• 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 Bill has passed

Redress said:
So far I have seen no evidence the government can withdraw funds through this without permission. If such is contained in the bill(and I already said this), I would suspect it was illegal and could and should be challenged in court, and I would oppose it.
Click to expand...

When I am speaking of stereotypical democrats you are rarely one of those I'm speaking of. We differ fundamentally on poltical philosophy but you're anything but consistant. That is not true for many of your compatriots (ditto for mine)
 
disneydude said:
You can thank the Republicans and the Bluedogs for that...they are the ones who prevented the public option and stuck you with the buy insurance requirement. Most of us, including most of the public wanted the public option.
Click to expand...

Thanks Disney for putting it into perspective.

The Bill is ****ing horrendous and attrocious, and that portion of it is abysmal, but thank god for the Republicans and Blue Dogs that it wasn't ****ing horrendous and attrocious, along with abysmal, but topped with a heap of dog **** on top of it.

Thanks republicans and blue dogs, you managed to make this garbage not come frosted with dog **** on top. At least that's something.

Wonderful of you to point that out Disney, thanks. You truly countered Riv's point :roll:
 
disneydude said:
You can thank the Republicans and the Bluedogs for that...they are the ones who prevented the public option and stuck you with the buy insurance requirement. Most of us, including most of the public wanted the public option.
Click to expand...

I hear that. But fear mongers won the day on that one. Sadly.
 
jallman said:
What fearmongering, specifically?
Click to expand...
The ones that said that 45,000 per year die from lack of health insurance.

No wait, that was the Democrats ...
 
soccerboy22 said:
I fail to see how that is spin. Wikipedia is a pretty good place of general information on a subject. Also, I find it funny that you criticize some one on using Wikipedia, when you started a thread using Conservapedia.
Click to expand...

Because so many people use Wikipedia as if it's a source for all things factual. Wikipedia is liberal machine that censors Republican and Conservative facts and instead presents the opinion of journalists as fact.

Conservapedia actually allows primary citations and research to be referenced as encyclopedic; Wikipedia will only allow opinion articles written by journalists to be used a reference, which over time you can begin to see where the problem of facts can plague Wikipedia. The world is far more liberal than the American people. When you have a very liberal world and leftist media propaganda, and then combine both to write encyclopedic articles, you typically get garbage.

Anything political related Wikipedia is useless. Anything global warming related, Wikipedia is useless. For everything else, sure, there's nothing wrong with Wikipedia. Otherwise, for all things political and when facts are most important, Conservapedia is pretty reliable.
 
Last edited:
Zyphlin said:
Thanks Disney for putting it into perspective.

The Bill is ****ing horrendous and attrocious, and that portion of it is abysmal, but thank god for the Republicans and Blue Dogs that it wasn't ****ing horrendous and attrocious, along with abysmal, but topped with a heap of dog **** on top of it.

Thanks republicans and blue dogs, you managed to make this garbage not come frosted with dog **** on top. At least that's something.

Wonderful of you to point that out Disney, thanks. You truly countered Riv's point :roll:
Click to expand...

Actually, you can thank those who screeched "pull the plug on grandma", "death panels", and the like, for this bill passing. Because of them, the real message of why this should not have passed got lost.
 
danarhea said:
Actually, you can thank those who screeched "pull the plug on grandma", "death panels", and the like, for this bill passing. Because of them, the real message of why this should not have passed got lost.
Click to expand...
Except that the wording of the bill proves them right.
 
The Prof said:
such a teeny little perspective of things

LOL!

how do you expand m and m by 31 million new enrollees while simultaneously cutting funding of both underwater entitlements by half a trillion dollars?

waste, fraud and abuse?

LOL!

THAT's president pie-in-the-face's response

dang, that ted kennedy musta been awful DUMB not to find so much money

i mean, all those years chappaquiddick ted spent searching...
Click to expand...
guess what? it's not simultaneous.
 
dirtpoorchris said:
I bet Obama is finally reading some of the bill right now and saying... "OH ****."
Click to expand...

No he isn't. He is thinking victory, no matter at what price. You know, Bush used to really piss me off with his "win by attrition" strategy. Obama is no different. He is also conducting a slash and burn political strategy. Bush's arrogance eventually took him down. I predict the same will happen with Obama's arrogance, the sooner, the better.
 
What "win by attrition" strategy? There's no a singular legislative measure that George Bush pushed for that I can think went into affect through such a method. The one situation that could've applied was Social Security Reform, and they actually gave up on that once it was clear the American People rejected it despite them thinking it was what was best for us.

The only other thing you could point to would be the Iraq War, which was not entered into under a "war of attrition" strategy and becomes an entirely different dynamic than what is being discussed here when we talk about the continuation of it.

Patriot? Wasn't passed by attrition.
NCLB? Wasn't passed by attrition.
Perscription Drug? Wasn't passed by attrition.
Entry into Afghanistan? Wasn't passed by attrition
Entry into Iraq? Wasn't passed by attrition

Ban of Gay Marriage? Dropped when it was clear the American People weren't standing for it rather than attempting to bribe and/or strong arm politicians and do it anyways
Social Security? Dropped when it was clear the American People weren't standing for it rather than attempting to bribe and/or strong arm politicians to do it anyways

You could PERHAPS say its the case with the Bush Tax Cuts, but even that seemed to garner more wide reaching support than this bill.
What are you speaking of SPECIFICALLY dana.
 
Last edited:
danarhea said:
No he isn't. He is thinking victory, no matter at what price. You know, Bush used to really piss me off with his "win by attrition" strategy. Obama is no different. He is also conducting a slash and burn political strategy. Bush's arrogance eventually took him down. I predict the same will happen with Obama's arrogance, the sooner, the better.
Click to expand...
Obama is setting himself up for the unfriendliest congress in history, the Democrats who do survive this will be weakened to the point of uselessness and human nature would dictate they'll be looking for political payback. This administration has the potential to be a lame duck in the last half of it's first term.
 
1069 said:
The minor emergency room costs $120, cash on the barrelhead; an office visit is comparable. You then pay additionally for a strep-test and any other lab fees. it's going to run you at least $160-$180, more likely around 200 bucks.
Good antibiotics like Zythromax (Z-Pac) are around $70; most often doctors will prescribe additional drugs such as a decongestant and hydrocodone syrup for a sore throat.
It all ends up adding up to around $200 just for the drugs.
My experience with the ER is, if you simply ask- not even give a sob story, just ask- they'll give you samples, and then all the drugs are free.
I've had ER docs give me full courses of antibiotics for free, in little individual sample packs.
All you have to do is say, "How much is this prescription going to cost, because I really don't have any money", and they'll bust out a box of free samples.

How much do you think an office visit and prescription drugs cost?


By the way, I don't consider any of this "theft", because health care is my right.
It's everyone's right.

For the past couple of years, I've had insurance, and you know what? I can't afford to go to the doctor with it, because it's a $40 co-pay for an office visit, and then $15 for prescriptions, and I basically never have that much cash on hand to blow.
Click to expand...


If you can't manage to have $55 on hand at any given time, your problems go far beyond affordable healthcare...
 
Zyphlin said:
What "win by attrition" strategy? There's no a singular legislative measure that George Bush pushed for that I can think went into affect through such a method. The one situation that could've applied was Social Security Reform, and they actually gave up on that once it was clear the American People rejected it despite them thinking it was what was best for us.

The only other thing you could point to would be the Iraq War, which was not entered into under a "war of attrition" strategy and becomes an entirely different dynamic than what is being discussed here when we talk about the continuation of it.

Patriot? Wasn't passed by attrition.
NCLB? Wasn't passed by attrition.
Perscription Drug? Wasn't passed by attrition.
Entry into Afghanistan? Wasn't passed by attrition
Entry into Iraq? Wasn't passed by attrition

Ban of Gay Marriage? Dropped when it was clear the American People weren't standing for it rather than attempting to bribe and/or strong arm politicians and do it anyways
Social Security? Dropped when it was clear the American People weren't standing for it rather than attempting to bribe and/or strong arm politicians to do it anyways

You could PERHAPS say its the case with the Bush Tax Cuts, but even that seemed to garner more wide reaching support than this bill.
What are you speaking of SPECIFICALLY dana.
Click to expand...

This is not the thread for that, but I would like to debate it with you. I don't want to derail this thread, though. I was comparing Obama to Bush, in the context of Obama's presidency, but don't really want to make this thread about Bush. Give me a couple of days, and I will start a thread about Bush, in the same context. I will message you when I start the thread. Cool?
 
1069,

Do you smoke? Do you drink? Do you and/or your family members that you help support go out to eat often? Do you go to movies, buy new books, have HD TV or high speed internet? Is there public transportation around where you live, do you use it? Do you tend to buy new clothes because you're in need of it because of old ones becoming destroyed or because you want something new to wear? Does someone in your house hold play video games? If so are they buying new games rather than utilizing ones they could download (legally) for free online.

I could go on, but I'm just wondering what luxuries you're unwilling to give up that I'm essentially subsidizing because you would rather have myself and others pay for your health insurance in the future.
 
danarhea said:
This is not the thread for that, but I would like to debate it with you. I don't want to derail this thread, though. I was comparing Obama to Bush, in the context of Obama's presidency, but don't really want to make this thread about Bush. Give me a couple of days, and I will start a thread about Bush, in the same context. I will message you when I start the thread. Cool?
Click to expand...

Sure thing, in the future though perhaps you don't want to make throw away comments with that much implication if you think discussing them is going to derail a thread.
 
LaMidRighter said:
Obama is setting himself up for the unfriendliest congress in history, the Democrats who do survive this will be weakened to the point of uselessness and human nature would dictate they'll be looking for political payback. This administration has the potential to be a lame duck in the last half of it's first term.
Click to expand...

I think you are wrong. When the dust settles, the spin and misinformation fades away, folks find out the bill may actually benefit them and they start thinking for themselves again the democrats may end up being the heroes. The republicans may turn out to be the real losers.
Heck there are still some that believe death panels are part of the bill.
 
Zyphlin said:
Sure thing, in the future though perhaps you don't want to make throw away comments with that much implication if you think discussing them is going to derail a thread.
Click to expand...

Didn't think it would, since I was speaking to Obama's arrogance, and making a comparison. My offer to start another thread was to preempt any possibility of a thread derailment, which doesn't look like it is happening anyways. Just a preventative measure.
 
According to someone that's read the bill, they essentially are. I'm eager to see you actually counter Jallman's statements and what Jallman's quotes of the bill rather than simply just going "They're not in there" while not proving in any way that YOU'VE read the bill.

Glad to know you're saying though that when the dusts settles peoples own greed about what in this bill benefits THEM and to hell with what it means for this country or what damage it does is what will make it okay.

Right, that's what many Democrats say "greed" is right? Anytime you're concerned simply for what makes things good for you.
 
Last edited:
USA-1 said:
I think you are wrong. When the dust settles, the spin and misinformation fades away, folks find out the bill may actually benefit them and they start thinking for themselves again the democrats may end up being the heroes.
Click to expand...
You're ****ing kidding right? Jallman is reading the bill, everything that has been called "rightwing mis-information" is in the ****ing bill. So what misinformation are you talking about? I know what the damage is going to be, other citizens can see it too, which is why literally millions of people have been calling reps telling them to vote NO. Enough representatives ignored the people to insure they are gone, but please, continue to use talking points, it's much easier for me to win the debate that way.
The republicans may turn out to be the real losers.
Heck there are still some that believe death panels are part of the bill.
Click to expand...
They are in the bill. Jallman read it pages 29-43.
Click to expand...
 
Zyphlin said:
According to someone that's read the bill, they essentially are. I'm eager to see you actually counter Jallman's statements and what Jallman's quotes of the bill rather than simply just going "They're not in there" while not proving in any way that YOU'VE read the bill.

Glad to know you're saying though that when the dusts settles peoples own greed about what in this bill benefits THEM and to hell with what it means for this country or what damage it does is what will make it okay.

Right, that's what many Democrats say "greed" is right? Anytime you're concerned simply for what makes things good for you.
Click to expand...

You are asking someone to prove a negative? It doesn't work that way. I think the proper way to settle this would be to have Jallman post the relevant parts. That way, this gets settled immediately. I bet that jallman is right, but you still can't demand that someone prove a negative.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom