• 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!

Health care repeal will cost $230 billion

Gill said:
As good as a local source ??? As good as a non-biased source ??

I don't think so. You only think so because it mirrors your own perceptions.
Click to expand...

Don't know enough about CBC to know if it is nonbaised. Local doesn't mean accurate. But for what it does, an overview, Wiki is fine.
 
Boo Radley said:
repealing it doesn't stop us from paying for anyone. We have been paying for others, the irresponsible anf will continue to with the bill repelled.
Click to expand...

Well your technically right, since we still have unconstitutional theft programs Medicare and Medicare and none of the current scumbags now (with Ron Paul being the exception) want to actually do anything about those programs.
 
Boo Radley said:
Aren't heavily involved in our wars?
Click to expand...

So what ??? They are still quite capable of handling any national emergency.

Typical liberal. You would rather spend money to reinvent the wheel rather than use the one we already have.
 
Boo Radley said:
Would you suggest we couldn't have used more help during Katrina? The military is a tad over taxed at the moment, and law enforement has it's own struggles.

But go on. Explain further.
Click to expand...

A lack of help wasn't the problem during Katrina. A lack of leadership and decisiveness was the problem. There were literally thousands of national gaurd soldiers available to render aid.
 
Boo Radley said:
Don't know enough about CBC to know if it is nonbaised. Local doesn't mean accurate. But for what it does, an overview, Wiki is fine.
Click to expand...

Well maybe you should look it up on Wiki since you are so enthralled with them. If you did, you would find the following:

Established in the 1930s, CBC News is the department within the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation responsible for the news gathering and production of news programs on CBC television, radio and online services. CBC News is the largest news broadcaster in Canada with local, regional, and national broadcasts and stations.
Click to expand...

Seems a lot more credible than Wiki. At least some jerk with a computer in his mom's basement can't edit CBC news content.
 
Gill said:
So what ??? They are still quite capable of handling any national emergency.

Typical liberal. You would rather spend money to reinvent the wheel rather than use the one we already have.
Click to expand...

Are they? If a unit isn't here, how capable can they be? They're not here.

As for anyone being typical, neither of you have explained either whatb their purpose is or why they would not be needed. The president didn't write this bill, congress did. I sugest they had a reason. It may not be a valid reason, but it sure wasn't for Obama's personal army. So, to combat it, you need to dig deeper and consider why they actually put it in the bill. As you are concerned about it, and the orginal claim was found inaccurate, I would like something more thougthful if possible.
 
Gill said:
Well maybe you should look it up on Wiki since you are so enthralled with them. If you did, you would find the following:



Seems a lot more credible than Wiki. At least some jerk with a computer in his mom's basement can't edit CBC news content.
Click to expand...

Using a source as an overview does not equal being enthralled. You seem to not understand the pupose of different sources. However, if you look, there are claims of cbc being baised. Don't know if any of the claims are true, but they are out there.
 
Boo Radley said:
for it's purpose, limited as it is, put it over the CBC
Click to expand...

wik over cbc?!

LOL!

wik over the "npr of the canadian crown"

hilarious

please continue
 
Boo Radley said:
Using a source as an overview does not equal being enthralled. You seem to not understand the pupose of different sources. However, if you look, there are claims of cbc being baised. Don't know if any of the claims are true, but they are out there.
Click to expand...

Boo, this is embarrassing to watch. Have you so little concern about your own credibility that you would continue this farse about adding 40 million more to the healthcare roles will lower costs? Are you that naive to believe the CBO projections 10 years out are accurate and will result in reductions in costs? Have you even read the assumptions given the CBO? How many of those assumptions do you believe are correct? If the assumptions aren't correct what happens to the projections?

http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2010/03/congressional_budget_offices_h.html
 
Last edited:
Boo Radley said:
Are they? If a unit isn't here, how capable can they be? They're not here.

As for anyone being typical, neither of you have explained either whatb their purpose is or why they would not be needed. The president didn't write this bill, congress did. I sugest they had a reason. It may not be a valid reason, but it sure wasn't for Obama's personal army. So, to combat it, you need to dig deeper and consider why they actually put it in the bill. As you are concerned about it, and the orginal claim was found inaccurate, I would like something more thougthful if possible.
Click to expand...

There are over 450,000 members of the National Guard, yet only around 15,000 in Iraq and Afghanistan.

You tell me if enough are still in the U.S. to protect the homeland.
 
I think the bill needs to be voted on line by line. Though many say that 3/4's want the bill repealed, a clear majority favor most of the benefits given by the bill. How many people you know are against being able to insure their kids through college or not being rejected for coverage because of a pre-existing condition?
 
Boo Radley said:
I certainly there was a lack of leadership locally, at the state level and the federal level. But that doesn't mean there was enough help.

Katrina poses key test for stretched National Guard / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com
Click to expand...

Not surprising that someone who supports massive control of 1/6 of the U.S. Economy would also believe in Federal Intervention into state responsibilities. What gives the Federal Govt. the right to go into any state without the officials of that state requesting Federal Assistance? Did Blanco and Nagin request Federal assistance in New Orleans? Interesting that someone who doesn't live in the area is such an expert on what actually happened in New Orleans. Seems that the people of La. know where the blame lies and showed that during the last election.
 
Gill said:
There are over 450,000 members of the National Guard, yet only around 15,000 in Iraq and Afghanistan.

You tell me if enough are still in the U.S. to protect the homeland.
Click to expand...

If it is not, then we likely don't need all that we have in the National Guard. I did link an article discussing it above.
 
tlmorg02 said:
I think the bill needs to be voted on line by line. Though many say that 3/4's want the bill repealed, a clear majority favor most of the benefits given by the bill. How many people you know are against being able to insure their kids through college or not being rejected for coverage because of a pre-existing condition?
Click to expand...

Not many. But many do suffer from a disconnect. They provisions like the ones you mention, but oppose any possible way to make sure it happens. this disconnect seems very pervasive.
 
Gill said:
And not one word in the story actually claiming that the National Guard is stretched beyond its limits.
Click to expand...

Wasn't it's single purpose, but if you want a source that says exactly that, let me give you the first few of a search:

WASHINGTON -- The deployment of nearly 50,000 National Guard troops from 50 states as part of the Hurricane Katrina relief effort has exposed debilitating equipment shortages in a force already stretched thin by three years of deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Lt. Gen. Steven Blum, head of the National Guard, said in an interview that the needs of Guard units overseas have left troops at home without modern communications and night vision equipment, as well as the vehicles necessary for Guard troops to traverse neighborhoods flooded in the wake of Katrina.

Guard units stretched thin

AP) The National Guard is stretched so thin by simultaneous assignments in Iraq and the hurricane-ravaged Gulf Coast that leaders in statehouses and Congress say it is time to reconsider how the force is used.

National Guard Stretched Thin - CBS News

Army National Guard units that'd already served the maximum time on active duty, in combat, are being told that the rules have changed, and they're again being called back for Iraq service.

It doesn't matter that those Guard units were ordered to leave virtually all of their equipment in Iraq and have had none of it replaced so that they might actually train for the eventuality that has befallen them. Nor does it matter that there may not be equipment and vehicles waiting for them in Iraq when they get there.

An Army Stretched Thin
 
I honestly cannot see why anyone would fear this bill, other than Insurance and Pharmaceutical companies that have profits to lose. All of the major industrial nations have such systems in place and none have collapsed into some oblivion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom