100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Health bill clears hurdle with support from Snowe | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Now Rahm Emanuel has democratic senaters in a locked room working on combining their 2 bills. No repulicans were invited. There goes bipartisanship OUT THE WINDOW! And what happened to that whole TRANSPARENCY thing? Not sure how you have bipartisan with one side voting no one everything and doing everything they can to prevent it in the first place. boo do you not think the repubicans would be more wiling to vote yes on something if they could be involved in the debate and what is out in the bill. Aren't the democrats voting no on everything the rebulicans want to add by not allowing them in on the debates. And being in a locked room while they merge the two democratic bills together? What do I know? I'm just a liberal bleeding heart socialist communist [DEMONRAT]... any other labels I missed? No matter what I say it will be called propaganda or some thing worse. Nobody called you any thing. And you didn't answer my question. I asked if the democrats coulld be called the party of no because they are in a locked room merging the 2 democratic bills. No offer was made to any repulicans to join in this meeting. Damn I posted a whole lengthy reply and it didn't post cuz my dial up went down.. argh Anyway when people call democrats, [Democrats] as Raider did and say they only want to tie the hands of the opposition that's just plain ignorant. Because people are democrats doesn't' mean they are unwilling to work with the other side. But in the case of health care those against it is pretty telling when you find out who they are really standing up for, namely the insurers themselves. I have been watching cspan where the lawmakers themselves are debating. I can't get any information worth anything on the news frankly. So from that point of view it is the republicans mostly fighting this tooth and nail and the blue dog conservatives on the left. Why closed doors? I have no bloody idea, I would like to know if that is how it works or if it's by design or if the Dem's figure if the republicans don't want to actually participate why let them in. I don't know. I would like to see a list of the most important parts of the combined bills and then see who voted yes and who voted no. But that final bill is not here yet. Conservatives on left and right are Both saying no, but so far from what I can tell it's always no on specific things. If we can't compremise here at mingle, how do we expect them to do it in washington. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now Rahm Emanuel has democratic senaters in a locked room working on combining their 2 bills. No repulicans were invited. There goes bipartisanship OUT THE WINDOW! And what happened to that whole TRANSPARENCY thing? Not sure how you have bipartisan with one side voting no one everything and doing everything they can to prevent it in the first place. boo do you not think the repubicans would be more wiling to vote yes on something if they could be involved in the debate and what is out in the bill. Aren't the democrats voting no on everything the rebulicans want to add by not allowing them in on the debates. And being in a locked room while they merge the two democratic bills together? What do I know? I'm just a liberal bleeding heart socialist communist [DEMONRAT]... any other labels I missed? No matter what I say it will be called propaganda or some thing worse. Nobody called you any thing. And you didn't answer my question. I asked if the democrats coulld be called the party of no because they are in a locked room merging the 2 democratic bills. No offer was made to any repulicans to join in this meeting. Damn I posted a whole lengthy reply and it didn't post cuz my dial up went down.. argh Anyway when people call democrats, [Democrats] as Raider did and say they only want to tie the hands of the opposition that's just plain ignorant. Because people are democrats doesn't' mean they are unwilling to work with the other side. But in the case of health care those against it is pretty telling when you find out who they are really standing up for, namely the insurers themselves. I have been watching cspan where the lawmakers themselves are debating. I can't get any information worth anything on the news frankly. So from that point of view it is the republicans mostly fighting this tooth and nail and the blue dog conservatives on the left. Why closed doors? I have no bloody idea, I would like to know if that is how it works or if it's by design or if the Dem's figure if the republicans don't want to actually participate why let them in. I don't know. I would like to see a list of the most important parts of the combined bills and then see who voted yes and who voted no. But that final bill is not here yet. Conservatives on left and right are Both saying no, but so far from what I can tell it's always no on specific things. If we can't compremise here at mingle, how do we expect them to do it in washington. Well because we can't compromise doesn't mean they can't, but they should still have the option. I can say that we can all agree that we disagree. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
boo2u
on
Wed 10/14/09 02:32 PM
|
|
Now Rahm Emanuel has democratic senaters in a locked room working on combining their 2 bills. No repulicans were invited. There goes bipartisanship OUT THE WINDOW! And what happened to that whole TRANSPARENCY thing? Not sure how you have bipartisan with one side voting no one everything and doing everything they can to prevent it in the first place. boo do you not think the repubicans would be more wiling to vote yes on something if they could be involved in the debate and what is out in the bill. Aren't the democrats voting no on everything the rebulicans want to add by not allowing them in on the debates. And being in a locked room while they merge the two democratic bills together? What do I know? I'm just a liberal bleeding heart socialist communist [DEMONRAT]... any other labels I missed? No matter what I say it will be called propaganda or some thing worse. Nobody called you any thing. And you didn't answer my question. I asked if the democrats coulld be called the party of no because they are in a locked room merging the 2 democratic bills. No offer was made to any repulicans to join in this meeting. they don't want to answer any question tto which they know the proper answer is self incriminating.. The right side of the isle has been completely left out of the process.. none of the ideas that Republicans have offered have been given any consideration at all, despite the fact The One said he'd consider any ideas no matter who they came from.. well, we all know that means, "you can have ideas and we might pay them token attention but they have no chance of getting into any bills we'll consider" the only people they're concerned about working with are already half way Democrats to begin with.. But I'll ask again since no one answered.. Why should they vote 'yes' on something their constituents are vehemently opposed to? Why should they vote 'yes' on something they are philosophically opposed to? Put in some measures that conservatives believe in, like tort reform or tax deductibility for health care costs or take the restriction on flexcare accounts, and you might get some to go along.. but asking people to go along with things they don't agree with and then whining about lack of cooperation.. give me a break.. go back to the kiddie pool Damn it already give someone time to bloody answer before you make assumption!!! And you are completely wrong when you say that republicans have no input, they have had plenty of input, that input is being dicussed at this very moment. All those issues you meantioned are in the bills being considered and combined. Believe me if you think the bill that was just passed is something I as a liberal likes, your seriously wrong. Why not wait for the final bill where everyone's input is combined and we can then see how it favors. I don't expect it will faovor one side or the other because of all the crap that has gone on in the last few months. And by the way it goes both ways, why should we vote yes on things that favor insurers and not ordinary hard working people? Don't assume. Neither you nor I know what is in the bill that is being combined and considered right this minute. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Republicans are the party of "No".
They know very well that when this reform passes, they are toast. They are fighting for their political lives and will do anything to stop this reform. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now Rahm Emanuel has democratic senaters in a locked room working on combining their 2 bills. No repulicans were invited. There goes bipartisanship OUT THE WINDOW! And what happened to that whole TRANSPARENCY thing? Not sure how you have bipartisan with one side voting no one everything and doing everything they can to prevent it in the first place. boo do you not think the repubicans would be more wiling to vote yes on something if they could be involved in the debate and what is out in the bill. Aren't the democrats voting no on everything the rebulicans want to add by not allowing them in on the debates. And being in a locked room while they merge the two democratic bills together? What do I know? I'm just a liberal bleeding heart socialist communist [DEMONRAT]... any other labels I missed? No matter what I say it will be called propaganda or some thing worse. Nobody called you any thing. And you didn't answer my question. I asked if the democrats coulld be called the party of no because they are in a locked room merging the 2 democratic bills. No offer was made to any repulicans to join in this meeting. Damn I posted a whole lengthy reply and it didn't post cuz my dial up went down.. argh Anyway when people call democrats, [Democrats] as Raider did and say they only want to tie the hands of the opposition that's just plain ignorant. Because people are democrats doesn't' mean they are unwilling to work with the other side. But in the case of health care those against it is pretty telling when you find out who they are really standing up for, namely the insurers themselves. I have been watching cspan where the lawmakers themselves are debating. I can't get any information worth anything on the news frankly. So from that point of view it is the republicans mostly fighting this tooth and nail and the blue dog conservatives on the left. Why closed doors? I have no bloody idea, I would like to know if that is how it works or if it's by design or if the Dem's figure if the republicans don't want to actually participate why let them in. I don't know. I would like to see a list of the most important parts of the combined bills and then see who voted yes and who voted no. But that final bill is not here yet. Conservatives on left and right are Both saying no, but so far from what I can tell it's always no on specific things. If we can't compremise here at mingle, how do we expect them to do it in washington. I make the distinction between democrat and Democrat with a capital 'D' because I object to the way the media uses the term "Democratic" to describe the Democrat Party.. as if to say the opposition isn't democratic, don't follow or honor the priciples of democracy... They are the Democrat Party.. not the only party representing democracy.. The 'Demoncrat' was just a typo at first but it seemed appropo and I stuck with it.. You can't say the Republican "don't want to participate". That's a specious assumption. Of course they want to participate. Of course they want to help reform the health care system is the United States. But they have very different views on the ways in which it should be done. Empowering and encouraging individuals by making certain healthcare expenses tax deductible, promoting **actual** competition by eliminating the federal restrictions preventing you and I from purchasing and carrying insurance plans across state lines, carry out meaningful tort reform.. Those are the things Republican would like to see occur and they are relatively passive Opposed to the way Democrats want to do it which is by creating a massive new, massively expensive government bureaucracy which will promote it's own dominion and monopoly over the system.. How can you call it "choice and competition" when the only entity which will be available to compete in all 50 States will be the so-called "Public Option".. one which inherently is operated by the regulating entity.. That's not choice and competition.. that's a monopoly.. I'll make you an analogy.. Let's play a game of one-on-one basketball.. but here's the deal. I get to be referee. I get to make the rules. Oh and I get to change them whenever I want to and apply them as I choose.. who do you think will win that game? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now Rahm Emanuel has democratic senaters in a locked room working on combining their 2 bills. No repulicans were invited. There goes bipartisanship OUT THE WINDOW! And what happened to that whole TRANSPARENCY thing? Not sure how you have bipartisan with one side voting no one everything and doing everything they can to prevent it in the first place. boo do you not think the repubicans would be more wiling to vote yes on something if they could be involved in the debate and what is out in the bill. Aren't the democrats voting no on everything the rebulicans want to add by not allowing them in on the debates. And being in a locked room while they merge the two democratic bills together? What do I know? I'm just a liberal bleeding heart socialist communist [DEMONRAT]... any other labels I missed? No matter what I say it will be called propaganda or some thing worse. Nobody called you any thing. And you didn't answer my question. I asked if the democrats coulld be called the party of no because they are in a locked room merging the 2 democratic bills. No offer was made to any repulicans to join in this meeting. Damn I posted a whole lengthy reply and it didn't post cuz my dial up went down.. argh Anyway when people call democrats, [Democrats] as Raider did and say they only want to tie the hands of the opposition that's just plain ignorant. Because people are democrats doesn't' mean they are unwilling to work with the other side. But in the case of health care those against it is pretty telling when you find out who they are really standing up for, namely the insurers themselves. I have been watching cspan where the lawmakers themselves are debating. I can't get any information worth anything on the news frankly. So from that point of view it is the republicans mostly fighting this tooth and nail and the blue dog conservatives on the left. Why closed doors? I have no bloody idea, I would like to know if that is how it works or if it's by design or if the Dem's figure if the republicans don't want to actually participate why let them in. I don't know. I would like to see a list of the most important parts of the combined bills and then see who voted yes and who voted no. But that final bill is not here yet. Conservatives on left and right are Both saying no, but so far from what I can tell it's always no on specific things. If we can't compremise here at mingle, how do we expect them to do it in washington. I make the distinction between democrat and Democrat with a capital 'D' because I object to the way the media uses the term "Democratic" to describe the Democrat Party.. as if to say the opposition isn't democratic, don't follow or honor the priciples of democracy... They are the Democrat Party.. not the only party representing democracy.. The 'Demoncrat' was just a typo at first but it seemed appropo and I stuck with it.. You can't say the Republican "don't want to participate". That's a specious assumption. Of course they want to participate. Of course they want to help reform the health care system is the United States. But they have very different views on the ways in which it should be done. Empowering and encouraging individuals by making certain healthcare expenses tax deductible, promoting **actual** competition by eliminating the federal restrictions preventing you and I from purchasing and carrying insurance plans across state lines, carry out meaningful tort reform.. Those are the things Republican would like to see occur and they are relatively passive Opposed to the way Democrats want to do it which is by creating a massive new, massively expensive government bureaucracy which will promote it's own dominion and monopoly over the system.. How can you call it "choice and competition" when the only entity which will be available to compete in all 50 States will be the so-called "Public Option".. one which inherently is operated by the regulating entity.. That's not choice and competition.. that's a monopoly.. I'll make you an analogy.. Let's play a game of one-on-one basketball.. but here's the deal. I get to be referee. I get to make the rules. Oh and I get to change them whenever I want to and apply them as I choose.. who do you think will win that game? We have a monopoly right now in insurance. and as for: 'Empowering and encouraging individuals by making certain healthcare expenses tax deductible, promoting **actual** competition by eliminating the federal restrictions preventing you and I from purchasing and carrying insurance plans across state lines, carry out meaningful tort reform.. Those are the things Republican would like to see occur and they are relatively passive' These are all things that are being considered right now. I also believe we need tort reform badly but not so badly that we turn it completely around and leave people in danger from bad doctors etc. So I'll stop right here and no longer respond, I can't really argue a bill that isn't even finished anyway. I can only say that with out competition, real competition the insurers will not stop gouging people and denying them services. I am not convinced insurers will allow competition, period, especially after what they said yesterday. I don't give a hoot about arguments between two sides about how the word democratic is used by anyone. I try to use terms correctly. So you won't find me twisting the names of either side. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now Rahm Emanuel has democratic senaters in a locked room working on combining their 2 bills. No repulicans were invited. There goes bipartisanship OUT THE WINDOW! And what happened to that whole TRANSPARENCY thing? Not sure how you have bipartisan with one side voting no one everything and doing everything they can to prevent it in the first place. boo do you not think the repubicans would be more wiling to vote yes on something if they could be involved in the debate and what is out in the bill. Aren't the democrats voting no on everything the rebulicans want to add by not allowing them in on the debates. And being in a locked room while they merge the two democratic bills together? What do I know? I'm just a liberal bleeding heart socialist communist [DEMONRAT]... any other labels I missed? No matter what I say it will be called propaganda or some thing worse. Nobody called you any thing. And you didn't answer my question. I asked if the democrats coulld be called the party of no because they are in a locked room merging the 2 democratic bills. No offer was made to any repulicans to join in this meeting. Damn I posted a whole lengthy reply and it didn't post cuz my dial up went down.. argh Anyway when people call democrats, [Democrats] as Raider did and say they only want to tie the hands of the opposition that's just plain ignorant. Because people are democrats doesn't' mean they are unwilling to work with the other side. But in the case of health care those against it is pretty telling when you find out who they are really standing up for, namely the insurers themselves. I have been watching cspan where the lawmakers themselves are debating. I can't get any information worth anything on the news frankly. So from that point of view it is the republicans mostly fighting this tooth and nail and the blue dog conservatives on the left. Why closed doors? I have no bloody idea, I would like to know if that is how it works or if it's by design or if the Dem's figure if the republicans don't want to actually participate why let them in. I don't know. I would like to see a list of the most important parts of the combined bills and then see who voted yes and who voted no. But that final bill is not here yet. Conservatives on left and right are Both saying no, but so far from what I can tell it's always no on specific things. If we can't compremise here at mingle, how do we expect them to do it in washington. I make the distinction between democrat and Democrat with a capital 'D' because I object to the way the media uses the term "Democratic" to describe the Democrat Party.. as if to say the opposition isn't democratic, don't follow or honor the priciples of democracy... They are the Democrat Party.. not the only party representing democracy.. The 'Demoncrat' was just a typo at first but it seemed appropo and I stuck with it.. You can't say the Republican "don't want to participate". That's a specious assumption. Of course they want to participate. Of course they want to help reform the health care system is the United States. But they have very different views on the ways in which it should be done. Empowering and encouraging individuals by making certain healthcare expenses tax deductible, promoting **actual** competition by eliminating the federal restrictions preventing you and I from purchasing and carrying insurance plans across state lines, carry out meaningful tort reform.. Those are the things Republican would like to see occur and they are relatively passive Opposed to the way Democrats want to do it which is by creating a massive new, massively expensive government bureaucracy which will promote it's own dominion and monopoly over the system.. How can you call it "choice and competition" when the only entity which will be available to compete in all 50 States will be the so-called "Public Option".. one which inherently is operated by the regulating entity.. That's not choice and competition.. that's a monopoly.. I'll make you an analogy.. Let's play a game of one-on-one basketball.. but here's the deal. I get to be referee. I get to make the rules. Oh and I get to change them whenever I want to and apply them as I choose.. who do you think will win that game? We have a monopoly right now in insurance. and as for: 'Empowering and encouraging individuals by making certain healthcare expenses tax deductible, promoting **actual** competition by eliminating the federal restrictions preventing you and I from purchasing and carrying insurance plans across state lines, carry out meaningful tort reform.. Those are the things Republican would like to see occur and they are relatively passive' These are all things that are being considered right now. I also believe we need tort reform badly but not so badly that we turn it completely around and leave people in danger from bad doctors etc. So I'll stop right here and no longer respond, I can't really argue a bill that isn't even finished anyway. I can only say that with out competition, real competition the insurers will not stop gouging people and denying them services. I am not convinced insurers will allow competition, period, especially after what they said yesterday. I don't give a hoot about arguments between two sides about how the word democratic is used by anyone. I try to use terms correctly. So you won't find me twisting the names of either side. Right no twisting the names just calling them names. and no there isn't one bill right now. that's what they are working on. Both bills in the house are being combinded as we speak(both dems bills) Not one repulican was invited to work on this. And none of what the repulicans are wanting to do to reform healthcare is being considered by the dems. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
raiderfan_32
on
Wed 10/14/09 03:20 PM
|
|
We have a monopoly right now in insurance. and as for: 'Empowering and encouraging individuals by making certain healthcare expenses tax deductible, promoting **actual** competition by eliminating the federal restrictions preventing you and I from purchasing and carrying insurance plans across state lines, carry out meaningful tort reform.. Those are the things Republican would like to see occur and they are relatively passive' These are all things that are being considered right now. I also believe we need tort reform badly but not so badly that we turn it completely around and leave people in danger from bad doctors etc. There are "monopolies" by virtue of FEDERAL LAW.. That can go away TOMORROW if they just repeal those laws.. There's no need for government interference in the business of insuring people.. Just allow those companies to compete across state lines.. Business owners shop for new coverage every year or so.. to get a better deal, to save money, to get better coverage for their money.. Tell me why it would be ok for the government to offer insurance in all 50 States but no one else.. why? The fact is, rather the very legitimate fear that people have is, that the purpose of the Democrat version of healthcare reform is: 1) to affect redistribution of wealth (a plainly, explicitly stated objective of Obama, and the lynch pin of his political philosophy) 2) to continue the government take-over of private industry 3) ultimately to make our system a carbon copy of European Socialist single payer healthcare systems where government (whether you want to admit it or not) has the final determination in who gets what treatment (all of which are stone-cold BROKE, by the way!) and 4) to continue to entrench the class warfare mentality and to make more progressive the already highly-progressive the income tax system.. Nearly all of the provisions in the proposed bill works to one or more of those ends.. "Public Option", subsidies for the "poor" (which includes people earning into the $75,000 - $80,000 range) while taxing "Cadillac" plans, placing the full weight of the Federal income tax burden on less than half of all wage earners in America.. Democracy fails when people make their vote an instrument of plunder. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
raiderfan_32
on
Wed 10/14/09 04:38 PM
|
|
Nevermind the unconstitutional mandate that the forthcoming law will place on individuals to purchase insurance under threat of financial penalty which could ultimately land someone in prison if they fail to meet this new obligation..
Establishing a new buearacracy and forcing people to spend their money in a particular way is the polar opposite of the way that conservatives would like to see this handled.. Make deductibles, premiums and copays, cost of prescription meds tax deductible. Enact meaningful tort reform. Eliminate the Federal Restrictions that keep people from being able to purchase and carry their health care insurance across state lines. Do these things and It's guaranteed that costs will come down But for God's sake, take the foot of the government off the throats of the American People! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE make them stop printing money!!
It's destroying the Dollar!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
MirrorMirror
on
Wed 10/14/09 10:23 PM
|
 We are now one step closer to a nightmare future where everyone has Health insurance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of now the unions don't like it either. There is a part in it where there is a tax on the "cadillac" policies and that would affect most union members. They are sposed to be saying something about it. There is no public option in it. Goes to the senate on the 26th I believe I heard. Where they can change itfrom the way it came to them. I don't like that it doesn't have a public option. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The funniest thing is because 1 repulican voted for it Obama is calling it a bipartisan bill. I allmost spit my coffee out when I heard that 
That's because Baucus made it more of a bipartisan bill. He took away the public option to please the Republicans. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now Rahm Emanuel has democratic senaters in a locked room working on combining their 2 bills. No repulicans were invited. There goes bipartisanship OUT THE WINDOW! And what happened to that whole TRANSPARENCY thing? Not sure how you have bipartisan with one side voting no one everything and doing everything they can to prevent it in the first place. boo do you not think the repubicans would be more wiling to vote yes on something if they could be involved in the debate and what is out in the bill. Aren't the democrats voting no on everything the rebulicans want to add by not allowing them in on the debates. And being in a locked room while they merge the two democratic bills together? You don't understand, do you, TJ? The Demoncrat idea of bipartisanship is "Do what I want and keep your mouth shut. We do not want to hear your ideas and we don't care that you have ideas in the first place" and the Demoncrat's purpose of "reaching across the isle" is to put a pair of handcuffs on anyone that extends to them their hand.. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Republicans are the party of "No". They know very well that when this reform passes, they are toast. They are fighting for their political lives and will do anything to stop this reform. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We are now one step closer to a nightmare future where everyone has Health insurance
lol,,oh what WILL be next? , a future where everyone has food and shelter? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We are now one step closer to a nightmare future where everyone has Health insurance
lol,,oh what WILL be next? , a future where everyone has food and shelter? And we will all be speaking Chinese( no Quiet I don't know which dialect)Because of all the money we borrow from them to pay for it. Can you say Yuan. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We are now one step closer to a nightmare future where everyone has Health insurance
lol,,oh what WILL be next? , a future where everyone has food and shelter? Hope springs eternal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
MirrorMirror
on
Thu 10/15/09 05:54 PM
|
 The president and CEO of Guardian Life Insurance Company called people with muscular distrophy "dogs".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The president and CEO of Guardian Life Insurance Company called people with muscular distrophy "dogs".
Really? 
|
|
|
|
|
