conservative medical practice with doctors who despise the legislation and understand the concerns of both sides very well.  It's not a black and white issue and just wish people would actually consider different perspectives; instead, we get biased conversations that border on ranting and bickering.  For a group of open minded people, we can still be stubborn and myopic.  And there is no reason to make character assessments based solely on the political views of other posters. In any event, I will leave you to your discussion.

Well stated.  I think then, you will agree that "debate is an essential tool for developing and maintaining democracy and open societies."

[Jamie D]

Well, feel free to stay and bicker then.

I am not bickering.  I am providing a factual basis for decision making.

[Devlyn]

Are too

Am not

Are too

Am not......

[Jamie D]

bicker n. - 1. to engage in petulant or peevish argument

I see no "petulance" or "peevishness" on my part.  I am not being unreasonable, ill-tempered, or contemptuous.  I am just providing facts and resources.

"Just the facts Ma'am." - Sgt. Joe Friday

[amZo]

Great, just great, now since my insurance has dumped me I'm not going to be able to get inexpensive insurance.
Time to move to Canada.

Sorry to hear that, the POTUS deceived you and others and it's outrageous. This is not settle law, this is blatant fraud.

There, I killed two birds with one stone.... I was supportive (per Devlyn) and 'bickered' at the same time.

But seriously, the young especially are getting over burdened with subsidizing older sicker people during a time that good jobs are hard for them to come by.  Hard working families are now trying to figure out how to survive as well.  This infuriates me.