Originally posted by Soothfast
Liberals wanted the public option or a single-payer system. The ACA was the only "compromise" that could get squeezed past the Republican filibustering. Liberal tenets have therefore not been damaged.
You don't "know thy enemy" very well, which is why your brand of ranting is especially poignant.
Your attempt to revise history is very charming; however as I stated previously, Democrats had control of both houses of Congress for two years and failed to produce anything of note, related to health care or otherwise. I'll also note for your benefit that the ACA was passed without a single Republican vote. This highlights not Republican obstructionism, but Democrat inability to govern and understand that sweeping legislation of the magnitude of the ACA has always been and must always be enacted in a bipartisan manner.
Has not Republican obstructionism, given the extremely poor quality of the substance of the law and the extremely poor quality of the law's execution, been justified? Does not Republican obstructionism seem more like heroism today? Can not Republicans claim they were trying to protect Americans from this foolhardy and ill-conceived legislation, and the President and Party that were its genesis?
I maintain that the ACA has exposed the limits of Big Government, has only started to show the harm that can be done by the government to private markets, has exposed the harm done by the liberal thinking that government knows what's best for individuals, has laid bare liberal arrogance, and has seriously undermined public confidence in government (well, that along with the fact that Obama knowingly and deliberately lied to the American public thirty times, and then lied about his lies, which, if I had not heard with my own ears, I would never have believed).