quote:

Originally posted by Max Thomson this backwards ass government cant even run the f*cking post office, I question how good they'll be at managing health care for 300 million people.

The bill isn't for the government to "run" or "manage" healthcare.




the17sss, I'll deal with you later.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss Easy.... they think you're stupid. http://article.nationalreview.com/?...NWJjYjI=&w=MA==

Stupid indeed. They believe the government is trying to take over the healthcare sector which is a flat out lie.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Stupid indeed. They believe the government is trying to take over the healthcare sector which is a flat out lie.

A flat out lie huh. LOL! Just like how Obama had "no interest" in running GM, yet that's exactly what the government is doing. Read the Stupid Nation post above... there are a lot of things in there "certain people" are falling for.

You're not right, but let's say you were. GM has gotten out of bankruptcy and now has to hire back more workers to meet unexpected demand.

its so terrible

Obama slams 'outrageous myths' about health care

quote:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Facing a recent erosion of public support for health-care overhaul, President Obama lashed out at his opponents Saturday for spreading "outrageous myths" on the Internet, television, and at town hall forums. President Obama talks about health care reform Thursday in Washington. Republican leaders, in turn, said it was Obama who is guilty of playing "fast and loose with the facts." They repeated their assertion that the president's proposed government-funded public health insurance option would destroy the current private insurance-based system. "I'm glad that so many are engaged," Obama said in his weekly radio address. But it should "be an honest debate, not one dominated by willful misrepresentations and outright distortions, spread by the very folks who would benefit the most by keeping things exactly as they are." Obama emphasized that, contrary to the assertions of many, illegal immigrants will not get health insurance under a reform plan. "That idea has never even been on the table," he said. He said the charge that funding for abortions would be mandated is false, as is the notion that federal "death panels" would be established to discourage care for the sick and elderly. Watch as the president debunks what he calls the myths about health care » The health-care bill advanced in the House of Representatives would include coverage of end-of-life counseling for Medicare beneficiaries who want it. The provision was recently dropped, however, by Senate negotiators. Obama asserted that his plan would not lead to "a government takeover of health care," and said the proposed public option is just "one idea among many to provide more competition and choice." Don't Miss Divided Democrats put Obama in health care bind Commentary: Democrats may kill health care overhaul In Depth: Health care in America "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor," he said. "If you like your private health insurance plan, you can keep your plan. Period." Republican Rep. Tom Price of Georgia had a different take. Watch Rep. Price outline his opinions » "The plan being promoted by the White House would give Washington the power to make highly personal medical decisions on behalf of patients -- on behalf of you," Price, a former physician, said in the weekly GOP address. Obama "has also said that he thinks the government should compete with your current health care plan. "But we all know that when the government is setting the rules and is backed by tax dollars, it will destroy -- not compete -- with the private sector. The reality is, whether or not you get to keep your plan, or your doctor, is very much in question under the president's proposal," Price said. Price also argued that under Obama's plan "every health care plan will have to meet a new federal definition for coverage -- one that your current plan might not match, even if you like it." Price urged a "bipartisan solution that puts patients in charge" and rejects "a government-centered approach." The latest charges and countercharges came after another week of highly publicized arguments among congressional Democrats over the political viability of a public health option. One of the top Senate negotiators, Sen. Kent Conrad, a North Dakota Democrat, has insisted that a public option cannot get the 60 votes required to overcome a Senate filibuster. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi asserted Thursday that a bill cannot pass the House of Representatives if it does not include a public option. The No. 2 Democrat in the House, however, seemed less definitive. Majority Leader Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Maryland, told reporters Friday on a conference call, "As I've said in the past, I'm for a public option but I'm also for passing a bill. ... But, you know, we'll have to see because there are many other aspects of the bill as well." After Hoyer's conference call, an aide told CNN that the majority leader is in full agreement with the speaker over the need for a public option, and that it will be hard to pass the House without one. What he was acknowledging, the aide said, was the reality that a public option will be hard to pass in the Senate and therefore in Congress as a whole. The public option has been cleared by three committees in the House as well as by the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. But a bipartisan group of six negotiators on the Senate Finance Committee -- the last committee that needs to clear health-care legislation before it can be taken up on the Senate floor -- is considering dropping a public option in favor of nonprofit cooperatives that would negotiate collective polices for members. Some top Democrats have responded in recent days by hinting that they may instead try to short-circuit the traditional Senate legislative process by passing a health-care bill through an obscure tactic known as reconciliation, a type of budget maneuver that requires only a simple majority -- 51 votes -- to pass. Such a maneuver would boost the prospects for Senate passage of a public health option. But Republicans have equated such a move to legislative warfare. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs reiterated Friday that the president remains committed to crafting a bipartisan bill.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08...ma.health.care/

___________________
The Democratic Party

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss A flat out lie huh. LOL! Just like how Obama had "no interest" in running GM, yet that's exactly what the government is doing. there are a lot of things in there "certain people" are falling for.

Yes flat out lie. The healthcare reform bill does not propose "running" the healthcare system.

Additionally, the government doesn't "run" GM. The government does not control the factors of production in GM. The government does not tell GM what to produce, how to produce, how much to produce, what to produce with, when to produce, etc. The government is a major shareholder. Great. Just because I own shares of a company does not mean I get to make management decisions on day-to-day operations.

quote:

Read the Stupid Nation post above...

Read it and it's full of shit.

___________________

you know, the rest of the developed world - the majority of which provide healthcare to ALL of their citizens - are sitting back right now and observing this ridiculous fiasco in the USA.

The "haves" are putting up such a fight to essentially fuck over their fellow "have not" Americans over the basic right to healthcare.

The American Empire has truly peaked. It's all downhill from here folks.

___________________
"No offense, but you're stupid"

quote:

Originally posted by Dj Smitty20 you know, the rest of the developed world - the majority of which provide healthcare to ALL of their citizens - are sitting back right now and observing this ridiculous fiasco in the USA. The "haves" are putting up such a fight to essentially fuck over their fellow "have not" Americans over the basic right to healthcare. The American Empire has truly peaked. It's all downhill from here folks.

Rome is falling down.

___________________
The Democratic Party

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt the things produced and provided by the labor of other men

yeah baby, play that song!

___________________

damn pk you responded before my ninja edit delete.. I really didn't feel like starting a debate..since the socialists are obviously going to win in the end. Yes my point was that any finite resource, product, or service (including healthcare) can not be considered an "entitlement" in any free society. Healthcare/housing/food/transportation etc might be necessary for one to survive..but you can't make these things "entitlements" without forcing others to provide them in one way or another. None of the things mentioned above is unlimited in supply..so the only way to ensure every "entitled" person in society gets their freebies is to force others to sacrifice their time, energy, and property to provide them..to increase government taxation and compel others to furnish these goods against their will. It's really pointless to make moral arguments against this type of "compassionate" slavery when the whole world is embracing it..so I've decided to go with it. Rome is falling, but not because of opposition to UHC..but because some version of it passing is inevitable. Our country is already beyond bankrupt and we will be $22 trillion in debt within 10 years by our government's own rosy numbers. The prescription drug benefit passed a few years ago under Bush has already exceeded triple it's promised cost, and if that is anything to go by a new healthcare entitlement will do much the same. This can only hasten the collapse of the US dollar (and eventually the global financial system). We are long past the point of no return, so I say bring it on. Borrow borrow borrow...spend spend spend...inflate inflate inflate...kill the goose that laid the golden egg...control, regulate, nationalize...fuck yeah...yeeeeeeehaaaaaaa!

Last edited by Capitalizt on Aug-23-2009 at 14:45

^ re: prescription drug benefit...

Why isn't this program being reviewed? I would have thought that doctors were clearly prescribing way too many prescription meds, and these all come at a cost to either the tax payer or other insured parties who don't go to their doctor asking for pills for everything that might ail them.

So many high profile cases have come to light recently including Rush Limbaugh where they were getting these powerful meds when they really didn't need them because they were addicted to them.

Why doesn't anyone declare a war on these drugs? [/dumb rhetorical question] Clearly there's too much money to be made from it.

Prevention doesn't make money lol

___________________
Paul