What is with Obama?

[chile1]

Originally Posted by MrLabGuy

Krimson, Chili I can understand but you're smarter than this. I'll chalk this instance up to an extuberance of emotion.

Chili...That means he could not help himself.

[MrLabGuy]

Originally Posted by chile1

I guess I don't. Why don't you set the record straight for me.

Well Chili,

Do you believe the Government should have the right to remove Glenn Beck from the airways for spewing lies about our President and Congress as you have so eloquently stated here on this forum? You do think he is dangerous...Right?

[MrLabGuy]

Originally Posted by chile1

Tell me you did not have to look up the word extuberance

Be honest...

[chile1]

Originally Posted by MrLabGuy

Well Chili,

Do you believe the Government should have the right to remove Glenn Beck from the airways for spewing lies about our President and Congress as you have so eloquently stated here on this forum? You do think he is dangerous...Right?

I actualy find Glenn Beck entertaining (maybe I'm a, you know... closet concervative). My concern is with those that can't distinguish fact from fiction (....MrLabGuy).

Also, please do tell where i've I stated that the gov't should have the right to remove Glenn from the airways......inquiring minds want to know.

[Dannyell]

Glenn Beck might be a danger to the people that actually believe everything he says lmao...

[Thunder22]

Republicans aren't against healthcare reform, they're against it in the form that it exists in this bill. It's quite simple to understand. I stated the facts earlier in this thread, they're indisputable. All during the "debate" last night, the Republicans stated facts about what they objected to in the bill, the Democrats, one after another read stories about people who have no insurance. I think the American public has empathy for those without insurance, what they don't empathize with is getting taxed AGAIN to pay for insurance for 32MM people.

If the dems were serious about closing loopholes and providing insurance for 32 million people, they would have broken down this huge bill into smaller bills such as : insurance companies can't reject someone because of a pre-existing condition; insurance companies can't cap lifetime coverage; insurance companies can't boot someone who was covered and lost their job.

3 new laws. It's simple.

The entire thing is a sham.

$2.6 trillion dollars to cover 32MM people when the US can't even pay off the debts that it has now.

[Quicksilver]

Really;

Then if they are against the bill then why contribute to the contents of the bill
and then claim that you would have no part in it? Why not tell everyone you indeed contributed to the bill instead of
hiding behind a cloak of lies.

And yes "Republicans stated facts about what they objected to in the bill"
they also lied about much of is as well......

It's great theatre but defending either side as if they had credibility
doesn't play very well and I don't believe anyone's buying it.

And finally to say that "you stated the facts earlier in this thread,
and they're indisputable as if your facts are without flaw
defy's simple logic. No offense my friend but We are all infallible at any
given time and that I believe is with out a doubt indisputable.

As I said previously no one except the authors of this bill knows
exactly what it says and how it will be implemented is yet to be
determined. Not only that but It's contents are bound to change
in a very short time.
Slate examines the GOP amendments to a Senate health care bill. - By Christopher Beam - Slate Magazine

Originally Posted by Thunder22

Republicans aren't against healthcare reform, they're against it in the form that it exists in this bill. It's quite simple to understand. I stated the facts earlier in this thread, they're indisputable. All during the "debate" last night, the Republicans stated facts about what they objected to in the bill, the Democrats, one after another read stories about people who have no insurance. I think the American public has empathy for those without insurance, what they don't empathize with is getting taxed AGAIN to pay for insurance for 32MM people.

If the dems were serious about closing loopholes and providing insurance for 32 million people, they would have broken down this huge bill into smaller bills such as : insurance companies can't reject someone because of a pre-existing condition; insurance companies can't cap lifetime coverage; insurance companies can't boot someone who was covered and lost their job.

3 new laws. It's simple.

The entire thing is a sham.

$2.6 trillion dollars to cover 32MM people when the US can't even pay off the debts that it has now.

[Thunder22]

Really. I think you're just stirring the pot Barry, but I'll answer you anyway:

Originally Posted by Quicksilver

Really;

Then if they are against the bill then why contribute to the contents of the bill
and then claim that you would have no part in it?

The Republicans submitted far more than the 200 amendments that the dems put in the bill. Only 200 were accepted. In case you forgot, the Democrats control the house and Senate, and it's their bill


Why not tell everyone you indeed contributed to the bill instead of
hiding behind a cloak of lies.

Please provide evidence of the cloak of lies.


And yes "Republicans stated facts about what they objected to in the bill"
they also lied about much of is as well......

Please provide evidence of of the lies

It's great theatre but defending either side as if they had credibility
doesn't play very well and I don't believe anyone's buying it.


And finally to say that "you stated the facts earlier in this thread,
and they're indisputable as if your facts are without flaw
defy's simple logic. No offense my friend but We are all infallible at any
given time and that I believe is with out a doubt indisputable.

I've provided those facts as stated by the bill. Prove them wrong. Just you stating that they are wrong is b.s.

As I said previously no one except the authors of this bill knows
exactly what it says and how it will be implemented is yet to be
determined. Not only that but It's contents are bound to change
in a very short time.

Really? are you incapable of reading the bill and/or the synopsis of the bill with the sidecar amendments? Gee, I apologize, I didn't know that you were illiterate. Your link below is from Slate? That bastion of credibility of political analysis and critical thinking? Not to mention that it references the Senate bill from last year, which has changed and become the "new bill" and by new bill i mean old bill with sidecars, that was voted on last night. I thought for sure you would provide a link to the Liberal Bible, the NY Times

Regardless, that article tries to address the REPUBLICAN amendments which is all well and good, but how about providing a link or evidence contradicting my prior statements that you say are b.s.? Show me where the bill provides for 1 new doctor or nurse. Show me that it doesn't provide for 17,500 new IRS agents. Show me where it doesn't raid $500,000,000 from medicare. Show me how it doesn't raid social security. And here's my favorite, why didn't the Democrats accept the amendment that Senators and Reps have to be covered by this bill as well? Because they're not, they're exempt! WTF is that all about?

You can't prove those wrong, because they are fact, whether you choose to believe them or not.



Slate examines the GOP amendments to a Senate health care bill. - By Christopher Beam - Slate Magazine

Be thankful I didn't billy madison you, because that's what your post deserved. <-- that's me having a sense of humor

[Thunder22]

Here's the WSJ comparison of the bill to earlier versions, enjoy. (I guess the author of the comparison must be pretty smart, he figured out a few things about the bill and he wasn't one of the authors. Go figure )


Health Reform, Point by Point - Bills Compared

[Thunder22]

Here's another one from Reuters, they have a smart guy on their staff too


FACTBOX-US healthcare bill would provide immediate benefits | Reuters