Well, no. I didn't create the definition. Try to understand the term at a more complex level than a single sentence in a dictionary. I provided a Wikipedia article, and that article explains why health care can correctly be called "rationed" in the United States.
Some groups have coverage through Medicaid, others through private coverage, and most of us get insurance through work. The richest people [think Rush Limbaugh, Mitt Romney, the late Ted Kennedy] can get all the health care they want by forking over cash. So people from the very poor to the very rich can get care-money isn't the issue.
The working poor, the temporarily unemployed, and those with a preexisting condition are denied coverage. We aren't talking about a lack of money. A person with the same income as I can lack access to health care because they have a preexisting condition.
Please think about the illogic of what you're saying. In one sentence, you claim that if the currently uninsured get health care, we will have long lines, and in the next, you claim that no one is denied health care.
The only way to respond to this is to tell you that you don't know what you're talking about. You are arguing a point you know nothing about.
That unsourced claim aside, the ACA addresses the needs of those who currently have no coverage, allowing them to enter into exchanges and supplementing their purchase of private policies. No problem, even if your claim were accurate.
