More lies on Healthcare.

[Oscar54]

I totally disagree. Funny, we actually HAVE universal healthcare in this country. It's been in place for several years now. The only universal healthcare in this country is found in Massachusetts and was the work of Mitt Romney, a conservative republican, working hand in hand with Ted Kennedy and the democrats in the state legislature, as well as the doctors, insurance companies, republicans, experts, etc.

The Gaggle : Romney on Obama's Push For Health Reform: Slow Down

This is the single most experienced person in the country when it comes to designing, passing, and implementing sweeping universal healthcare reform, yet he has been ignored by the administration. Weird. He wants to be involved, he wants to work with both sides of the aisle to pass the RIGHT bill, but the left doesn't want to play.

Your arguments that we need to pass something without understanding what it is, what it will cost, what effect it will have on our families, on our children and grandchildren, our economy as a whole, given the fact that our president's central goal is to reduce that cost burden while every analysis of it shows that it will instead increase that burden, is completely absurd.

First off, don't put words in my mouth. My argument is not to pass something without understanding it, that is your spin.

My point, which you will continue to ignore, is that the Republicans have openly stated that if they can deny Obama heath care reform they can break him, that it will be his "Waterloo", etc.

So you can stop with this total BS that the Republicans are trying to be constructive or fiscally prudent, or that they give a S*^T about yours or my grandchildren. The Republicans don't care about you, Cuba, unless you are wealthy or a major corporation that gives millions to the RNC.

That is the sad reality, but you can continue to defend the Republicans if you want.

PS: Mitt Romney was against this health care reform, but had a veto proof majority against him. Now, that it has been successful though, he was all for it and it was his idea, just like all those other lies he told when running for the Republican nomination that ruined his candidacy.

 

[Oscar54]

As a person who has been a patient/subject of goverment provided health care I am skeptical until I see the meat and potatos of the plan; eg: how will it specifically work. So far we've been given a very board peep of what that plan will be. Yes I understand the Congress and Senate subcommittees are working on it but so far Prez O has only presented the happy version.

My experiance with the Army medical system and the VA system are both good and very bad. Good in that the price is right, free. Bad in that I never saw the same Dr. twice. The wait to get service was longish at times too.

Now what I experianced is based on a massive clinic type system, not an individual provider, so it will be a little different, I think, of what the Prez is proposing.

When I returned from Iraq I had 180 days of health care from the Army. Step 1) get a full physical. This required three trips; 120 miles each visit. From the time I learned the system, requested the appointment and then completed the physical it took 6 weeks. Then I needed the orthopedic surgen. About 3 weeks to see him, then I had to sign up for another type over government health insurance to receive physical therapy so I wouldn't have to drive 120 miles round trip. During my PT I had another three visits with the Ortho for evaluation, 120 miles a trip, and saw a DIFFERENT surgen each time. Two surgens wanted to operate, two did not. My doctor in Kuwait recommended I should have surgery. Ugh!!! I finally gave up. The whole process took almost 5 months.

The VA was actually pretty good, if I want to my local clinic. If I want to the bigger city location it was a nightmare. The local place was very timely with the larger place was HUGE waits, and the closed promptly at 4:00 pm. Getting an appointment could take months, yes months. Many of the VA workers complained of too many people and not being able to keep up. I also noticed that the Drs were either very old or very young...hmmm...

Now if the Prez can keep us at our own Drs, not overly ration care and services it may work. My concern like others is of very slow response, added cost to the government and increased taxes.

I guess we'll have to wait and see.

The fact that you have to go through this not right! If we send our soldiers off to war we should pay to fix them up when they get back.

I suspect the root of the problem is more to do with funding than bad doctors and bureaucracy. Congress always seems to want the best hardware but skimps on the soldiers health care.

Maybe if we can get off the dime on health care reform, the issue of only being able to be treated by VA doctors instead of your personal doctor can be addressed. The VA after all was in response to WWII vets medical needs and has continued on with inadequate funding.

 

[Cuba]

First off, don't put words in my mouth. My argument is not to pass something without understanding it, that is your spin.

My point, which you will continue to ignore, is that the Republicans have openly stated that if they can deny Obama heath care reform they can break him, that it will be his "Waterloo", etc.

So you can stop with this total BS that the Republicans are trying to be constructive or fiscally prudent, or that they give a S*^T about yours or my grandchildren. The Republicans don't care about you, Cuba, unless you are wealthy or a major corporation that gives millions to the RNC.

That is the sad reality, but you can continue to defend the Republicans if you want.

PS: Mitt Romney was against this health care reform, but had a veto proof majority against him. Now, that it has been successful though, he was all for it and it was his idea, just like all those other lies he told when running for the Republican nomination that ruined his candidacy.

Talk about biased! You cannot see the forest for the trees, as the saying goes. The republican party is not a person. It does not have one voice, it does not have one goal, and it is not evil. It is a collection of elected officials, many share similar beliefs on fiscal constraint, some don't (bush). The republican party did not announce that it's plan is to obstruct healthcare reform for political gain, one member out of over 200 made that point. Your belief that all republicans are evil, big corporate focussed, uncaring, self absorbed slippery politicians is grossly prejudiced. It is true that there are members of both parties that share these traits. It is true that Obama received more campaign donations from big corporations than anyone else in history, and has subsequently paid those same corporations more tax payer dollars than anyone else in history. You are just so intensly onesided and overly simplistic in your arguments and you beliefs that you needn't open your mouth, we already know your opinion will be blind faith in the administration and blind hatred and mistrust for anyone that criticizes what they are doing.

The fact that it is the democrats standing in the way of this plan is very telling. The president has failed to properly sell this plan to his own party. There is very little concensus amongst anyone, but what is clear is that the more liberal members are the ones in charge and don't care for the opinions of republicans, conservative democrats, or even moderate democrats. As a result the majority of American people are not confident in congress, and as of today are not confident in the president. Obama's approval rating is below 50% as of today. The number of people that expect their cost to increase as a reult of this plan is 76% as of yesterday, and the number of people that expect their quality of healthcare to decline as a result is 60%, vs. 23% that believe it will actually improve. This week the democrats in congress have interestingly said EXACTLY what I have been saying all along (and you have been dismissing as obstructionism). Harry Reid said we need more time to get it right and will not ram through an incomplete bill. Sounds reasonable right? :thumbup: The president himself has mirrored my statements (only after it became clear that he would not be able to strong arm his party into a premature vote on an incomlplete bill, saying it's okay to take more time, that we have to get it right.

No republicans, including Mr. Waterloo, have advocated doing nothing. The president has made great strides at getting bipartisan support for reform that will DECREASE this cost burden on our country, it is impressive what he has done and I applaud him for that. The problem though, is in delivering. I love what I'm hearing in terms of rhetoric and goals, and am appauled by what I see in these bills.

BTW- Take a look at what universal healthcare has done in the 2 states that passed it into law. Tennessee and Massachucetts. Both have seen incredible rising costs, TN dropped it altogether and MA is on an unsustainable path. So we can clearly see that universal healthcare has very large risks involved. What you don't hear the president saying is "sustainablility". Whatever plan we pass, and I believe we will pass something this year, has to not only work now, but it must work many years down the road. Estimates on the current proposals, by law, cannot go out further than 10 years. As a result politicians "backload" the increasing costs, showing a decent average but ignoring the cost growth afterward.

I have gotten my wish though, they will not be able to steamroll an incomplete bill through as they had planned, and instead will need to prove their case, provide specifics, and work with moderates and conservatives to pass anything at all (these being the bluedogs). In doing so they may be able to gain republican support as well, which politically is important should something go wrong. We're all in it together.

 

[Oscar54]

Talk about biased! You cannot see the forest for the trees, as the saying goes. The republican party is not a person. It does not have one voice, it does not have one goal, and it is not evil. It is a collection of elected officials, many share similar beliefs on fiscal constraint, some don't (bush). The republican party did not announce that it's plan is to obstruct healthcare reform for political gain, one member out of over 200 made that point. Your belief that all republicans are evil, big corporate focussed, uncaring, self absorbed slippery politicians is grossly prejudiced. It is true that there are members of both parties that share these traits. It is true that Obama received more campaign donations from big corporations than anyone else in history, and has subsequently paid those same corporations more tax payer dollars than anyone else in history. You are just so intensly onesided and overly simplistic in your arguments and you beliefs that you needn't open your mouth, we already know your opinion will be blind faith in the administration and blind hatred and mistrust for anyone that criticizes what they are doing.

The fact that it is the democrats standing in the way of this plan is very telling. The president has failed to properly sell this plan to his own party. There is very little concensus amongst anyone, but what is clear is that the more liberal members are the ones in charge and don't care for the opinions of republicans, conservative democrats, or even moderate democrats. As a result the majority of American people are not confident in congress, and as of today are not confident in the president. Obama's approval rating is below 50% as of today. The number of people that expect their cost to increase as a reult of this plan is 76% as of yesterday, and the number of people that expect their quality of healthcare to decline as a result is 60%, vs. 23% that believe it will actually improve. This week the democrats in congress have interestingly said EXACTLY what I have been saying all along (and you have been dismissing as obstructionism). Harry Reid said we need more time to get it right and will not ram through an incomplete bill. Sounds reasonable right? :thumbup: The president himself has mirrored my statements (only after it became clear that he would not be able to strong arm his party into a premature vote on an incomlplete bill, saying it's okay to take more time, that we have to get it right.

No republicans, including Mr. Waterloo, have advocated doing nothing. The president has made great strides at getting bipartisan support for reform that will DECREASE this cost burden on our country, it is impressive what he has done and I applaud him for that. The problem though, is in delivering. I love what I'm hearing in terms of rhetoric and goals, and am appauled by what I see in these bills.

BTW- Take a look at what universal healthcare has done in the 2 states that passed it into law. Tennessee and Massachucetts. Both have seen incredible rising costs, TN dropped it altogether and MA is on an unsustainable path. So we can clearly see that universal healthcare has very large risks involved. What you don't hear the president saying is "sustainablility". Whatever plan we pass, and I believe we will pass something this year, has to not only work now, but it must work many years down the road. Estimates on the current proposals, by law, cannot go out further than 10 years. As a result politicians "backload" the increasing costs, showing a decent average but ignoring the cost growth afterward.

I have gotten my wish though, they will not be able to steamroll an incomplete bill through as they had planned, and instead will need to prove their case, provide specifics, and work with moderates and conservatives to pass anything at all (these being the bluedogs). In doing so they may be able to gain republican support as well, which politically is important should something go wrong. We're all in it together.

You can pretend that it is a lone Republican who said denying Obama health care would break him is only his wish and not the party's, but then explain why its the 9 Democrats that are holding it up in the Senate and all 40 Republican's are against it? And now you are bashing Mitt?

I admit I think the Republicans are a bunch of LSOS! I'm not a mindless cheerleader for Democrats either, I think allot of them are pussies in the face of Republican intimidation and suffer from Corporate malfeasance, but unfortunately they are all I got!

Here's one for you, and I'm not kidding, I think the Republican Party (not you) is a criminal organization masquerading as political party, that way they can commit treasonous acts like Bush and Cheney did with Enron, Haliburton, Abu Ghaibe, Guantanamo, and the Iraq War, and not have to go to jail because they did it under color of the Government and knowing that the Democrats are too pussy to prosecute them! Put that in your pipe and smoke it! But that is way off topic.

So, please prove me wrong! Name me one thing. Just one thing that the Republicans ever did in the last 30 years, if ever, that was for the benefit of the middle class worker or the poor. Just give me one instance. And a couple of % points on tax rates don't count because the wealthy got more, and the middle class gave up deductions, like credit card and car loan interest.

Balls in your court

 

[Cuba]

You can pretend that it is a lone Republican who said denying Obama health care would break him is only his wish and not the party's, but then explain why its the 9 Democrats that are holding it up in the Senate and all 40 Republican's are against it? And now you are bashing Mitt?

I admit I think the Republicans are a bunch of LSOS! I'm not a mindless cheerleader for Democrats either, I think allot of them are pussies in the face of Republican intimidation and suffer from Corporate malfeasance, but unfortunately they are all I got!

Here's one for you, and I'm not kidding, I think the Republican Party (not you) is a criminal organization masquerading as political party, that way they can commit treasonous acts like Bush and Cheney did with Enron, Haliburton, Abu Ghaibe, Guantanamo, and the Iraq War, and not have to go to jail because they did it under color of the Government and knowing that the Democrats are too pussy to prosecute them! Put that in your pipe and smoke it! But that is way off topic.

So, please prove me wrong! Name me one thing. Just one thing that the Republicans ever did in the last 30 years, if ever, that was for the benefit of the middle class worker or the poor. Just give me one instance. And a couple of % points on tax rates don't count because the wealthy got more, and the middle class gave up deductions, like credit card and car loan interest.

Balls in your court

Well well well, the truth comes out. Remember, it's also 52 democratic house reps, not just 9 senators. Here is the problem with your, and the president and the far left's view, of what should happen. They believe that they have the answer, that they alone are best suited to make these decisions and to dictate what will happen. <-- this, by the way, is how most people think, I'm right, you're wrong, we're doing it my way because that's what's best. The problem here is that this is AMERICA, where we live in a DEMOCRACY, where our elected officials are tasked with representing the will of the people, you don't have the same power as a dictator. The democrats are representing their constituents. The republicans are doing the same. But the president is not. Nancy Pelosi's constituents are in favor of what she is doing, but the majority of Americans are very opposed. The majority of Americans DO NOT WANT the current bills to pass. They don't. They want cost cutting reform, not cost increasing reform. It is his job to come up with solutions that are best for the country, not that are best for a small percentage of extremists, or wat is best to buy a lot of votes. We are a moderate country, not an extreme liberal one whether they accept that fact or not. The people were rightly fed up with the way things were going over the past few years, but the person they voted for was not running a campaign of opaque government takeover and extremist liberal policies. Quite the contrary, they voted for someone promissing bipartisan solutions in extremely transparent fashion, listening, not dictating (remember?) but instead we have gone from right wing partisan solutions to left wing partisan solutions. We are seeing cowboy politics (what they crucified all republicans for) except that it is now directed squarely on the American people and in the opposite political direction.

These same democrats standing up against this policy were the ones that were steamrolled on the climate change bill and hung out to dry by Obama and Pelosi. They voted for something that their constituents are not in favor of. They were strong armed and threatened into voting for something that does not represent what their constituents want. They are aware that their own approval ratings have suffered greatly because of that. Look at Specter, he's dead politically because of his vote on the "stimulus". He voted against the will of his constituents whom it was his sworn duty to represent in the senate. There is a cost associated with doing that, one that he wasn't willing to face, and so he betrayed his party for personal political survival. Now he's going to be destroyed by the democrat running against him in the primaries. The political system actually does work in that regard, if you don't represent the people, they won't vote for you. You SHOULD make decisions based on your reelection, based on politics, but the problem stems from making those decisions based on ammassing enough campaign dollars to bury your opponent rather than truely representing your constituency.

The point is the way our country works, the way it was designed, was to prevent the very thing that almost happened this week. Our officials are not supposed to vote against the will of the people and then look to the president to protect them with free advertising and fundraising. They are not supposed to be able to make wreckless decisions without debate, compromise, and bipartisan support. The system is not designed to allow an extremist minority group to control the outcome of the vote, it is designed for checks and balances, for moderation, for a representative democracy. What you seem to favor is a dictatorial system of government in which you can ignore the people and just dictate what YOU want to happen, as long as it's an extremely liberal dictator. Which is ironically exactly what you were arguing AGAINST when it was someone else's views being pushed onto you. What you seem to lust for is revenge.

The left had a golden opportunity to actually change the status quo in this regard. Obama's approval ratings and political capital at the onset were extremely strong, and the majority of the population was strongly in favor of what he was saying. He was RIGHT when he said these things, but I believe he was too tempted to go the easy route. He chose to dictate rather than cooperate, he chose to threaten and strongarm ("We're keeping score buddy") rather than convince and work towards a universal solution. He fell into the trap and thought if he could act quickly enough he could get all his porposals passed before they were questioned. He didn't see this as wrong, he saw it as an opportunity for change. The problem is it is not only incredibly unrealistic to believe you could get everything right on your own with no time to double check your own work, but also unrealistic to think that the people would not raise red flags when they see you breaking your promises and taking a far left sprint towards something we hadn't signed on for or expected. He overreached.

He could get away with that at the start, but not anymore. Our system of government has it's strengths and it's weaknesses. A dictator can quickly and easily bring about sweeping reforms, but a president must act more carefully, more conservatively, because (as he stated) it isn't about him and what he wants, it's about us. He must state his case and convince the people BEFORE he can proceed, not after the fact. Our process is actually working right now.

This is common sense in all walks of life. If you have a problem you don't write someone with no experience or track record in that area a blank check without any details whatsoever and expect it will get done right. You talk, you listen, you challenge, you debate, you question, you compromise, and bottom line you understand what it is you want (lower healthcare costs and sustainability) and how specifically you plan to get there, BEFORE you sign a contract. As if you would risk signing a mortgage without first reading the fine print This is what Obama preached, this is what he needs to do to succeed. I don't want him to fail, I want him to live up to the rhetoric. If his policies are contradictory to the goal and will add cost without delivering the desired results, I do want them to fail- then I want them to get it right the next time.

Regardless, I can happily say that I now stand in the majority, with those that have the sense to say hold on a second! We can't afford to get this wrong and we need the specifics before we commit to anything. We support the goal but demand the proper due diligence. Funny how, in this case, Cuba Demands > Obama Demands. :thumbup:

 

[wrightme43]

Talk about biased! You cannot see the forest for the trees, as the saying goes. The republican party is not a person. It does not have one voice, it does not have one goal, and it is not evil. It is a collection of elected officials, many share similar beliefs on fiscal constraint, some don't (bush). The republican party did not announce that it's plan is to obstruct healthcare reform for political gain, one member out of over 200 made that point. Your belief that all republicans are evil, big corporate focussed, uncaring, self absorbed slippery politicians is grossly prejudiced. It is true that there are members of both parties that share these traits. It is true that Obama received more campaign donations from big corporations than anyone else in history, and has subsequently paid those same corporations more tax payer dollars than anyone else in history. You are just so intensly onesided and overly simplistic in your arguments and you beliefs that you needn't open your mouth, we already know your opinion will be blind faith in the administration and blind hatred and mistrust for anyone that criticizes what they are doing.


I figured this out a long time ago.

 

[Wavex]

You are just so intensly onesided and overly simplistic in your arguments and you beliefs that you needn't open your mouth, we already know your opinion will be blind faith in the administration and blind hatred and mistrust for anyone that criticizes what they are doing.

Who's "we"?

I see "hatred" from all of us in all U.P threads... I enjoy reading Oscar's posts as much as yours Cuba, so no need to silence anyone imo.

 

[wrightme43]

No I disagree.

I do not hate you, nor do I hate oscar, nor any one in here. I do not hate Obama or any of these people.

Oscar on the other hand has a irrational view, that anything done by his party of choice is good no matter what, and all evil in this country is perpetrated by the republican conspiricy. Discussion, or refutation of his ideas results in anger, and more accusation. Generally I just disregard all his posts as pointless, random, nutjobbery.

If he were a republician I would do the same. Left wing and right wing zealots are both the same.

 

[Oscar54]

Well well well, the truth comes out. Remember, it's also 52 democratic house reps, not just 9 senators. Here is the problem with your, and the president and the far left's view, of what should happen. They believe that they have the answer, that they alone are best suited to make these decisions and to dictate what will happen. <-- this, by the way, is how most people think, I'm right, you're wrong, we're doing it my way because that's what's best. The problem here is that this is AMERICA, where we live in a DEMOCRACY, where our elected officials are tasked with representing the will of the people, you don't have the same power as a dictator. The democrats are representing their constituents. The republicans are doing the same. But the president is not. Nancy Pelosi's constituents are in favor of what she is doing, but the majority of Americans are very opposed. The majority of Americans DO NOT WANT the current bills to pass. They don't. They want cost cutting reform, not cost increasing reform. It is his job to come up with solutions that are best for the country, not that are best for a small percentage of extremists, or wat is best to buy a lot of votes. We are a moderate country, not an extreme liberal one whether they accept that fact or not. The people were rightly fed up with the way things were going over the past few years, but the person they voted for was not running a campaign of opaque government takeover and extremist liberal policies. Quite the contrary, they voted for someone promissing bipartisan solutions in extremely transparent fashion, listening, not dictating (remember?) but instead we have gone from right wing partisan solutions to left wing partisan solutions. We are seeing cowboy politics (what they crucified all republicans for) except that it is now directed squarely on the American people and in the opposite political direction.

These same democrats standing up against this policy were the ones that were steamrolled on the climate change bill and hung out to dry by Obama and Pelosi. They voted for something that their constituents are not in favor of. They were strong armed and threatened into voting for something that does not represent what their constituents want. They are aware that their own approval ratings have suffered greatly because of that. Look at Specter, he's dead politically because of his vote on the "stimulus". He voted against the will of his constituents whom it was his sworn duty to represent in the senate. There is a cost associated with doing that, one that he wasn't willing to face, and so he betrayed his party for personal political survival. Now he's going to be destroyed by the democrat running against him in the primaries. The political system actually does work in that regard, if you don't represent the people, they won't vote for you. You SHOULD make decisions based on your reelection, based on politics, but the problem stems from making those decisions based on ammassing enough campaign dollars to bury your opponent rather than truely representing your constituency.

The point is the way our country works, the way it was designed, was to prevent the very thing that almost happened this week. Our officials are not supposed to vote against the will of the people and then look to the president to protect them with free advertising and fundraising. They are not supposed to be able to make wreckless decisions without debate, compromise, and bipartisan support. The system is not designed to allow an extremist minority group to control the outcome of the vote, it is designed for checks and balances, for moderation, for a representative democracy. What you seem to favor is a dictatorial system of government in which you can ignore the people and just dictate what YOU want to happen, as long as it's an extremely liberal dictator. Which is ironically exactly what you were arguing AGAINST when it was someone else's views being pushed onto you. What you seem to lust for is revenge.

The left had a golden opportunity to actually change the status quo in this regard. Obama's approval ratings and political capital at the onset were extremely strong, and the majority of the population was strongly in favor of what he was saying. He was RIGHT when he said these things, but I believe he was too tempted to go the easy route. He chose to dictate rather than cooperate, he chose to threaten and strongarm ("We're keeping score buddy") rather than convince and work towards a universal solution. He fell into the trap and thought if he could act quickly enough he could get all his porposals passed before they were questioned. He didn't see this as wrong, he saw it as an opportunity for change. The problem is it is not only incredibly unrealistic to believe you could get everything right on your own with no time to double check your own work, but also unrealistic to think that the people would not raise red flags when they see you breaking your promises and taking a far left sprint towards something we hadn't signed on for or expected. He overreached.

He could get away with that at the start, but not anymore. Our system of government has it's strengths and it's weaknesses. A dictator can quickly and easily bring about sweeping reforms, but a president must act more carefully, more conservatively, because (as he stated) it isn't about him and what he wants, it's about us. He must state his case and convince the people BEFORE he can proceed, not after the fact. Our process is actually working right now.

This is common sense in all walks of life. If you have a problem you don't write someone with no experience or track record in that area a blank check without any details whatsoever and expect it will get done right. You talk, you listen, you challenge, you debate, you question, you compromise, and bottom line you understand what it is you want (lower healthcare costs and sustainability) and how specifically you plan to get there, BEFORE you sign a contract. As if you would risk signing a mortgage without first reading the fine print This is what Obama preached, this is what he needs to do to succeed. I don't want him to fail, I want him to live up to the rhetoric. If his policies are contradictory to the goal and will add cost without delivering the desired results, I do want them to fail- then I want them to get it right the next time.

Regardless, I can happily say that I now stand in the majority, with those that have the sense to say hold on a second! We can't afford to get this wrong and we need the specifics before we commit to anything. We support the goal but demand the proper due diligence. Funny how, in this case, Cuba Demands > Obama Demands. :thumbup:

What the hell was all that BS?

I ended the statement you quoted to respond to with one question, and your response is a bunch of rambling jibberish.

Peace!

 

[Oscar54]

No I disagree.

I do not hate you, nor do I hate oscar, nor any one in here. I do not hate Obama or any of these people.

Oscar on the other hand has a irrational view, that anything done by his party of choice is good no matter what, and all evil in this country is perpetrated by the republican conspiricy. Discussion, or refutation of his ideas results in anger, and more accusation. Generally I just disregard all his posts as pointless, random, nutjobbery.

If he were a republician I would do the same. Left wing and right wing zealots are both the same.

Coming from you I consider that a complement!

All you have to do is look at the Republican's Rube Goldberg Flow Chart of the Health Care proposals to know that anything they say about the health care debate is BS and shows their contempt for the intelligence of their constituency.

And anyone who uses Michelle Bachman as a source of reference should really not comment on anyone else's mental state.

 

[Cuba]

What the hell was all that BS?

I ended the statement you quoted to respond to with one question, and your response is a bunch of rambling jibberish.

Peace!

You went off on a tangent trying to talk about your blind hatred and mistrust for anyone that doesn't share your very liberal beliefs, and expect me to help you make your point? I'd rather discuss the current situtaion, whereas you would rather talk about Bush. It's getting old, and it isn't adding to the discussion on this healthcare plan, or what needs to happen to make it work. My advice to you is go to a Fox or MSNBC forum for a while where you can interact with extremists like yourself that would rather discuss Bush and Iraq than Obama and healthcare. You should vent your anger elsewhere to allow yourself to focus on what we are talking about here. I'm not the enemy, I don't have a hidden agenda, and in fact I am personally benefitting from these policies I so strongly disagree with. My company is a major supplier to the federal government and our business in DC is off the charts due to the "stimulus", so please don't assume that all republicans are greedy bastards that only vote with their wallets because it is simple untrue. What we are discussing here is healthcare, what the current bills mean to us, and why.

When someone is arguing for moderation, sensible planning, cooperation, and responsible problem solving, it is a difficult position to argue extremist one sided partisan steamrolling of something that is not fully understood or supported by the people. Your views are not representative of what the people want, or what they voted for. There are many questions and holes in these proposals that haven't been answered, and Obama thus far has completely failed to discuss any specifics- kind of an important part of getting people to sign on to your plan, those specifics. Obama's approval ratings are tanking, below 50%, independants are running for the hills, democrats are calling for restraint and slowing down the process, and as of this morning 40% of likely voters are strongly opposed to Obama's policies versus 30% that strongly approve. What is happening right now is exactly what he should have avoided- he is strengthening the opposition, revitilizing republican support, and starting the pendulum swinging in the other direction. Had he lived up to his campaign promisses I don't think we would be seeing such drastic swings in popularity. What we wanted was bipartisanship, transparency, and someone that would carefully weigh the situation, listen to the people, and produce legislation that would improve our country's economic sustainability, global reputation, and reduce deficit spending. We simply are not seeing that right now. Great leaders do not make excuses and they don't blame bad results on others, they take charge, they admit their mistakes, and they gain the trust and support of the people. We aren't seeing that, yet. I hope we will now that he no longer has the option of taking the easy way out and simply strongarming congress to do his bidding.

I think now is when we will start to see him actually going down the road of cooperation, because he has learned that even with a supermajority in congress he no longer has the power to dictate his terms. He actually needs to go through the legislative process like everbody else. Checks and balances guys, it's what I have been saying since the start of our discussions here and I am very excited to see that this is staring to be restored. As I said, I liked a lot of what he said during the campaign, I just didn't believe he would live up to the rhetoric and unfortunately I have been correct so far. I still have hope for him, but I don't think it will come from partisan steamrolling, it will come from compromise, common sense, honesty, and integrity. It will come from him living up to his promisses, even when it's hard.

 

[Cuba]

Who's "we"?

I see "hatred" from all of us in all U.P threads... I enjoy reading Oscar's posts as much as yours Cuba, so no need to silence anyone imo.

Anyone that has been reading these discussions would have to be mentally disabled to not at least have a very good idea of what this member's responses will be, it is intensely one-sided, black and white, Obama is to be followed and obeyed, we are wrong to question him, and should be attacked as obstructionists if we even bring up our very real concerns about these policies, that evidense to the contrary of what Obama is saying should be ignored. I would enjoy his posts if they were relevant to the discussion, sometimes they are and add another perspective, often they are tangents about Bush and the personal hatred he is harboring for past wrongs. You shouldn't just spout out your emotional response, no one cares about your personal paranoia if you are simply making completely unsupported assumptions. Come up with a convincing why, not a simple "what".You should think about things critically (especially when you agree with them!!), look up details if you aren't clear about them, do some research, and add to the discussion rather than changing the subject when things don't seem to be going your way. We don't have to agree but it is far more constructive if you haven't made up your mind and written it in stone before talking about these issues. I've been wrong before, I have made opinions that didn't include all the facts, but I can admit that and change my mind as a result of debate. I don't see that ability in some people here. Silencing is not the intent, getting back to the subject and having a real conversation with people that listen and think critically is.

 

[Cuba]

CBO deals new blow to health plan - Chris Frates - POLITICO.com

Back to the topic. It is quite clear that the current plans have many issues to be resolved before a final decision can be made. This is an extremely complex issue and it will take time to explore the effects and potential problems it may create. Obama's goals are clear but his solutions are not, we need to close that gap and answer the details, the plan must change if it is to meet these stated goals. Interestingly their proposals do not even take effect until 2013... in my opinion you cannot honestly argue that there is such urgency to pass this that we don't have time to be thorough when you have given yourself four years to make it happen. Obama should slow down his rush it through approach and think more long term, make it clear that he has listened to the concerns and pledge to get it right while explaining that this approach does carry some risk, there are some obstructionists (as there are with all legislation) but that republicans and democrats are committed to this cost cutting reform. He has been enormously successful in gaining virtual concensus among both parties that we need this reform, that we need to cut costs and expand coverage, republicans are actually agreeing to the idea of a universal plan! He needs to use that to his advantage, not ignore it and go his own way. He cannot continue to ignore the concerns and dismiss them as political when it is increasingly clear that these concerns are valid and need to be answered in detail.

 

[wrightme43]

Coming from you I consider that a complement!

All you have to do is look at the Republican's Rube Goldberg Flow Chart of the Health Care proposals to know that anything they say about the health care debate is BS and shows their contempt for the intelligence of their constituency.

And anyone who uses Michelle Bachman as a source of reference should really not comment on anyone else's mental state.

Damnit man if I spend all my time making you see the absolute wackjobbery of your statements, it derails the threads, and wastes my time because you wont see it anyway.

Anyway, Michelle Bachmann agrees with Oscar and does something about it.
[edit] Iraq War troop surge

Bachmann called for a full hearing of President George W. Bush's plan to increase troop levels in Iraq in January 2007. She said “The American people deserve to hear and understand the merits of increasing U.S. troop presence in Iraq. Increased troop presence is justifiable if that measure would bring a swift conclusion to a difficult conflict.”[18] She "hesitated to give a firm endorsement, calling it instead 'a good first step in explaining to the American people the course toward victory in Iraq.'"[19] When pressed by reporters, she said she had not come to any conclusion on the matter,[19] saying she wanted more information. “I don't believe we have all of the information in front of us. As a member of Congress that's why I want to go to Iraq as quickly as I can. I want to get the best information in front of me.”[20] When a resolution opposing the surge was voted on in the House of Representatives on February 16, 2007, the resolution was approved 246 to 182, with Bachmann voting "No".

Ms Bachmann doesnt agree with Oscar.

[edit] Incandescent lightbulbs

Bachmann introduced the Light Bulb Freedom of Choice Act, to repeal the nationwide phase-out of conventional light bulbs. She argued that the government has no business telling consumers what kind of light bulbs they can buy:[24] "By 2012, incandescent light bulbs will be no more," Bachmann said. "Fluorescent bulbs are more polluting because of their mercury content. We are working on a light bulb bill. If the Democrats can hose up a light bulb, don't trust them with the country."
According to a report from the non-partisan Congressional Research Service [25], the use of compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) may actually reduce the amount of mercury in the environment if they result in a reduction of the use of coal in the production of electricity. They also stated that the amount of mercury from CFLs is minimal. National Public Radio also focused on the challenge of recycling these bulbs.[26]

Guess what I dont agree with her alot either. Here is a nice saying. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Or as mr. Lincoln said.
Stand with anybody that stands right, stand with him while he is right and part with him when he goes wrong.
[COLOR=blue! important][COLOR=blue! important]Abraham [COLOR=blue! important]Lincoln[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]

 

[Cuba]

Or as mr. Lincoln said.
Stand with anybody that stands right, stand with him while he is right and part with him when he goes wrong.

Great quote! We would all do well to live by it. There is a fairly major update to this debate this morning. The senate is getting close to reaching a bipartisan compromise that would actually reduce costs, it does not include the public option. It also eases the burden on small businesses, which is the part of the original plan that never made sense to me, we are in a horrible economy and that is the not the time to shovel huge cost mandates onto small businesses that are already struggling and laying people off. I hope they can continue to work together constructively on this, if the president takes this opportunity to stop viciously attaking everyone that wants more time and instead stands up and supports his own campaign goals of bipartisan compromise we may have something here. His strategy of burning through all of his political capital and good will as soon as humanly possible to shove through legislation wasn't a good one. Had he trusted in his own original plan of being the better man and staying above the political storm he would be better off now I think, but it's not too late. This is promissing news.

Sources: Senators Near Bipartisan Health Deal - Political News - FOXNews.com

 

[Cuba]

My Way News - AP Sources: Senate group omitting Dem health goals

More detail.

 

[Cuba]

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gl...gislationthrough-congress-without-allowing-ti

And again hitting on the point I've been making, but this time in Obama's own words. If he lived up to his own rhetoric we might actually "change the way Washington works" rather than repeating the mistakes of the past. He needs to make a major shift in his tone and approach to do this, but now is the time. He should stand up and repeat what he had been saying, admit that they haven't been living up to that standard, but moving forward we will do this together. The dems would remain in power in 2010 and he would get reelected if that were to happen, I think it would be their best strategy at this point. Stop the pendulum please!

 

[Oscar54]

You went off on a tangent trying to talk about your blind hatred and mistrust for anyone .....

There you go again putting words in my mouth.

You can portray yourself as Mr. Objective and moderate but the only problem with that is everything you have ever posted has been Anti-Obama and Anti-Democrat. I have yet to see you say anything positive about Obama.

At least I'm honest in stating my feelings about the Republicans, and over the last 30 years of watching all their criminal acts, like Iran-Contra, the Savings and Loan Crash, the dismantlement and not enforcement of anti-trust laws and financial regulations, even aided by Clinton, that created the current financial meltdown, banks to big to fail, that you blame Obama for not fixing in 6 months, Jack Abramoff, Iraq and the non-existant WMD's, Republican Congresses passing tax laws so corporations can get a PO Box in the Caymon Islands and pay no US income taxes. Just to name few. Oh, and the 9 Trillion dollars run up under Republican Administrations, that Obama should fix immediately.

So, if it makes you feel better to right me off as a left wing fruitcake, that's fine with me. As I said, at least I'm honest and up front why I feel that way and it is based on facts not opinion.

You can play your games and pretend that your all moderate and objective and non-partisan or that the Republican's are really trying to do the right thing with health care reform.

So now that I've listed why I don't trust Republicans and think they are LSOS, why don't you get specific for once and tell me one thing, like I asked before, that the Republicans have ever done for the average American!

 

[Cuba]

There you go again putting words in my mouth.

You can portray yourself as Mr. Objective and moderate but the only problem with that is everything you have ever posted has been Anti-Obama and Anti-Democrat. I have yet to see you say anything positive about Obama.

At least I'm honest in stating my feelings about the Republicans, and over the last 30 years of watching all their criminal acts, like Iran-Contra, the Savings and Loan Crash, the dismantlement and not enforcement of anti-trust laws and financial regulations, even aided by Clinton, that created the current financial meltdown, banks to big to fail, that you blame Obama for not fixing in 6 months, Jack Abramoff, Iraq and the non-existant WMD's, Republican Congresses passing tax laws so corporations can get a PO Box in the Caymon Islands and pay no US income taxes. Just to name few. Oh, and the 9 Trillion dollars run up under Republican Administrations, that Obama should fix immediately.

So, if it makes you feel better to right me off as a left wing fruitcake, that's fine with me. As I said, at least I'm honest and up front why I feel that way and it is based on facts not opinion.

You can play your games and pretend that your all moderate and objective and non-partisan or that the Republican's are really trying to do the right thing with health care reform.

So now that I've listed why I don't trust Republicans and think they are LSOS, why don't you get specific for once and tell me one thing, like I asked before, that the Republicans have ever done for the average American!

Start a new thread if you want to rant about this, let's keep this one on healthcare.

 

[Oscar54]

Start a new thread if you want to rant about this, let's keep this one on healthcare.

I thought you would dodge and say something like that because the answer is "None".

Your only purpose in anything you post is to bash Obama, and then accuse me of being a blind disciple because I choose to push back against your unrelenting onslaught against anything he tries to do using the prepackaged talking points the you get from the New York Post, Washington Times, Townhall, Real Politics and Faux News and try to pass off as objective reasoned debate.

You are right in saying the he is naive in one respect, that he actually thinks that the Republicans want to do anything positive for the country, especially while he is president.

Glad you and your company are enjoying the profits from the Stimulus Plan that is ruining the Country and you hate so much.

I won't bother you any more, and I will wait for you to edify us on Health Care and present the Republican's Detailed Health Care Proposal, but I won't hold my breath.

Peace!