• 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!

Nelson says he'll support healthcare bill

Boo Radley said:
Show me something before congress. That's what you need to form an effective rebuttal. After all, that's what a proposal is.
Click to expand...
What do you think this bill started as? Face it, this is what is currently being proposed. You are either being dishonest with yourself or the rest of us, I've been watching you play the semantics game with fine v. tax and what this bill does, I've been watching you deny the VERY things that these democrats are telling you they want to implement in their own words, coming from their own mouths, and you want to say, "yeah but it's not in the bill", well, yes, in an indirect way it IS, all they have to do, like Obama said, is wait a decade or so for the damage to take effect, so that they can take the rest of the control from the private sector. You need to be honest here, either with yourself or with us, cause you aren't even close to a valid rebuttle here and frankly, it's irritating me.
 
LaMidRighter said:
What do you think this bill started as? Face it, this is what is currently being proposed. You are either being dishonest with yourself or the rest of us, I've been watching you play the semantics game with fine v. tax and what this bill does, I've been watching you deny the VERY things that these democrats are telling you they want to implement in their own words, coming from their own mouths, and you want to say, "yeah but it's not in the bill", well, yes, in an indirect way it IS, all they have to do, like Obama said, is wait a decade or so for the damage to take effect, so that they can take the rest of the control from the private sector. You need to be honest here, either with yourself or with us, cause you aren't even close to a valid rebuttle here and frankly, it's irritating me.
Click to expand...

There was never a single payer proposal in any of the bills. You see, these are what facts are. When you have to read in and create out of whole cloth something not there, well, it is you who are leaving the facts.
 
Boo Radley said:
There was never a single payer proposal in any of the bills. You see, these are what facts are.
Click to expand...
The public option is a "single payor" system, even "UHC" countries have private options. The goal is to corner the market with the public option, BHO said it in his own words, that they took the public option out of the bill for now does NOT invalidate the FACT that it was proposed, so stop this little game, the FACT is that "single payor" was proposed. Even worse, to insure it's success, the fine for not having insurance was in fact proposed.
When you have to read in and create out of whole cloth something not there, well, it is you who are leaving the facts.
Click to expand...
No, semantics games trying to spin this are the perfect example of that, to this point, you are the one doing that. This is an attempt at "UHC" and your twisting is not appreciated.
Click to expand...
 
LaMidRighter said:
The public option is a "single payor" system, even "UHC" countries have private options. The goal is to corner the market with the public option, BHO said it in his own words, that they took the public option out of the bill for now does NOT invalidate the FACT that it was proposed, so stop this little game, the FACT is that "single payor" was proposed. Even worse, to insure it's success, the fine for not having insurance was in fact proposed. No, semantics games trying to spin this are the perfect example of that, to this point, you are the one doing that. This is an attempt at "UHC" and your twisting is not appreciated.
Click to expand...

No, the public option is not a single payer. A single payer has only ONE payer. Nothing eliminated other payers. Nor did anyone argue to eliminate them.

And actually, you're the pot talking speaking. You're the one leaving the facts to "read in," spin, and make out of whole cloth what isn't there.
Click to expand...
 
Boo Radley said:
LaMidRighter said:
No, the public option is not a single payer. A single payer has only ONE payer. Nothing eliminated other payers. Nor did anyone argue to eliminate them.
Click to expand...
Patently false througout. Most socialised medicine(single payor) systems minus a few such as Cuba and probably China have at least a few private coverages, the dirty little secret though is that you still have to fund the public option even when you have private coverage. The U.K., France, Canada, etc. are all single payor, and yet they have private insurers as well, so I guess you can drop this little Charade you have going on now right? Cause I'm about done with this little pro-Democrat game you have going on here.

And actually, you're the pot talking speaking. You're the one leaving the facts to "read in," spin, and make out of whole cloth what isn't there.
Click to expand...
Seriously, I have given you the facts, And if you are unwilling to acknowledge them, not my problem. Maybe a less partisan individual can still be helped.:roll:
Click to expand...
 
LaMidRighter said:
Patently false througout. Most socialised medicine(single payor) systems minus a few such as Cuba and probably China have at least a few private coverages, the dirty little secret though is that you still have to fund the public option even when you have private coverage. The U.K., France, Canada, etc. are all single payor, and yet they have private insurers as well, so I guess you can drop this little Charade you have going on now right? Cause I'm about done with this little pro-Democrat game you have going on here.
Click to expand...

Very few. Instead they have most paid for by the government. Nothing of that nature was proposed.

BTW, I'm not pro democrat. Pro health care reform to be sure. But not pro democrat. Until now, I've been a support of Chuck Grassly, a republican. In the past, I have voted for Reagan and Dole. I admit Bush made me a tad crazy with is insane running of the country, but I'm hardly pro democrat. Just relieved Bush is no longer president. ;)

Seriously, I have given you the facts, And if you are unwilling to acknowledge them, not my problem. Maybe a less partisan individual can still be helped.:roll:
Click to expand...

I know you think you have. But you haven't. I'm sorry that is the case. You provide speculation; you misuse quotes out context. You avoid the actual bill and focus on what you think it really means. And prove yourself more partisan than most in doing so.
 
Boo Radley said:
Very few. Instead they have most paid for by the government. Nothing of that nature was proposed.
Click to expand...
Bull****.

BTW, I'm not pro democrat. Pro health care reform to be sure. But not pro democrat. Until now, I've been a support of Chuck Grassly, a republican. In the past, I have voted for Reagan and Dole. I admit Bush made me a tad crazy with is insane running of the country, but I'm hardly pro democrat. Just relieved Bush is no longer president. ;)
Click to expand...
Right, I don't believe it for a second, the only supporters of this that I have run across, heard from, or seen are Democrat only voters, try again.



I know you think you have. But you haven't. I'm sorry that is the case. You provide speculation; you misuse quotes out context. You avoid the actual bill and focus on what you think it really means. And prove yourself more partisan than most in doing so.
Click to expand...
Alright, I've got better things to do with my time than argue with a true partisan, the information is very public and all over the internet and news sources, if you care look it up for yourself. I am satisfied that you lost, you have been given plenty of audio/visual evidence, there is plenty of information out there, an actual coverage expert(me) has explained it, and you still hold onto your misgivings. I am done, have fun with your little worldview.
 
LaMidRighter said:
Bull****.
Click to expand...

Nope. Nothing like there system was proposed. However, the french model does seem closer, and not a bad one. But it isn't single payer unless there is a single payer.

Right, I don't believe it for a second, the only supporters of this that I have run across, heard from, or seen are Democrat only voters, try again.
Click to expand...

Belief isn't required. Facts are facts regardless of what you believe.


:2wave:
 
Boo Radley said:
Belief isn't required. Facts are facts regardless of what you believe.


:2wave:
Click to expand...
Bring facts or else be silent, you haven't presented a single fact, just rhetorical spin. I have presented facts, but hey, keep your head in the sand if you want.
 
if you poll americans whether they want a public option, of course they answer affirmatively

one would have to be beyond naive not to anticipate such

however, were you to query, do you want a po if it means half a T cuts to m and m?

or, do you prefer a po at the price of 10 years of taxes vs 6 of benefits?

you'd get entirely different results

more realistic results

THIS BILL, which still none defend, despite all their airy considerations, polls in the 30's

and there have been a lot of polls

RealClearPolitics - Election Other - Obama and Democrats' Health Care Plan

why do the bills' opponents own the links?

are the libs lazy?

the reason americans, led by seniors, overwhelmingly and hotly hate THIS BILL is not cuzza death panels or single payer

the animus derives instead from the HUGE cuts to m and m, while massively expanding both bankrupt systems which so many of our parents have come so intrinsically to depend upon

opposition arises from the mandate on individuals to buy up for themselves, with fines for those who refuse to conform, followed by jail for those who refuse to conform

and a dozen other poison provisions in this pig

it is what it is

women and children can dispute endlessly their ideals and dreams

but here on earth, late december, 2009, it is what it is

a profoundly unpopular piece of legislation
 
Cost is a concern, but it isn't about whether they want it or not. The fact is they want it. The job once we accept that is to find out how to pay for it.

It would help if they knew how much they pay now. The cost isn't as different as many think.
 
LaMidRighter said:
Bring facts or else be silent, you haven't presented a single fact, just rhetorical spin. I have presented facts, but hey, keep your head in the sand if you want.
Click to expand...

I have. What do you want facts on? I did show you what was in the bill concerning the penalty for not having insurance. It was factual. Just tell me what you want to see.
 
Boo Radley said:
We're talking about public perception j. You're being kind of misleading here with this comment. It was the death panel, rationing, and socialism type misinformation that clouded everything
Click to expand...

the arrogance of presumption

he who knows least about what's actually in this bill and, despite 100's of posts has provided zero links, here accuses those who disagree with his airy platitudes of being "clouded" by the likes of mrs alaska

LOL!

half a T cuts to m and m

10 years of taxes, 6 of benefits

the class act

the reliance upon chimerical cuts to achieve balance

etc

etc

hardly clouds, my plato-like friend

no, the double counting of a quarter T was all too real

as hard and real as the secret deal with phrma
 
Boo Radley said:
Cost is a concern, but it isn't about whether they want it or not. The fact is they want it. The job once we accept that is to find out how to pay for it.

It would help if they knew how much they pay now. The cost isn't as different as many think.
Click to expand...

you don't know what you're talking about
 
STILL not a keystroke in defense of THIS BILL
 
Boo Radley said:
Haven't offered one. I think it's too little. But hope that it will stay a work in progress.
Click to expand...

why in the world would you think anyone could possibly care what you hope or think?

all any of us adults care about is THE BILL

which none defend
 
The Prof said:
why in the world would you think anyone could possibly care what you hope or think?

all any of us adults care about is THE BILL

which none defend
Click to expand...

:2rofll::2rofll::2rofll:

Obviously you do as you keep answering me. ;)
 
not you

you're boring as an adolescent

setting the truth to THIS BILL

which none CAN defend

sorry
 
I had to make an account just to post here. I usually am satisfied to lurk.
It is not worth the waste of energy to argue with the likes of some.
Facts just confuse them.
 
JustGinger said:
I had to make an account just to post here. I usually am satisfied to lurk.
It is not worth the waste of energy to argue with the likes of some.
Facts just confuse them.
Click to expand...

One has to wonder at exactly who this post is aimed at.....
 
JustGinger said:
I had to make an account just to post here. I usually am satisfied to lurk.
It is not worth the waste of energy to argue with the likes of some.
Facts just confuse them.
Click to expand...


Welcome, hope you stick around and lend your views.

j-mac
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom