• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama Criticizes Republicans for Blocking Health Care Bill

Well I don't know maybe someone like Jim Demint saying that if they don't kill reform that it will hurt republican chances in 2010. That its been made political. Really I don't know where he gets the idea they want to kill reform.
:thinking

I don't have any idea where he gets that we want to kill "REFORM". If he said THIS REFORM then yeah...absolutely, you're damn right. We want to kill THIS reform. Its bad, we don't want it, and as such our representitives are doing a good job by fighting against it.

However, the fact there has been alternative suggestions put out there by republicans shows this notion that they simply don't want "reform" is bogus. The Republicans don't want the reform, tied to an increased governmental control in some fashion of peoples insurance or service, that they are pushing currently. That is not the same as not wanting "reform" as you and the President continue to try and portray. The continual and repeated spin and attempt to blame republicans is as much playing "politics" as anything Demint's stated.
 
Well I don't know maybe someone like Jim Demint saying that if they don't kill reform that it will hurt republican chances in 2010. That its been made political. Really I don't know where he gets the idea they want to kill reform.
:thinking
So what? If the Reps can't stop anything, what's Obama's bitch?
 
My spelling before coffee! :mrgreen:

I really don't believe anything anybody says about costs of anything.

All I'm saying is the president is nuts thinking this is the republicans fault. He's just incredibly bad at explaining things and of meeting people half way.

Drink more coffee. I'm not seeing what your complaint is. So you're not willing to believe anyone on anything. So where do you get that people are complaining that seniors are taking too much money or immigrants are taking up too much of our healthcare?

Halfway? There is no halfway. The republicans seem to forget they lost the election. Look what happened on the stimulus they brought the stimulus spending down, had him throw in a bunch of tax cuts and only a few voted for it. What's the point of negotiating if the other side won't even vote for a bill after you give them what they want?

Compromise is both sides giving not one side throwing a temper tantrum to get what they want and then not voting for the bill. If the republicans want some things in the bill they need to give a little.
 
Drink more coffee. I'm not seeing what your complaint is. So you're not willing to believe anyone on anything. So where do you get that people are complaining that seniors are taking too much money or immigrants are taking up too much of our healthcare?

Halfway? There is no halfway. The republicans seem to forget they lost the election. Look what happened on the stimulus they brought the stimulus spending down, had him throw in a bunch of tax cuts and only a few voted for it. What's the point of negotiating if the other side won't even vote for a bill after you give them what they want?

Compromise is both sides giving not one side throwing a temper tantrum to get what they want and then not voting for the bill. If the republicans want some things in the bill they need to give a little.
So? What are they suppose to do, roll over and play dead now for four years? I don't remember the Dems doing that after 1994. I don't remember the Dems doing that when Bush won twice. So what is your point? Compromise to the Democrats is Republicans giving in.
 
If the President thinks that choice and competition is what's most important, why aren't democrats even considering allowing purchasing insurance across state-lines?

They are, that's what the Exchange will do.


You're right they can't stop it if the dems choose the budget reconcilliation process. However if they try the normal route the dems simply do not have enough dems to defeat a filabuster. Johnson isn't reliable because of his health situation. Lieberman is an independent who can't be counted on. Most I see them getting is 59 if all the dems and Sanders votes their way.

Plus, they are missing Sen Kennedy's vote ...


Thanks for nobody quoting this middle paragraph. What a disgrace!:doh

LOL that was cute. I hate when I mangle spelling or sentences and it get's quoted, meaning I can't fix it. :lol:
 
So? What are they suppose to do, roll over and play dead now for four years? I don't remember the Dems doing that after 1994. I don't remember the Dems doing that when Bush won twice. So what is your point? Compromise to the Democrats is Republicans giving in.

No as has been shown with this president Compromise is giving a little for the other side as was done with the stimulus bill and thus far is being done with this bill with them trying to take out the public option. Thus far the republicans have shown no desire to compromise. Again what is the point of the democrats giving in when the republicans refuse to vote for a bill even after their changes are made? What exactly do they stand to gain?
 
Halfway? There is no halfway.
The republicans seem to forget they lost the election.
So did the Dems in 2000 2002 2004.
Did they roll over and give GWB everything he wanted?

Compromise is both sides giving...
Comprimise is giving someone something they -can- vote for.
Why would a Repubkican, as a Republican, vote for this bill?
 
So did the Dems in 2000 2002 2004.
Did they roll over and give GWB everything he wanted?

Are you asking this question with a straight face?


Comprimise is giving someone something they -can- vote for.
Why would a Repubkican, as a Republican, vote for this bill?

So if the republicans wont vote for a bill even with their own provisions added why should the democrats even try to compromise. So you're saying most of the stuff republicans offer up isn't anything they'd vote for.
 
Last edited:
No as has been shown with this president Compromise is giving a little for the other side as was done with the stimulus bill and thus far is being done with this bill with them trying to take out the public option. Thus far the republicans have shown no desire to compromise. Again what is the point of the democrats giving in when the republicans refuse to vote for a bill even after their changes are made? What exactly do they stand to gain?
It goes against the principle of smaller government.
 
Are you asking this question with a straight face?
I'll take your answer, please.

So if the republicans wont vote for a bill even with their own provisions added why should the democrats even try to compromise.
There's more to it than what was put into the bill -- there's also what is taken out, or in this case, not taken out. You cannot expect the GOP to vote for something that they cannot, as the GOP, vote for, even if you include some things they WILL vote for.
 
It goes against the principle of smaller government.
Where was this principle of smaller government when patriot act 1 and 2 were passed when the department of homeland security was created? Was it conveniently misplaced did they store it in one of al gore's social security "lockboxes"
 
I'll take your answer, please.


There's more to it than what was put into the bill -- there's also what is taken out, or in this case, not taken out. You cannot expect the GOP to vote for something that they cannot, as the GOP, vote for, even if you include some things they WILL vote for.

Off the top of my head the bush tax cuts which were rammed through with the budget reconciliation process. So in other words theres no sense of compromising the republicans only want their bill passed regardless of what the democrats put in for them or take out. Demint made it quite clear they dont want health reform to pass just as they didnt back in the 90s because it would hurt the republican party
 
Off the top of my head the bush tax cuts which were rammed through with the budget reconciliation process. So in other words theres no sense of compromising the republicans only want their bill passed regardless of what the democrats put in for them or take out. Demint made it quite clear they dont want health reform to pass just as they didnt back in the 90s because it would hurt the republican party

Reconciliation was used by the Republicans for Bush tax cuts in '01 and '03, extending capital gains and dividends tax cuts in '05, spending cuts in '05, and they argued for using it for opening up ANWR to drilling in '05, but I don't remember what happened with that bill.
 
Off the top of my head the bush tax cuts which were rammed through with the budget reconciliation process.
Irrelevant to the point.
I said:
[the dems lost] in 2000 2002 2004.
I then asked:
Did they roll over and give GWB everything he wanted?
Did the Dems roll over and give GWB the tax cuts?
Did the GOP argue that 'we won, give us what we want'?

So in other words...
You really need to stop creating strawmen by putting words in my mouth.

The issue here is comprimise.

You're arguing that the Dems have tried to comprimise by adding some things the GOP wants included -- and as far as that goes, you have some degree of credibility. What you fail to recognize, willfully or otherwise, is that, in order for the GOP, being the GOP, to support the bill, the bill has to NOT have things in it that the GOP CANNOT support. When the Dems start talking about the removal of those things, then the issue of comprimise and the GOPs supposed unwiliingness to do so, will be open for discussion.

That is, you cannot expect a party to vote for something that goes against its core political positions; you then cannot refuse to address the difference in that position and argue that you tried to comprimise because you added a few things that said party might like.
 
Last edited:
....So Republicans aren't trying to block the Health Care bill?

Trying and doing are two different things, but, to answer your red herring question, yes, the spineless GOP is actually trying something of merit.
 
Last edited:
Obama says:

"I believe that we will have enough votes to pass not just any health care bill, but a good health care bill that helps the American people, reduces costs, actually over the long-term controls our deficit. I'm confident that we've got that,"

So how is there even a problem?
 
Obama says:



So how is there even a problem?

Problem is Americans don't want Obama's crappy, indecipherable monstrosity of a health care bill, so he needs to place the blame anywhere besides himself e.g., the GOP.
 
Obama says:



So how is there even a problem?



Problem is with the failed logic of those that think criticizing 'those in the Republican party who think that the best thing to do is just to kill reform' ipso facto means that Pres Obama does not have the votes to pass a good bill.


That would be a big problem. With logic on the part of the one putting it forward. Not with Pres Obama's statements.

:lamo



From the OP:


"I believe that we will have enough votes to pass not just any health care bill, but a good health care bill that helps the American people, reduces costs, actually over the long-term controls our deficit. I'm confident that we've got that," Obama said in an interview broadcast Sunday on CBS' "60 Minutes. "There are those in the Republican party who think the best thing to do is just to kill reform. That that will be good politics."​
 
"I believe that we will have enough votes to pass not just any health care bill, but a good health care bill that helps the American people, reduces costs, actually over the long-term controls our deficit. I'm confident that we've got that," Obama said in an interview broadcast Sunday on CBS' "60 Minutes. "There are those in the Republican party who think the best thing to do is just to kill reform. That that will be good politics."
All of which is based on the lie that the GOP wants to kill reform.
It wants to kill THIS reform.
While THIS reform is the only reform The Obama and His minions want to pass, it is NOT the only reform possible.
Thus, the lie.
 
Off the top of my head the bush tax cuts which were rammed through with the budget reconciliation process. So in other words theres no sense of compromising the republicans only want their bill passed regardless of what the democrats put in for them or take out. Demint made it quite clear they dont want health reform to pass just as they didnt back in the 90s because it would hurt the republican party

:spin: :spin: :spin:

Glad to see you "politicizing" Health Care reform by stating positively BS spin like that. Make some more stuff up, its fun.

Reconciliation was used by the Republicans for Bush tax cuts in '01 and '03

Which isn't really outside the realm its meant to be for

extending capital gains and dividends tax cuts in '05, spending cuts in '05

Which isn't really outside the realm its meant to be for

and they argued for using it for opening up ANWR to drilling in '05, but I don't remember what happened with that bill.

Which seems to be stretching the realm it was meant for, much like using it for health care reform, that i'd have greatly opposed and disagreed with if they used it for it.
 
Which isn't really outside the realm its meant to be for

---- > IA

Which isn't really outside the realm its meant to be for

---- > IA

Which seems to be stretching the realm it was meant for, much like using it for health care reform, that i'd have greatly opposed and disagreed with if they used it for it.

-----> IA, b/c drilling in ANWR isn't spending or taxes

answers in red up above, plus ~


But, you didn't comment on reconciliation for health care. I don't see a problem with that process being used for health care. Neither does Bill Frist, former Republican majority leader of the Senate:

BENNET: We just had Bill Kristol on. He said he’s got real doubts that [Obama] will be able to pull [health care reform] off. Bottom line, Do you think they can?

FRIST: Nah, I think Bill’s wrong. I think they’ll pull it off. … You can drive things through a fifty vote threshold, instead of that sixty vote threshold. And you don’t do it maybe one out of a thousand bills do you do it on. But it’s legal, it’s ethical, you can do it. And it has been suggested and accepted by the administration, pretty directly that if it came down to it, they’re going to drive this thing through a fifty-vote door. And if they do that…they can pass whatever they want to. I hope that they don’t do that.

Think Progress Frist On Using Reconciliation Process To Pass Health Care Reform: ‘It’s Legal, It’s Ethical’
 
Many, not all, in the Republican party have seeded lies throughout the population. This is not just an A.M. radio phenomenon but has become an issue as politicians pick up the crazy talk and act as if it is fact. Through their blatant lies they have caused people to fear and then advocate to their representatives against their own well being. So, yes, the Republicans are trying to block health care just like they did last time.

Second, I don't think it is only Republicans, but rather, misguided centrists and conservatives (blue dawgs) on the Democratic side. ALL evidence points toward UHC being cheaper and far more efficient than anything we have and frankly the conservatives and centrists want to opt to protect the companies rather than the American public. If you're curious about cost, here you go:

Compare International Medical Bills : NPR

You would keep more money in your own pockets by paying taxes for your health care rather than paying so called free market companies. It's just a fact. Why Republicans and Blue Dawgs want us to waste our money on paying more for less quality care is beyond me. Voting against a public option is voting against the best interest of the American public and it shows again and again and again in the evidence.
 
Irrelevant to the point.
I said:

I then asked:

Did the Dems roll over and give GWB the tax cuts?
Did the GOP argue that 'we won, give us what we want'?

Multiple tax cuts not just the first one. Yeah the GOP did say that. When Bush was reelected by a thin majority he claimed a mandate. Plenty of times the GOP was asking for up and down votes on confirmation and legislation. Gonzales got through on compromise, Muckasey with his faults was pushed through because they needed an AG. The torture legislation in 2006 was passed when the democrats compromised and let the president do what he was already doing. The multiple iraq supplemental bills compromised without timetables. The bankruptcy bill. Again times the democrats compromised and got nothing out of it.

You really need to stop creating strawmen by putting words in my mouth.

The issue here is comprimise.

You're arguing that the Dems have tried to comprimise by adding some things the GOP wants included -- and as far as that goes, you have some degree of credibility. What you fail to recognize, willfully or otherwise, is that, in order for the GOP, being the GOP, to support the bill, the bill has to NOT have things in it that the GOP CANNOT support. When the Dems start talking about the removal of those things, then the issue of comprimise and the GOPs supposed unwiliingness to do so, will be open for discussion.

That's not compromise that's called capitulation. When you want everything your way and everything else be damned. Compromise would be the GOP getting some of the stuff they want and the democrats getting some of the things they want. Not the GOP getting everything they want taken out of the bill and everything they want put in the bill. Again the democrats did what the republicans wanted on the stimulus bill and they still voted against it.

That is, you cannot expect a party to vote for something that goes against its core political positions; you then cannot refuse to address the difference in that position and argue that you tried to comprimise because you added a few things that said party might like.

Except when its convenient right? They seem to have no problem dropping principles when they hold the keys.
 
So, yes, the Republicans are trying to block health care just like they did last time.
And, if they succeed, we will be forever better for it.

You would keep more money in your own pockets by paying taxes for your health care rather than paying so called free market companies. It's just a fact.
Translation:
No, I cannot really back it up -- but its still a fact!

Why Republicans and Blue Dawgs want us to waste our money on paying more for less quality care is beyond me
The basic idea that the government exists to protect yrou rights, not provide you the means to exercise them?
That having a right does not mean having the right to have others provide you the means to exercise that right?
Oh wait -- those ideas ARE beyond you.
 
Last edited:
:spin: :spin: :spin:

Glad to see you "politicizing" Health Care reform by stating positively BS spin like that. Make some more stuff up, its fun.

No spin. Demint said what he said and multiple republicans have supported it. He didn't say if we kill this bill he said if we kill health reform. He meant health reform specifically and he made it political not me. They are about killing reform. Back then they even said it would hurt them if health care passed when it was tried in the 90s.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom