Either way, I'm sure it amounts to 
Have a nice day
Posted on 01/30/2013 5:26:02 AM PST by NYer
ROTFL.
Yeah, so, where is your website and your record of fighting to privatize the Veterans Administration that periodically turns a hospital here and there into a horror movie? Is it the same one you have to fight against the decades long abuse the BIA health system dispenses and fails to dispense or do you have two different sites?
LOL. Yeah, "intrinsically evil" when it impacts your life, otherwise, not so much.
I don't want anything to do with anything the government runs ever again but that doesn't make hyperbole from the peanut gallery trying to put more blame off on Catholic Bishops than others is any less funny. BarryCare as "intrinsically" evil because everyone is going to get the same crap that those who had no alternative have been getting for a long, long, time.
Any time problems with the health care system have come up there's been the sound of a big broom sweeping it under the rug followed by crickets until the next horror story came up. Conservatives never had the guts to make it more like a real private industry and the left always had the guts to press for more socialization in exchange for shoving it under the rug for a few more years. Bishops are stupid to think that anything the government runs can work well, but their being stupid is a far cry from their ignoring an "intrinsic evil".
They're not a bit more evil than the people who had no problems, insurance paid for by their employer or income to afford insurance, and no idea at all how far out of whack things have gotten. The Bishops are supid for thinking nationalized healthcare is worthwhile, but they're no more stupid than the people who have ignored the mess things have become. For half the population, if their spouse has a major stroke they better drag them to the driveway and run them over before calling EMS. That way EMS will figure the stroke is due to their having been accidently run over and the auto insurance will pay. Otherwise they're only a few months or even weeks away from being bankrupt and then some.
Ignoring contraception to the extent they have, now that's ignoring intrinsic evil, but of course the vast majority of the population love contraception and don't care about the blood on their own hands. I notice that murdering millions with contraceptives doesn't come up as being "intrinsically evil" very often, now why is that? If BarryCare is as popular as contraception, does that mean BarryCare ceases to be "intrinsically evil", too?
People who are neck deep in the mud they're throwing at Catholic Bishops look just plain silly when they try to pin BarryCare on people who ninety percent of the population ignore anyway.
Again I point you to your posted claim. Though I might agree with you that the government may not arrest any Bishops instead seeking to take monies and properties -THIS possibility in no way proves your claim that the Bishops are not sincere.
Your pessimism is noted as is your disgusting attack upon the integrity of the Bishops. In all honesty no one can know what the Bishops will do. My faith that the Bishops will not capitulate is just as valid as your faith that they will.
I wonder how many of their faithful flock will refuse to vote as they have been voting in order to support them.
Well ignoranus, it would appear that the USCCB is indeed a liberal group. Hard left liberal in fact. They are not conservatives. They are not friends of conservatives. They are not allies of conservatives. Anyone who claims that they are is either deliberatly ignorant or lying. I can't decide yet which you are - probably both But I do know you are yet another belligerant blowhard who believes in attacking the person you disagree with. Bottom line is that the USCCB which is the OFFICAL organization of the Catholic bishops in the USA is a liberal organization.
Actually I shouldn't have bothered responding to you. People like you who at the slightst hint of the truth about the catholic church try to shout it down are incapable of learning, and incapable of rational discussion. Go hump someone else's leg in the future.
Read post 104 - it applies to you as well as that other blowhard
Read post 104 - it applies to you as well as that other blowhard
I guess it depends on how one defines the “ACTUAL Church.” My guess is that the regime has already pissed those folks off, and so, for the regime, it doesn't really matter.
I wouldn't be surprised if the issues related to the HHS mandate wind up being a net loser for the Church. Gov. Romney received nearly 50% of the Catholic vote last year, but significantly less than 50% of Catholics believe that nationalized health care shouldn't cover contraceptives. * sigh *
sitetest
Yeah.
I hope that you derived more satisfaction from your rant than one could derive sense from it.
So, let's see. I am to be criticized for my alleged failure to fight for the privatization of health care provided by the Veteran's Administration? And because “Conservatives never had the guts to make it more like a real private industry...”?
“People who are neck deep in the mud they're throwing at Catholic Bishops look just plain silly when they try to pin BarryCare on people who ninety percent of the population ignore anyway.”
So, the bishops are immune to criticism for mostly being favorably inclined to Obamacare because, well, ah,... tu quoque?
Your defense of the bishops is that they're just really igorant, not evil? And lots of other people are just as ignorant?
If a primary criticism of me is that I've overestimated the knowledge, generally, of Catholic bishops, well... that could be. I've never been impressed with their intellectual prowess, but it's possible that even so, they're less knowledgeable, generally, than even I thought.
As for me, you don't know much about me. But I've been engaged in this battle in my own little ways for over 20 years. I've owned small businesses since 1985. I don't have lawyers on retainer, I don't have an HR department, I'm the chief cook and bottle washer. Thus had little choice but to become educated about issues concerning the payment for health care. I've studied the issue, discussed it with different folks from different positions in the field, my various insurance brokers over the years, my financial guy. I've read about alternate models - the Germans, the Swiss, the Singaporeans. I've written my congresscritters (Though, living in Maryland, I'm not sure they listen much to a registered Republican who tells ‘em to cut mandates, do tort reform, outlaw first-dollar coverage, give any tax benefits to consumers so that insurance can be portable, more like auto insurance, and then folks can spend how much or how little as they want or need on health insurance, encourage high-deductible plans so that folks treat health care purchases like other important purchases they they need in life, like food, like housing, like transportation and education. For some reason, my congresscritters don't much care for my ideas.)
I know all about folks who think that health care dollars are created by faeries using pink faery dust. Most of the folks I've employed over the years have thought thusly. At least initially. I've tried to do my part to educate my employees, explaining why plans that seem great - no deductibles, no co-pays, everything for “free” are actually the most damaging, both to the individual as they encourage behavior that drive up plan costs, and to the society as a whole, as they encourage behavior that is a principle of driver of health care eating up increasing amounts of GDP.
And, as each ordinary of a diocese is also the head of a sizable corporate entity, any bishop who isn't appalled by the idea of government-run health care is either a socialist (and thus, not authentically Catholic) or profoundly, willfully, culpably ignorant. The head of a business entity has a moral obligation to know about important issues concerning his business entity.
Unless you're actually asserting that these folks are not ignorant (lacking knowledge, but not necessarily intellect), but rather are very low-IQ. Could be. I just didn't think it would be nice to suggest it.
sitetest
I haven't suggested that the bishops will “capitulate,” if by capitulation one means that the bishops will generally voluntarily pay for the HHS mandate.
I've never suggested any such thing.
All I've said is that IT WILL NEVER COME TO GOING TO JAIL.
The standard way these things go is:
1. The federal government says ABC Co. owes the government a million bucks.
2. ABC Co. denies it.
3. The government and ABC duke it out. Maybe before an administrative law judge, or a federal court, or a tax court.
4. If ABC Co. wins (and once the government exhausts any appeals available to it), then all is well for ABC Co.! They don't pay, and they certainly DO NOT GO TO JAIL.
5, If ABC Co. loses and exhausts all appeals, well the, the government will expect its money. If ABC Co. refuses to pay, the government will send a note to ABC's banker, the holder of ABC's stock portfolio, etc., and will instruct these folks to forward the assets found within to the government.
ABC Co. is pretty much powerless to keep the government from raiding their accounts. No bank or brokerage is going to fail to execute this instruction from the government. The government gets its money, plus fines, penalties, interest, and goes away happy. ABC Co. is diminished by it. They didn't cooperate or capitulate, but the government got its money, anyway. But, and this is critical, NO ONE GOES TO JAIL!
6. If ABC Co. persists in the behavior (or lack thereof) that brings about the government's previous actions, the government will just provide a standing order to ship ABC's cash to the government from its accounts as soon as the money hits the accounts. And guess what? NO ONE GOES TO JAIL!
7. Eventually, ABC Co. will find it doesn't have enough cash to a) pay vendors; b) pay utilities; c) pay rents; d) pay its employees, etc.
When this happens, ABC Co. is pretty much out of business. The company must lay off its staff.
Once staff are laid off, then from the government's perspective, the issue is resolved. ABC, having no business, no employees, will incur no new violations of the civil code, and will thus stop generating fines, fees, penalties and interest.
AND NO ONE WILL GO TO JAIL!
Now, there ARE ways to go to jail when messing with the federal government. First and foremost is if you commit an actual felony that can be criminally prosecuted and that can draw a jail term. A lot of environmental protection laws are like that. Violate them and you could wind up paying fines and such AND going to jail.
But Obamacare is not such a chunk of law. There are no criminal penalties associated with failing to comply.
But, even if the underlying matter isn't a criminal matter, there are some ways you could go to jail. I doubt any bishops would do these things, because I think most bishops would hold them immoral. One thing you can do is lie to the government about your obligations to the government under law. If you have 100 employees and claim only 49 (since Obamacare only really applies with 50 employees or over), you could conceivably go to jail. Although there are probably a few ways you could game the system that, in the short term, would provide you the ability to maintain solvency, but would keep you out of jail. But if you lie blatantly enough, you might go to jail.
You could violate money laundering laws to keep your money out of the government's clutches. That could easily get you put in jail.
But I don't think the bishops will do that sort of thing.
No, DBeers, I'm not suggesting the bishops aren't resolute in refusing to obey the mandate. I'm saying failure to obey the mandate will only result in forced forfeiture of monetary assets. But, especially as Obamacare is presently written (specifically without criminal penalties), NO ONE WILL GO TO JAIL for failing to comply with the mandate.
The disingenuous part is not that they won't stay resolute, but that, despite their claims that they will go to jail rather than comply, THEY WON'T GO TO JAIL EVEN IF THEY DON'T COMPLY.
That's all.
sitetest
Either way, I'm sure it amounts to
Have a nice day
“I stopped reading at the word, ‘rant’ because everyone knows that people who so characterize the posts of others as ‘rants’ are typically the mental equals of a slug and not much more.”
Or, they're responding to a rant.
Take care.
sitetest
I've never suggested any such thing.
All I've said is that IT WILL NEVER COME TO GOING TO JAIL.
Okay. I apologize for the incorrect characterization.
No problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.