Obama the Crybaby Liberal

[Skanky Butterpuss]

this is definitely change that my can believe in!

[Scuzzy]

There ya go kiddo, all better.

[BinaryLife]

[quote=Scuzzy;467982]

Originally Posted by BinaryLife

The part where I get fuzzy, is that republicans are denying this plan outright without caring what its results are.[/quotes]

Examples, or rhetoric?



Actually the current situation has been caused by liberal policies, not conservative ones, but I'd be happy to hear how you feel conservatives started the high cost of health care. Which parts of the conservative solution do you disagree with?



People do not need "new health care", the quality of our health care is just fine. The issue that seems to get the most press is the cost of health care and the cost of health care insurance, both of which are easily fixed. Nothing in ObamaCare does either.



No, it is not. It's imposing government controls that will cause them to get poorer health care and drive up the cost.

Tell me this, the "can't deny coverage based on previous medical conditions", do you agree with that idea? Do you believe that someone who's never paid for insurance should be able to buy it once they are sick and have everything paid for?

Scuzzy

I see republicans on every news channel except Fox saying how little impact on the bill they have when they bill has been re-rewritten many times for them. I hear talk of death panels when none exist. I see and hear dishonest negative propaganda all the time and once the lie gets found out they just move to another lie as if it never happened.

I do believe that Scuzzy. I also remember a complaint about how people who do not contribute are to be fined in the same fashion as a car. Their fine would no doubt contribute. But you are now complaining that without that there it is unfair. I don't like saying it but Jon Stewart was right. You, in this instance remind me of republicans as a whole complaining that various details are not fair and then when they are given what they want, they complain about that too.

They wanted transparency and received, but then it was a trap as I recall a ploy to.... give them exactly what they asked for. This is was my respect for republicans has drifted down the drains. They are merely fighting for the sake of fighting. What's more frustrating is that you have to be intelligent to do what they are doing. These morally bankrupt or disenfranchised politicians are not helping America. (that comment however also applies to democrats who I believe are trying, and like more than the republicans, but are still behaving terribly and appear to me equally bankrupt in morals)

[Scuzzy]

[quote=BinaryLife;468018]

Originally Posted by Scuzzy

I see republicans on every news channel except Fox saying how little impact on the bill they have when they bill has been re-rewritten many times for them. I hear talk of death panels when none exist. I see and hear dishonest negative propaganda all the time and once the lie gets found out they just move to another lie as if it never happened.

This bill has not been "rewritten" many times Binary, you've either been fooled by the press into believing that or your lying about it. Yes, the bill has had some sweetheart deals added to it to buy votes, and removed some other issues that even some hard core liberals couldn't stomach, but it has never been "rewritten". The face that most Americans are against this legislation while still wanting the system to be reformed should show you that. They want reform, they do NOT want THIS specific piece of legislation.

Originally Posted by BinaryLife

I do believe that Scuzzy. I also remember a complaint about how people who do not contribute are to be fined in the same fashion as a car. Their fine would no doubt contribute. But you are now complaining that without that there it is unfair. I don't like saying it but Jon Stewart was right. You, in this instance remind me of republicans as a whole complaining that various details are not fair and then when they are given what they want, they complain about that too.

Also, do you support pre-existing conditions for house fires too? I'm mean, let's be fair. Everyone needs a place to live, right? If I own a house and it catches on fire, it's just like if I get cancer. It's not my fault, it's very expensive, and I could lose everything in both instances. Should I not, by your logic, be able to buy house insurance while my house is on fire? Wouldn't that be fair? Do you know why that sounds ludicrious? Because it's not something that can be economically supported. No business can survive in that environment unless the cost of premiums is astronomical and the cost of health care tripples to cover those people. Money does not grow on trees and it doesn't just appear out of thin air.

Originally Posted by BinaryLife

They wanted transparency and received, but then it was a trap as I recall a ploy to.... give them exactly what they asked for. This is was my respect for republicans has drifted down the drains.

Are you out of your fucking mind? Transparency? Obama's own administration can't tell us how much it will cost because they don't even know what's in the bill and it's going to supposedly be voted on today. Where in the hell have you seen transparency? They make deals behind closed doors, refused to release the text of the bill, etc, etc.

Originally Posted by BinaryLife

They are merely fighting for the sake of fighting.

Wrong. They know that the American people overwhelmingly want reform but not in the changes made by this legislation. The republicans have been extremely clear about what items they want for reform, do you know what they are? Or is your liberal press not reporting that? Are you just sucking up the tired old "they're just arguing to argue" or are you comparing what they want for reforms with what the dems are trying to shove down your throat?

Scuzzy

[BinaryLife]

Scuzzy, there are many distractions. Your analogy with the house is somewhat different than a person with an existing medical condition. See, if your house in on fire, you wont get booted from your existing insurance provider. If you did, somehow, and somehow found new insurance during this process, that policy would not prevent you from claiming your house for over a year.

Medical insurance frequently prevents people from claiming existing conditions because, very simply, it's expensive and they don't want to pay it. This process while it keeps people alive, isn't very humane. Nor is walking past other civilians in need of help and unable to help themselves.

More importantly, the government isn't forcing everything they have put it to a vote based on the people put in place by our own American citizens, the same people who put Bush into office if I recall that whole fiasco revolved around the public not being properly represented. Moreover, the military gets government run health care. Do they get very good health care? Do you feel that the military health care is awful? Be careful here, of course better is always better, and you can't get good enough care for people willing to lay down their lives for the safety of their country. But the are they receive is widely regarded as being amazing. So, why is it that that with an existing government run health care plan that is considered amazing that there is so little faith in what's going on?

I do understand that the vote already processed and that the bill passed before I wrote this. This wasn't intended to gloat by any means. But I felt our conversation should conclude. While it may not impact the country, I do enjoy debating things with you. Sometimes it may be frustrating, but two people disagreeing often is. I do respect you and you no doubt know that. I think that's why I care so much about understanding this discussion better.

[Etzell]

Binary, I wouldn't waste your time. First Scuzzy bitches about how Obama hasn't changed anything, as soon as he does, Scuzzy bitches about that. It's a never-ending circle of whining.

[Scuzzy]

Originally Posted by BinaryLife

Scuzzy, there are many distractions. Your analogy with the house is somewhat different than a person with an existing medical condition. See, if your house in on fire, you wont get booted from your existing insurance provider. If you did, somehow, and somehow found new insurance during this process, that policy would not prevent you from claiming your house for over a year.

That's a states issue. Michigan does not allow an insurance company to drop someone in the middle because they are two expensive, they also require your next insurance company to cover whatever the previous one did so long as you had them for 6 months. It puts the responsibility of the individual for their coverage, if you didn't have insurance, you're fucked, but if you were responsible then new companies need to cover you since you've paid your dues to the industry as a whole. If other states aren't smart enough to do that then doing what the Republcians want: removing interstate restrictions on selling insurance, would.

Originally Posted by BinaryLife

Medical insurance frequently prevents people from claiming existing conditions because, very simply, it's expensive and they don't want to pay it. This process while it keeps people alive, isn't very humane. Nor is walking past other civilians in need of help and unable to help themselves.

If you pay for insurance and the company doesn't pay that's breach of contract, plain and simple. The idea that if you have never payed for insurance, get sick, and buy insurance to cover 1000s of dollars in expenses isn't a humane question, it's a bankrupcy question. How many insurance companies can stay in the black under those conditions? Not many. What it does mean is that you are going to pay a hell of a lot more for insurance and medical now, because someone has to cover the people that come in and get their prexisting conditions covered. The money has to come from somewhere, and it's not going to be the people that haven't had coverage.

Originally Posted by BinaryLife

More importantly, the government isn't forcing everything they have put it to a vote based on the people put in place by our own American citizens, the same people who put Bush into office if I recall that whole fiasco revolved around the public not being properly represented.

Who clearly aren't listening to what the American people want. I imagine they'll be listening later this year.

Originally Posted by BinaryLife

Moreover, the military gets government run health care. Do they get very good health care? Do you feel that the military health care is awful?

The militaries health care is covered by your tax dollars. The people in the military don't pay for premiums and have their sickness covered by those premium's investments. If they get sick, YOU pay for it. If they get sick more, the government takes more of your money. Now, tell me, how do you see that as analagous to the public health care system?

Originally Posted by BinaryLife

So, why is it that that with an existing government run health care plan that is considered amazing that there is so little faith in what's going on?

Because the government run healthcare system that is already in place: Medicaid and Medicare are BILLIONS in the red every year. They can't fix that system to work properly, we have no faith they'll be able to manage an additional 230 million people any better. If they 1) fixed Medicade and Medicare so that they could pay for themselves or 2) ran a pilot program to prove it was solvent I'd believe they could do it. They have been unable to do either in the decades previous.

Etzell, you're being a whiny crybaby bitch. If you don't want to debate, shut the fuck up kiddo.

Scuzzy

[stray kitten]

Originally Posted by YomMamasHouse

You people can turn anything into a drama. Pretty much every other country in the world has the healthcare Obama is proposing and they are not socialist regimes. Our governments do not have absolute power, they just allocate funds. They aren't allowed to withhold medical care because someone pissed them off.

oh lord...

[Etzell]

Originally Posted by Scuzzy

Etzell, you're being a whiny crybaby bitch. If you don't want to debate, shut the fuck up kiddo.

Scuzzy

The title of this thread and every other "OMG DEMS WON MY VAGINA HURTS" thread you've posted in the past 4 months makes it painfully obvious that you don't want to debate.

[Scuzzy]

Originally Posted by Etzell

The title of this thread and every other "OMG DEMS WON MY VAGINA HURTS" thread you've posted in the past 4 months makes it painfully obvious that you don't want to debate.

No, the fact that you whiny crybabies don't want to debate proves you know you made a historically big mistake. Throughout Bush's presidency you bitched and whined and the conservatives here either agreed with you on some points or defended our policies in others. Throughout Obama's change, aside from a very limited few, there's been dead silence. You know you didn't get what you wanted, you know what he's doing is trampling on the consititution, and you have no way to defend his wacko policies. When Bush did things wrong you wanted to blame it on conservatives, now that Obama's doing in some cases the exact same thing Bush did or worse, you're too afraid to say anything, you don't even have the principles to stand up for. It shows your issues with Bush were lip service bullshit.

Scuzzy

[Etzell]

No, Scuzzy. The reason I don't "engage" you in "debate" anymore is because doing so is useless. You've proven time and time again that you're not interested in debate, as much as you are pointless party bashing. Beating your head against a wall is only fun for so long. That explains my silence on the issue. I'd imagine the IP ban you levied on uber explains his silence on the issue.
Anything else you'd like to be wrong about?

[BinaryLife]

Originally Posted by Scuzzy

No, the fact that you whiny crybabies don't want to debate proves you know you made a historically big mistake. Throughout Bush's presidency you bitched and whined and the conservatives here either agreed with you on some points or defended our policies in others. Throughout Obama's change, aside from a very limited few, there's been dead silence. You know you didn't get what you wanted, you know what he's doing is trampling on the consititution, and you have no way to defend his wacko policies. When Bush did things wrong you wanted to blame it on conservatives, now that Obama's doing in some cases the exact same thing Bush did or worse, you're too afraid to say anything, you don't even have the principles to stand up for. It shows your issues with Bush were lip service bullshit.

Scuzzy

Since you brought up Bush, I feel the need to question something. There was a time when Bush won his second term. The majority of the country's popular vote was in favor of Al Gore. But Bush won anyway. Democrats were naturally appalled by this and did not like it very much. The republicans on the other hand were ready to defend it drastically. They chastised the dems for not supporting their president. They hounded them consistently for their displays of disagreement. I honestly don't see how you can have such a short memory. It seems to fade so quickly from your mind.

Of course at least the democrats had the popular vote on their side. Just as they do now. The republicans seem to not be able to handle the fact that the majority of this country disagrees with them. They have no popular vote here. But they say they do, as you no doubt will very shortly. They insist the bill says and does things that it does not say and do. I saw a whole speech about how awful it was the the bill favored government sponsored abortions. It does no such thing. The comment was dishonest. So is the republican party. I would rather them propose honest, sincere oppositions to the bill than make up lies and propaganda to get their way.

[Iggy]

Originally Posted by Innoc

Government is never about how to help the people. It's always how to build and expand a powerbase for the government. The healthcare debate isn't about healthcare it's about an attempt to take even greater power and control over a large economic element of the US.

I heard an interesting comment this last week. If full gov't control of health care is such a great thing why not spend more time analyzing the successes and failures in Massachusetts? Or why not try to set up a pilot program that demonstrates the viability and efficacy of the proposed program? Could it be that it's not about healthcare but a grab for power?

My .02...ymmv

QFMFT!!!!

[stray kitten]

Originally Posted by Etzell

No, Scuzzy. The reason I don't "engage" you in "debate" anymore is because doing so is useless. You've proven time and time again that you're not interested in debate, as much as you are pointless party bashing. Beating your head against a wall is only fun for so long. That explains my silence on the issue. I'd imagine the IP ban you levied on uber explains his silence on the issue.
Anything else you'd like to be wrong about?

Was wondering why uber wasn't hanging about

[stray kitten]

Originally Posted by BinaryLife

They insist the bill says and does things that it does not say and do. I saw a whole speech about how awful it was the the bill favored government sponsored abortions. It does no such thing. The comment was dishonest. So is the republican party. I would rather them propose honest, sincere oppositions to the bill than make up lies and propaganda to get their way.

You do realize that Obama had to make ANOTHER last minute deal to swing (and ensure) the bill passed. That deal is an executive order outside the bill to make it clear on "government sponsored abortion". This order was promised to swing half a dozen DEMOCRATS who did not like wording in the bill. If the abortion concern was dishonest why the back deals democrats an a promise order? One of the reasons I think the bill is "evil" is the rush of changes and general panic to pass it at all cost. I bet most of congress didn't get a chance to really understand it. As far as I can tell the pro life movement is also not happy with the order because the statues already passed congress and the order is in draft unless Obama singed it today..

If the vast majority wants this bill we would not have had all the dirty politics and party threats internal to the DNC. It's going to ba a couple of election before I can think about voting democrat again.

[BinaryLife]

Originally Posted by stray kitten

You do realize that Obama had to make ANOTHER last minute deal to swing (and ensure) the bill passed. That deal is an executive order outside the bill to make it clear on "government sponsored abortion". This order was promised to swing half a dozen DEMOCRATS who did not like wording in the bill. If the abortion concern was dishonest why the back deals democrats an a promise order? One of the reasons I think the bill is "evil" is the rush of changes and general panic to pass it at all cost. I bet most of congress didn't get a chance to really understand it. As far as I can tell the pro life movement is also not happy with the order because the statues already passed congress and the order is in draft unless Obama singed it today..

If the vast majority wants this bill we would not have had all the dirty politics and party threats internal to the DNC. It's going to ba a couple of election before I can think about voting democrat again.

So your point is that Obama changed the bill to better suit the opinions of the people who were voting it into law? Seriously? That's your point? You're right, it sucks when the democratic process works exactly as it should and you have to eat crow. You can't have it both ways dude.

The argument I was referring to happened after the bill was voted into law. It was an effort to appeal the decision even though this part of the bill was already removed.

[Scuzzy]

Originally Posted by BinaryLife

Since you brought up Bush, I feel the need to question something. There was a time when Bush won his second term. The majority of the country's popular vote was in favor of Al Gore. But Bush won anyway. Democrats were naturally appalled by this and did not like it very much. The republicans on the other hand were ready to defend it drastically. They chastised the dems for not supporting their president. They hounded them consistently for their displays of disagreement. I honestly don't see how you can have such a short memory. It seems to fade so quickly from your mind.

Republicans defended it because they followed the constitution, the Dems wanted to throw the rules out the window. Just like they WANTED to do this weekend, but were able to twist enough arms where they didn't have too. I don't have a short memory, everything is crystal clear, the republicans defend the constitution while the dems shit all over it.

Originally Posted by BinaryLife

Of course at least the democrats had the popular vote on their side. Just as they do now. The republicans seem to not be able to handle the fact that the majority of this country disagrees with them. They have no popular vote here. But they say they do, as you no doubt will very shortly. They insist the bill says and does things that it does not say and do. I saw a whole speech about how awful it was the the bill favored government sponsored abortions. It does no such thing. The comment was dishonest. So is the republican party. I would rather them propose honest, sincere oppositions to the bill than make up lies and propaganda to get their way.

Propoganda? Really. Here's the republican stance:

What do you believe will happen to the cost of insurance now that they must cover EVERYONE who comes to their door? The people that are very sick, no matter what their condition, no matter that they never paid for medical insurance in the past. Everyone. So, your an insurance company... what will you do:

Will you raise premium rates to offset those costs, or lower them?
Will you cut the percentage of coverage for all services, or increase them?
Will you raise deductables or lower them?

Tell me again how you think this bill is going to make insurance affordable for all Americans.. No rhetoric, give me your honest logical opinion on what you think insurance companies will have to do to cover these costs.

Scuzzy

[BinaryLife]

Originally Posted by Scuzzy

Republicans defended it because they followed the constitution, the Dems wanted to throw the rules out the window. Just like they WANTED to do this weekend, but were able to twist enough arms where they didn't have too. I don't have a short memory, everything is crystal clear, the republicans defend the constitution while the dems shit all over it.



Propoganda? Really. Here's the republican stance:

What do you believe will happen to the cost of insurance now that they must cover EVERYONE who comes to their door? The people that are very sick, no matter what their condition, no matter that they never paid for medical insurance in the past. Everyone. So, your an insurance company... what will you do:

Will you raise premium rates to offset those costs, or lower them?
Will you cut the percentage of coverage for all services, or increase them?
Will you raise deductables or lower them?

Tell me again how you think this bill is going to make insurance affordable for all Americans.. No rhetoric, give me your honest logical opinion on what you think insurance companies will have to do to cover these costs.

Scuzzy

My honest opinion is that insurance companies will experience a loss of funds during a transition process and then level back out. Meanwhile, America gets some of its soul back and less people have problems. These regulations and this law are good for this country. I firmly, honestly believe that. I also believe that the majority of the American people are in support of this law.

[Credge]

Originally Posted by BinaryLife

My honest opinion is that insurance companies will experience a loss of funds during a transition process and then level back out. Meanwhile, America gets some of its soul back and less people have problems. These regulations and this law are good for this country. I firmly, honestly believe that. I also believe that the majority of the American people are in support of this law.

Do you believe I should be forced to participate?

[Scuzzy]

Originally Posted by BinaryLife

My honest opinion is that insurance companies will experience a loss of funds during a transition process and then level back out. Meanwhile, America gets some of its soul back and less people have problems. These regulations and this law are good for this country. I firmly, honestly believe that. I also believe that the majority of the American people are in support of this law.

I know you have more then just a gut feeling on that, can you explain the economics involved in how you believe things will "level back"? Also, exactly what indications have the health insurance companies given you stating they're willing to take this loss? Also, where are you getting your information to support that the majority of Americans want this specific piece of legislation (notice I did not say reform, I am using your example)?

Scuzzy