nice red herring there guys, but that's why congress also debates and votes on going to war.
sigh....
sigh....
How do they feel about their tax money purchasing bombs that kill innocents in other countries?
c'mon man, you were doing better
do you really want to talk about bipartisanship? really? only if there's a new set of pics on google/images->facepalm ;P
seriously though. the bickering has been on the side of the democrats. 39 voted against the damn thing and for very good reasons. some of them actually believe in the constitution and the free market.
republicans have made many, many attempts to make amendments and get involved in the process, but have been totally shot down at every step. the dem leaders ended up doing most of it behind closed doors.
it is a versus situation
constitutional vs. completely unconstitutional
reforming the existing system vs. fundamentally changing it
free market vs. government take over
I will be staying out of this thread because it causes way to much rage inside.
I'm sure that the same thing right now would happen if the numbers from each party are switched, and the roles would be reversed.
Not really. This is a problem with how people view this issue. "Oh it must be one or the other, or it won't work."
Try putting "completely" in front of "constitutional." You put an unfair bias in your generalization. Also, that is for the courts to decide.
Both can happen at the same time.
I love how people say "free market" this and "free market" that, and say that anything but is a "government take over." In things like banning discrimination against pre-existing conditions, the government is trying to make the free market more fair. But still, a free market and a fair market can live in harmony!!!
c'mon man, you were doing better
do you really want to talk about bipartisanship? really? only if there's a new set of pics on google/images->facepalm ;P
seriously though. the bickering has been on the side of the democrats. 39 voted against the damn thing and for very good reasons. some of them actually believe in the constitution and the free market.
republicans have made many, many attempts to make amendments and get involved in the process, but have been totally shot down at every step. the dem leaders ended up doing most of it behind closed doors.
it is a versus situation
constitutional vs. completely unconstitutional
reforming the existing system vs. fundamentally changing it
free market vs. government take over
215 elected officials voted against the right for their constituents to have access to basic healthcare.
that right there, is sad.
Government regulation != government take over. Last I heard, this doesn't abolish insurance companies but instead sets standards and guidelines for operating.
You, sir, are taking something which isn't versus and making it verses. Just because you disagree with the reforms doesn't mean that they aren't reforms. Just because the government is imposing more rules doesn't mean that the private market is gone.
~Jason
Haven't we gone over this before? You disagree with the SC rulings on the commerce clause, but that doesn't make it unconstitutional.
I didn't miss your point Einstein.Thanks for missing the point. My point was to show how ridiculous this can get.
"statistics show..." is a poor argument for anything.Statistics have shown that about 2/3 of all uncovered either can afford to pay or qualify for free programs but fail to sign up. Why should I give a rat's behind about them?
no, it's selfishness.Selfish? No, it is more about personal responsibility
so typical...I could care less what other countries think about our health care or debate.
ego, ego, ego.Human responsibility? The buck starts when a person's health directly affects another's, such as in the spread of communicable diseases and viruses. It need go no further than that.
for the same reason it's important to protect personal property and ensure individual liberty. it means quality of life.Why is it so important to have this for everyone?
no, I'd rather put some of it (like a public option) in the hands of the Fed while changing some of the rules so that the private insurance industry will quit raping it's consumers for big profits.You would rather put this all in the hands of the Federal Government by removing it from the state and local levels.
you're a fool, just keep those blinders on.Leaving people in despair at the levels seen in places like Somalia? Now I know you've lost those last three marbles.
that's a nice little patriotic spiel, but you ignored my question.It is because the free market fluctuates and I have options that I most likely will not see with this new system. Yeah, you're damned right it's about me; it's about all of us Americans,not just the ones who do not have coverage. Maybe you have not kept up on this issue, but the health care plans as proposed affect every American in one way or another, and not necessarily for the better.
look who's talking...Get off your high horse, minister.
... Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness....We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness
what do you think they meant when they wrote "the pursuit of happiness" huh?
really?Man up
Twenty year old Fullbleed is talking of his childhood to make a point. Everyone listen up.
Lol, thanks for giving me basic information Fullbleed. You are so useful and stuff. Here is an idea give that to someone that doesn't know five times as much you do on the issue.