I just read Imagine's blog and I have to tell you, I agree with him. President Obama needs to pass his health care reform without any bi-partisan support what-so-ever.
I mean come on, the Democrats don't actually NEED any Republicans to vote on the bill. They have enough votes to pass it on their own. They got a mandate in 2008, remember? They could just take it and ram it through by themselves. All the glory of passing this great piece of legislation will belong to the Democrats. America will be happy and they will cement their power for decades to come. I mean come on, if it is the single greatest reform one could pass to help America wouldn't you want to take all the credit for it if you could?
What's the holdup? If this bill is so fantastic why not just give it to us? Screw the Republicans. You don't need them. Lay it on us! Give us the great health care reform that lies within it's over 1000 pages. Pass it without them and change the scope of every Americans health care for the better. It's a gold mine. Be the heroes. If this bill is as great as you are telling us it is then take charge. If it is so fantastic you should never get voted out of power. I mean come on, why would we vote out the party that passed the greatest health care bill in the world? It's all there for your taking. just do it and TAKE ALL THE CREDIT!
Unless of course you are worried about having to take all the blame? Hmmmm?
|
|
| |
|
|
FNG you didnt answer shit as usual. A plastic surgeon cannot perform regular medical procedures so that argument is a bullshit way around the question. You obviously cannot answer as with the rest of the advocates of this 'great' system. So one more time just for laughs: How can we escape the prospect of rationing care when we inject 40 million new people into the system without injecting a proportionate amount of caregivers and facilities? Number 2: If the government will have to ration the care due to lack of said resources what is the difference between that and the insurance companies rationing due to price? Is No from the government the same as no from the insurance company?
And way to be derogratory to females FNG.
Yes go to bed and stop spreading your Obama talking points.
FNG those are specialists docotors. Add to it poor and middle class Canadians come here as well. AND WHY? Because Canada is a cluster fucked system! And no you not answered the question. U keep spinning and avoding the facts.
Well I gotta go beddie bye too. Goodnite fuckers!
Jesus christ Smashey I answered your convoluted question tow times what the fuck?
Smashey, I guess what you are saying is that we have a shortage of health resources in this country. Yet, it's also the most expensive health system in the world. Funny enough there are plenty of resources to handle rich arabs and Canadians who flock over here. There are plenty of doctors available to liposuck fat turds, there are plenty of doctors to install new tits in spoiled rich valley girls and there are plenty of doctors around to ensure rich fags get penis enlargements and proper anal care. I mean, I would think that a sick child would take priority over some fat cunt who wants a face lift. But that's just me.
What do u expect Smashey? U have a good night. Way to kick ass.
Sorry fellas but since FNG wont answer the question and my wife is getting pissed at me for being on U4Prez when I promised her its her night, im gonna log off. If you decide to answer either of my questions tonight please do so on my comments page.
No no no the Feds fucked up their chance to run healthcare. They can not even run the USPS. Wake up.
Last I checked FNG you couldnt get through med school in a short period of time. Even if they gave free med school to enough people to cover it, it would be years before any effects were felt.
Erock there shouldn't be a Mass plan, or a NY plan, or a California plan, it should be a federal plan.
I thought I answered your question, Smashey. The motives I guess would be different for the government saying "no". That's what I think the difference is if I understand your question, which I'm not sure I do.
It is not 40 million that number is much lower. many of those can afford but don't buy it. Many are illegals. We know for a FACT that Mass. plan is fucked up that is a fact.
Government promote the general welfare? So that is why they have a 11.6 trillion debt? Please the USPS is only around because the government keeps out competion never mind the 7 billion in debt the USPS has. I am sorry but your idea that the government does thing for the better ment of us they do it for POWER.
Are you going to answer the question?
Smashey, are we supposed to just say, as a nation, ummmm, we can only handle 260 million people, we are going to have to leave out 40,000,000 because we don't have enough doctors? I guess as a nation if our resources are stretched, they should stop paying medical schools to limit students.
FNG I am sorry but you are talking about more debt, and taxes for crappy service. We do not want that. Your "simply" plan will create more problems that u have REFUSED to address or u are blind to.
You still havent answered the question FNG. What is the difference between the insurance co saying no and the govt saying no?
I guess the government could hire insurance companies to make these decisions, but it would be better left to the government as their motivation is to promote the general welfare of the people, whereas the motive of the insurance company is to maximize profits for it;s shareholders.
It has nothing to do with penicillin, it has to do with not having enough doctors and facilities to handle an extra 40 million or whatever the number is this week. We will have to ration care and that is no different than the way it is now except for the fact that it doesnt cost billions of dollars for the ins co to tell you know.
Forget what might happen. I want to know if No from the government is different than no from an insurance company? I don't think it matters does it?
Well, I don't quite kniow what you are saying. If there were a National Health Insurance, like the kind I favor, and it came down to a situation where, let's say there were a shortage of something, like penicillin. Well, I guess it would have to be "rationed", or more accurately, priorities would be set. Only those that truly needed it would get it. Kind of like they do now with flu vaccines. At first, the caregivers get the first doses, then the elderly and people with resperatory ailments, then pregnant women, then children, etc. I mean, I suppose we could just say, the first shots go to the highest bidder, but I don't believe that would be the way to do it.
No means no. The governmet will end up worse then insurance companies and it will kill our economy with high taxes. Fewer doctors will enter the field as the government will dictate how much they can make. Then the shit will hit the fan. Also the government will not invest as much into research nor will the private sector when the prices are fixed. We have seen that in the past.
Rationing is a GREAT Word! And yes u are a bleeding heart liberal. Rationing will happen as u will see in the UK where many clinics and hospitals are not open on the wkends and woman are not able to get ambulances to go to a hospital to have a baby. Sorry but your simplied system is a Gassy stituation that will wrack up more debt and higher taxes. Sorry but no cigar.
But if the big argument is that all people cant get coverage because they cant afford it thats rationing care by price right? Whats the difference if the government does it because there isnt enough caregivers? Are you saying rationing by the government is ok but its not when the insurance co does it? No is still No unless i'm missing something.
One part of my plan says that Americans would take priority over foreignors, that would help ensure Americans get most of the services.
Oh hi Smashey. "Rationing" really isn't a good word for services like health care. "Rationing" is for actual commodities like gasoline. But if it came down to it, and priorities needed to be set because of limited resources, then we'd have to set priorities. That's all. So what?
What is the difference between rationing by price or rationing by supply and demand? It's still rationing is it not?
Because we ARE those people, Erock. Believe it or not, I am not a bleeding heart liberal as you seem to think. I hate the idea of having to pay taxes to pay for the handout crowd. I'd love for them to be more responsible. But I realize that society is not going to let these people starve and society is going to allow them medical care when they need it. I'm saying insure everyone the same way, and everyone plays by the same rules. As it stands, with medicaid and such, it doesn't work that way,. I have to pay for fucked up programs of all sorts with involvement of state, county federal local governments. All I want is a simplified system where everyone gets the same treatment. When it comes to health care, nobody should be treated any worse or any better than anyone else. And I don;'t see how we can achieve that without a National health Insurance.
Why trust the same people who fucked up the program to run a new one? That is a joke. I don't want to have a stake in your plan. I want to keep my money and buy my own insurance.
There's a guy in Buffalo, some black guy from the ghetto. He has been calling the fucking ambuklance every time he gets a gut ache, cause he figgers he'll get in before others if he comes in by ambulance. He's cost the state over 100,000 dollars doing this. How about slapping a copay on this asshole and maybe he won't be doing that shit.
If the same rules applied for everyone, mandatory copays for example, and everyone helped pay for it, then everyone would have a stake in it.
So why not get rid of the fucked up programs and institute one that works, for everyone.?
Mediciad is fucked up as its a government program.
Mediciad is fucked up for any number of reasons.
Medicaid is heavily regulated by the Fed. Doctors get paid a fraction of the cost and many doctors won't take on new medicaid patients because of how the Government regulates it.
I still have to know, Erock, Friday - do you think any American should be able to see a doctor when he is ill, regardless of his or her financial situation?
All Americans shouldn't be fully covered. If you fully cover all Americans then you are wasting money. I don't need pregnancy coverage, and I don't need insurance to pay for my physicals. My physicals would be a whole lot cheaper if I wasn't paying the insurance company to pay for my physical for me.
Funny, medicaid is run through state and county governments, but use largely federal money. That doesn't make sense either. Plus, there is no incentive for people to act responsibly with medicaid.
Here's the thing that I want to make clear, I have to pay for other peoples health care. Then, I have to pay for my own health care. I'm getting ripped off. We should ALL be paying for it and we should all be covered.
I grew up without health insurance. I still saw a doctor. In fact, it was cheaper for us because the doctor didn't charge us the "insurance is paying" rate.
First it must be decided if you want any American to be able to see a doctor if he or she is ill, regardless of finacial condition. If, like me, you decide yes, then you gotta find the simplest, cheapest, most efficient way to do that. If you don't care whether or not all Americans are fully covered, then OK, that's fine. There's nothing to debate.
The working class is getting ripped off by 15% mandatory taxes no matter how much you make so that you can pay for other people's healthcare and retirement in the two greatest ponzi schemes our country has ever known
It's going to work because local government can run thing far more efficiently than the Federal Government. Do you know how much we spend each year in medicaid/medicare fraud?
Right now, the workinmg class is getting ripped off blind. In that site you sent me to, there are alot of good ideas, but simply scrapping medicare and medicaid, how is that going to work? Many people cannot afford health care because it's gotten so expensive.
No, it wouldn't work. It hasn't worked with any of our other public options, like public schools, social security, medicare/medicaid, etc.
http://ccvoice.wordpress.com/2009/08/24/other-grea
t-public-options/ I know I keep plugging my blog, but it certainly fits.
Yes, Friday it seems counter-intuitive, but it would work. Instead of having all these different programs, you consolidate it into one simple program that covers everyone, run it by the federal government instead of vicariously through 50 different state agencies, and ensure EVERYONE helops pay for it by funding it, in part, with a sales tax.
No because u are adding pay roll taxes and others. Plus those taxes would need to go up or drive up the national debt. Add to it as u pointed out the government can not run 65% of the industry with out fucking that up and u want to give it 100%? I am sorry but are a big government tax and spender. Give me my money and let me buy my own insurance and thus I would not need your plan! That is why your plan fails. Let me keep my money and I can get the insurance. I dont need or want your plan.
I don't understand that argument. "Government programs like Medicaid, Medicare and the VA are all F-ed up. Therefore we should fix it with a new Government health program that covers everyone". Explain the logic to me.
Erock the government already pays for 65% of all health care in this country in one way or another. However, it is run through a plethora of different "systems, the worst of which is medicaid, which is run through 50 different state bureacracies. Then there is medicare for the elderly. the VA system for the veterans, county clinics programs for the destituite. It's a clusterfuck. It would be very economically beneficial to simplify it - cover everyone, take the monkey off the backs of American industry, for one.
Well I gtg for now. Goodnight everyone.
http://ccvoice.wordpress.com/2009/08/15/healthcare
-solutions/
FnG, we can help ensure that everyone who wants health insurance can get it without having the Government take it over
And u are okay with that!!!!!! Wow! Fine u can be but I am not.
Erock, must you continue with the childish personal attacks and name-calling. I'm simply trying to debate an issue here.
Erock, must you continue with the childish personal attacks and name-calling. I'm simply trying to debate an issue here.
We are for u going out and buying it not having the government give it to u. U are for hand outs! Big Fat hand outs off the backs off others.
Erock, supplies of infulenza immunizations are limited at first and it is the government that sets the priorities. The government also decides what strains are to be developed. Why? Because they are the ones equipped to do it.
FNG let me keep my medicare and buy my fucking insurance. what a joker u are.
FnG.....When supplies are available, anyone can go to their doctor and get a flu shot or schedule one. The fact that the government does in fact "try" to make sure that the most vulnerable among us are immunized first, is not a sincere example of the institutionalized forms of attention and care that this bill would lead to. Try to be more genuine and sincere in your attempts to support the Obama halthcare myths.
I happen to be a Republican that believes all Americans should have basic health coverage. Is that so bad? Are Republicans not for that?
Immunizations? Everyone gets u must before u go to school! lol
Erock, don't forget, you would no longer be responsible for a 2.5% medicare HITS tax and you wouldn't need to pay health insurance. I'm convinced that it would be a net gaion for most Americans as far as costs go.
FnG....Arlen Specter called himself a Republican too, but after a career of lying he is now fighting for the liberal party's nomination as he seeks to run as their Democrat standard bearer. You may call yourself a Republican but on many issues you are a Democrat. I am not saying that is bad, or that you have no right in the party, I am simply saying that you are at odds with the party youi claim to be a member of and that I see no evidence of your being committed to any of the principles that makes one a Republican. I might also add, who needs Democrats when there are Republicans that vote for the policies of President Obama?
Kempite it's too late, the federal government already controls and rations health services. Immunizations are a good example of that. Look, I'm not the one who asserted that there would be "rationing," Smashey mentioned that it was one of the reasons he doesn't like HR3200. But in the event that services need to be rationed, again immunizations being a prime example, who else would do that? Halliburton? It's got to be the federal government! Unless you want the UN to do it.
FNG u are whining like the baby in your pic. I think u should be responsable for your ablity to get healthcare not forcing others to pay for it!
More pay roll taxes? A national sales tax? more Corporate taxes? Way to kill the economy. Add to it I doubt if the CBO scored your bill it would work out.
FnG being a Republican makes about as much sense as an Atheist who voted for Pat Robertson, a Klansman who voted for Obama.
Unless you think that all Americans should have basic health insurance cobverage, then I cannot debate the issue, because I believe that all Americans should be covered. Once you decide that, you have to look at what the most effective way to do that is, the most efficient way to do that, and what works best for the working class. I believe that a National Health Insurance, funded in part by a 4% National Sales tax, a 3% payroll tax and a 4% corporate EBITDA tax is the best way to do that. There's nothing un-Republican about it.
I've been a Republican for nine years. The difference is that I actually share many of the views of the party and actively promote them.
Just because you've called yourself one for a long time doesn't mean anything. You share none of the core beliefs of the party and attack our basic planks. You have an R next to your name but I would assume that it just stood for Richard with the politics you promote.
If the guy in the ghetto didnt go buy beer each night and instead saved his money and if we allowed smaller insurance companies to compete against the bigger ones we would not have an issue. Add to it I don't have insurance and I don't want your fucking government healthcare nor should I be forced via taxes to pay for it.
FnG, I got as far as "if we do cover everyone, health care will have to be "rationed." I doubt we'd see much "rationing," but in the event that health care had to be "rationed", or priorities set.... so what? First of all I don't want your assurance that you don't think it will happen. Either bill prevents such an atroctious measures or it doesn't. What your think may not happen is about as pertinent as my believing not thinking a gocernment would ever tax the air that we breathe. And guess what....they are trying to. Second, if such rationing did occur, I do not want a liberal appointee or some Czar's appointed through political patronage doing the rationing. Bottom line is, I wouldn't trust the government to fix my car and I will certainly not trust them to fix my heart. But if that isn't enough, take out the question of rationing altogether and I still do not want a patronage permneated bureaucracy dealing with the decisions that I and my doctor should make alone.
All Americans should have the right to be covered, just like we all have the right to eat, put a roof over our head, and buy a gun. Work hard, make money, and go buy your health care. I'm not stopping you, neither is the government.
Austin I've been a Republican since you were still in diapers.
I gotta know first Fng. When are you gonna stop pretending that you're a republican?
I gotta know, do you people think all Americans should be covered?
Exactly which is why in the US we have new clinics and more research going on. Does the UK have the Mayo Clinic? Nope we do!
Erock, I'm sorry you have not convinced me of anything. You must answer this question - do you think any American should be able to see a doctor when he is ill? And please don't pretend that the system whereby a dipshit from the ghetto calls an ambulance because he has the flu and is rushed to the emergency room. That's no fucking system and you know it!
I can get treatment in the ER 24/7 I might not be 1st in line but I will get seen. Rationing would happen under the government or they would massivly so raise taxes and kill the economic recovery. The fact is your plan will not work. If u want UHC please move to Canada as almost 70% of Americans like their coverage now.
FnG, you are operating from the position that resources will be the same under a government rationing system as they will be under a free market system. The difference between a communist closed government system and a free market system is that in free markets there are incentives to expand and develop resources.
Erock, if resources become limited, rationing is the fair way to deal with it. Let's take fuel for example, if we suffered a fuel shortage, fuel would be rationed. This ensures a fair allocation of limited resources. I don't even think "rationing" is the right word when it comes to health care. I think what you'd see is priorities set in accordance with who needs the care the most. If that's what you want to call "rationing" then it already happens, in the emergency room.
No u are just closed minded. We have shown u time and time again that 1) most Americans like their healthcare 2) that the government would be forced to dictate how much Doctors and specialists could make. Their would be no way around it. 3) that the GOP has alternatives which could work. 4) that your plan would rack up more debt.
Why should Medical Care be rationed? that is the stupdiest thing I have ever heard of. Add to it the government would end up being like the insurance companies or they would end up with a massive debt. I not surprised that u have a Fat N gassy baby as your pic. that is what the government is Fat N gassy.
Erock I could be wrong. I simply haven't been convinced of that. It takes debate.
Let's examine the conception that if we do cover everyone, health care will have to be "rationed." I doubt we'd see much "rationing," but in the event that health care had to be "rationed", or priorities set.... so what? If there are limited resources, priorities should be set. And there is a conundrum there. If there are limited resources, should we allocate those resources the the highest bidder, perhaps rich Canadians and arabs over Americans? In the event resources become overstretched, Shouldn't there be some sort of "triage" system where perhaps a sick child might take precedence over some fat turd's liposuction? I mean, when did the word "ration" become anti-American? For chrissakes if our grandparents were such babies about "rationing", WWII would have been lost.
So one may wonder why u are the only one. It could be that your wrong.
I'm sorry, Erock I thought you had "check-mated" me, I didn't know you still wanted debate. All I can say is to read my platform that has not changed in about 8 months. Here I will provide you a quote:
MY PLATFORM:
HEALTH CARE - I don't see any viable alternative to a National Health Insurance, but I am looking! If there were some alternative which I could be convinced would work, I would heartily endorse it. Until then I support a federally-run National Health Insurance subsidized by EVERYONE. Here is the National Health Care plan I propose if you'd like details:
http://www.u4prez.com/Editorials.aspx?EditorialID=
331&Title=From_the_Radical_Middle
So you see I am in fact always "looking." I just happen to be the only Republican in the universe that thinks a Nationa Health Insurance is the way to. It is THE issue which sets me aprt from my fellow Republicans. I believe the Republican party should develop a health insurance plan and trump the dems on this one.
As I've said before, once you decide that everybody should be covered, the only way to cover everyone is to cover everyone.
FNG will try sure but then when defeated say you have no common sense only UHC will work and then claim to be open minded to other ideas which is not the case.
FNG will at least try erock. The others will not. They will promise to when they get a chance, but will not. I may not agree with FNG but at least he gives a valiant effort at arguing his points. The others just call us ignorant hicks and log off.
Smashey the FNG baby will not answer nor will Comrad Imagine.
Posted this question about 2 months ago and have still not gotten a reply: I still wonder if any proponent of the health care bill would like to explain how we don't end up rationing care if we inject 40 million new people into the system without a proportionate bump in caregivers and facilities as well? Anyone care to enlighten me?
The federal government sets many blanket laws over the states without asserting eminent domain through refusing federal funding if the states don't conform. Example being the legal age to purchase alcoholic beverages. All states went to 21 after the fed threatened to remove highway funding for those states that did not. Although I don't agree with the bully stance either, it can and has been done and the states at least still have a choice. Either way, if you want health care reform you must have tort reform first. You cannot bring down the costs without it.
U forget even with a limited government FNG they could still do somethings. Check and mate.
Yup it would take assertion of federal emminent domain over each of the 50 states to set tort limits and regulations.
Great point, FnG
Nobody has addressed the truly baffling contradiction in the conservative philosophy regarding tort reform. Most conservatives believe in states rights, and I've heard it loud and clear on this site. Most conservatives also believe in the federal government keeping out of the whole health care industry. Yet, somehow, the conservatives have a totally different philosophy with tort reform. Somehow it's OK for the federal government to interfere with state civil law and private law practice. Now, I agree with tort reform. I think the FEDERAL government should set some guidelines and regulate litigal civil law, but it goes completely against the conservative philosophy!
True dat.
You have a shitload of committee's and special interests and pork projects all wanting their piece. Every bill is usually long, but they usually have time to read it. The public freaks when they hear congressmen and the President say they haven't read it but we must pass it now. Seems a bit fishy and people start digging. If it walks like a duck......?
Why does this health care bill have to eb so long and controversial anyway. Can't we just have a bill that does tort reform, makes it illegal to deny coverage based on a pre-existing condition, makes it illegal to take coverage away from a sick person, and provides an affordable public option to provide insurance for those who want it and to stimulate competition in the market? Seems like we could pick the things we need and make a simple bill that could be easily argued for and passed.
Gotcha, I misunderstood your Medicare reference. What I think Obama is missing in this whole thing is that yes he ran on healthcare reform. But as with everything in a campaign, he wasn't specific. When the specifics came out, the public said, 'hey wait a minute, maybe not this reform.'. Couple that with the fact that he tried to rush it trough before anyone had read it like he was trying to hide something and you get what he got which is a pushback from the public. Many of whom voted for him. They way he went about it is the issue. I think the only ignorant person in the whole mix was Obama for not realizing he couldn't sneak it by.
First of all, "people that want the government to keep their hands of of medicare" is a term I used to name the "opposition" at the town halls because at one of the heated town halls, a man got up an told the congressman to "keep your government hands off my medicare," and people applauded. Secondly, I think I've criticized the Democrats for blocking healthcare in numerous blogs and comments. But I have also pointed out that it's their love of appeasing Republicans that is causing most of it. And third, our guy won by 10 million voted on a platform of ending the iraq war and reforming health care. The majority of Americans voted for him, knowling very well he intended to reform health care. He won, now HE gets to govern. Not Grassley or Karl Rove. Obama. Obama won by 10 million votes, so now he gets to do his thing and the Democrats need to quit being scared the Republicans won't want to sit by them at lunch and push this health care bill through. The only reason I'm a sore loser is because my guy won by 10 million votes and he's being fought on everything at every turn. If we didn't want him to do what he said, we wouldn't have voted for him.
I'm going to post an exerpt from Imagines last statement and then show you who the ignorant hillbilly is--------------------------------------Then Obama takes office and tries to pass health care, and some ignorant hicks that are woried the government is going to take over Medicare for God's fucking sake, are killing the health care bill. --------------------------------#1. The government already runs Medicare. #2. As I have pointed out to you 100 times, the Dems have the votes. The ones killing the bill are the Dems. I understand, that like Obama, your arrogance allowed you to believe you had some sort of super power that allowed you to do what you wanted and you would be beloved for it by all. Well, now reality has set in and you see, as well as Obama does, that the people may have voted for change and hope, just not YOUR change and hope. So who is the sore loser? I would say the arrogant people that were dumb enough to think they had a mandate.
I don't think that HR3200 will work. We either have to go with a National Health Insurance, or go free market all the way - everybody fend for themselves. One of Obama's ideas is to allow a government plan option, which would compete with the private health insurance industry. Conservatives don't like it, because the private companies wouldn't be able to compete. Think about that......
Anyways, under my plan, the health insurance industry would be payed off for economic damage, through arbitration.
I encourage all Republicans to open their minds to a National Health Insurance plan that would take the load off the working class. My plan will do that.
Democrat healthcare reform = market control by corporate monopolies in the name of government in your supposed best interest. lmfao
I too have suggested that Democrats "go it alone", let them go for the course of "reconciliation" on healthscare reform. Go ahead with the so-called "nuclear option" and pass their partisan bill (or as I would call it, bull), with a purely partisan vote. Democrats hold all the cards and if they have royal flush, go ahead, bet the ranch, or in this case, the nation it. I am calling their bluff and raising the ante. Pass the damn bill! Call it the Ted Kennedy Memorial Health Security Act and pass it already. Just remember, be careful of what you wished for, beacause the winner of this hand will have to deal with all the responsibility that comes with this win. As Smashey so correctly pointed out, with it will come not just any credit but also the blame. Leadership is a bitch, ain't it? Democrats wanted that too and now they got that.......So lead, pass your healthscare bill all by yourself.
I agree hawk.
Healthcare reform is being killed and I like it!!!!! I am not against healthcare reform because "the black guy" won, I am not against healthcare reform. I am against the healthcare reform that is on the table now. This is not reform, this is a takeover and imagine is an idiot.
You know those bitter people Obama and Murtha were talking about during the election? Those bitter people that cling to guns and religion? I don't cling to guns or religion, but I'm one of those bitter people. I see one of the major parties strictly adhere to anything and everything George Bush said: deregulation, war etc. Then Obama takes office and tries to pass health care, and some ignorant hicks that are woried the government is going to take over Medicare for God's fucking sake, are killing the health care bill. But if you want to see a sore loser, look in the mirror. The same party that demonized any dissent from the government from 200-2008, are now turning into anarchists because the black guy won. You're sore losers, and I'm bitter. And a lot of people out there are better, and they'll be the ones in the news if health care reform gets killed.
The more I read what imagine has to say, the more I see that he is getting more angry and more on the attack of anyone who is different to him every time he gets on here. I take it to be a sign of frustration over the fact that his politics are becoming more and more defeated. He is the sorest looser I have ever seen on this site.
Further more I can admit my mistake which was not writting in mickey mouse.
I could have written down mickey mouse on the fucking ballot lol as that is what it is comparable to. U you sold out for a little hope. nothing more.
You protest by voting for a racist theocrat? Classy. I gotta go make dinner. peace.
O yes I can because I knew I was throwing out my vote. U voted for a liar and a Bush mini me.
I voted for a guy that said he wanted change. You voted for an open racist who said he wants to change the constitution to fit the Bible. That's fucking psychotic. Baldwin makes Sarah Palin look like she'd be the best leader in history. You voted for a racist thocrat. You can't say shit about who anyone else voted for.
yea u know so much you voted for Obama u swalled all that hope and change and whats changed? Nothing all u do now is bitch and worship Maher.
U voted for a fuck up. I least threw my vote I have no issue with that. I hope Ron Paul runs in 2012.
I know the Republicans and Democrats both suck. I'm not a democrat. When it comes to Obama or Palin, Obama is more in sync with my beliefs. Obama may fuck up. Palin would've screw up worse, and Baldwin would re-instate slavery then end the world.
O right because Obama is really ending torture he backed off that one in the big hurry. He is escolating Afghanistan, spending more money in 1 year then Bush did his whole first term. O right as for Katrina the Democrats down in that state did a real cracker barrel job right? lmfao. I was mad at Bush over that as well. As for the patriot Act or FISA Obama voted for the new FISA after promising to veto it. And Obama is telling Honduras that they can not uphold their constitution. Check and mate.
Republicans keep saying Obama is worse than Bush...but I ain't buyin' it. Obama has yet to piss himself and do nothing after the biggest attack on America in history, lie to start a pre-emptive war, nominate a cleaning lady for the supreme court, fail to act after a huge ass Hurricane kills a shit load of people...and, well, you get the point. Obama's increasing spending. Big fucking deal. Bush spent us 10 trillion into debt AND fucked up every other issuse possible. Believe me, when Obama starts a pre-emtpive war and fucks it up and makes torture our new motto...then I'll be with you. Check and mate.
O right your just ready to triple spending here at home rack up more in national debt and just keep blathering on about hope.
Look at GOP Seats that the Democrats picked up in 06 long before Obama. It was thanks to conservative Democrats soaring back into power that allowed them to get the House back. And yes right now it does look like Obama and company are fucking up worse then Bush.
Oh yeah, the blue dogs like Barack Obama and Ted Kennedy are why the democrats have power. I plum fuckin forgot. Though the democrats are a sickening dissappointment, it's just flat out fals to say that the Republicans didn't get their asses kicked in 2006 and 2008. Just because we're frustrated with Obama doesn't mean we're ready for the flat earther Republicans to come in and triple millitary spending, start a war with Iran, cut taxes on the wealthiest people and declare science class null and void. The Republicans are depending on the Democrats failing miserably because that is the only way the GOP will ever get back in the white house. The GOP cannot rest on their own accomplishments because they fucked up everything for 8 years under Bush, so they NEED the Dems to screw up, and screw up bad...screw up worse than Bush...which I doubt can happen.
Ask the Dems why they are in power. Its because of Blue Dog Dems. Also the medical community is pumping millions into passing his bill. Add 2 it again who is really slowing down the process? its well Democrats not the GOP who prevented a pre August vote on a 1000 plus page bill no one had read. U really need to stop with the Obama talking memo.
I agree with Smashey. Fuck the Republicans. If the people wanted the Republicans to govern, someone would've voted Republican in 2006 and 2008. The Democrats got the house, senate and presidency. They're supposed to govern. When are we going to get real progressive government? The democrats finally win, and they refuse to do anything. I don't believe that Obama is affraid to take all the "blame". I think he's too worried about being popular. He needs to do whats good for America, and health care reform is essential. If insurance companies, Republican senators and people that want the gov't to keep its hands of medicare hate gim for it, so be it. He needs to grow a pari of nuts or ask George Bush to borrow his.
Good solid blog. Obama and his folks look at the same data plus they know for a fact that in the house they are going to need GOP if all the blue dogs revolt like they did during the Cap and Trade bill.
|
<< Home