those articles put a spotlight on inconvenient truths about the world that force elected officials to impose more government regulations on business that KILL JOBS

Just for giggles, what is the point of "voter ID laws?"

Where does "personal responsibility" fit in with the idea that people who shirk off insuring themselves get their bills covered by taxpayers?

If taxpayers are going to end up on the hook for it anyway, wouldn't it make sense to just have the government take over health care to reduce costs for everyone?

Not near. Mortal lock.

Republicans aren't even trying to act like they're being fair any more:

https://twitter.com/DavidCornDC/stat...10949681664001

I mean who cares, the NYT is slightly biased to the left, but is usually the gold start standard for fact based research. Objective newspapers can't be part of the #resistance, if you want to call it that, because they can't walk hand in hand with political groups. It won't stop the NYT style section or whatever from glamming up the Trumps or their Mansion section from detailing the the "white people problems" of the millionaire class when it comes to the social scene or finding a good 3rd house whose view is obstructed by some public housing or whatever.

Let's be honest though. The real problem lew and others have with the NYT is their tough, fact-based reporting that has exposed many of Donald Trump's lies and corruption scandals. It's not that they're "liberal." They don't like the truth in general. If Breitbart or Fox News suddenly started reporting these truths, they'd turn on those outlets and call them "liberal" in a heartbeat too. It's not about the content, it's about the fact that they want to shield themselves in a conservative safe space, and the only way to do that is to cast all the tough fact-based outlets as "liberal."

Also this:

I hadn't heard of Nunes until pretty recently, his hateability stock is really on the rise

Pretty big lack of personal responsibility there.

The bold words can be loosely translated as the following: "The R leaders have asked that we keep them up to date on how guilty POTUS is in an incremental manner, so that they can scurry in a more dignified manner, as opposed to getting hit all at once."

The difference between slanted and biased is a big issue here fwiw.

https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/843857696789094400

Aides Wrestle Drill From Trump’s Hands As He Tries To Remove Obama Listening Device From Skull

I don't golf. Is there a McDonald's in every clubhouse or do they deliver on the course?



https://twitter.com/taradublinrocks/...45311630004224

This is pretty obvious and why the whole healthcare thing is silly.

However to satisfy people like Lew they could post 10-25 million dollar bonds (per person) to cover any potential future healthcare expenses. If they use up 50% of their bond amount without repayment then the bond will be used to pay off healthcare. Then the bond will have to be refilled or else their countdown to care stops entirely and they become ineligible for future healthcare of any kind.

That is what personal responsibility actually would be when it comes to healthcare not paying $500 a month and not suffering any serious illnesses or diseases. That is fractional and convenient responsibility, nothing more.

I don't think it is fair to lump me in with that group, but I understand your point.

Perhaps, but I do pay for health insurance.

https://twitter.com/Evan_McMullin/st...36977036677127

Should someone who elects not to purchase insurance be able to change their mind and then purchase it, and should it still be "affordable" then?

You have it wrong. The question I was responding to asked why "anyone" would pay for health insurance and everyone here ignored that and jumped to conclusions.

Yes, of course.

Yeah, I often have to change my undies after reading posts in this forum.

OK, you have proposed a completely preposterous system in which people can wait to get sick to buy insurance. This is an even sillier proposal than the AHCA you panned

Ew?