Originally Posted By MPierce >>>Here you go EE. The entire tanscript of the speech the Speaker made. This is taken from her web site. Note that it is not a snippet that can be taken out of context.<<< Although she has my support, she certainly does say some stupid things. Like Palin. Like Biden. Like Bush. << Don't be knocking my main man Joe. He is a breath of fresh air in what I consider a dismal setting. I never said what Pelosi said was stupid. Sadly when she said “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy. " she was stating the truth. Congressman after Congressman, and Senator after Senator admiited they had not had time to read the Bill. The public did not have time to read the bill. You believe that Sarah Palin is a fraud, but you think the people who wrote this bill or genuine down to earth folks that know what's best for the American people? Can you name the chief architects of this bill without looking the names up? How about the statment that was made that no public funding would go to abortions. That was used to sway the needed vote from Democrats that were holding out. I will do some more research to prove to you that that was an outright lie if you would like me to. If you could just point me to the pages of this bill that contain why you supported it, I promise you I will look at it objectively. I have to run for a little while, but I'll be back.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>There you go singleing out Palin when she is not even elected official You know as well as anyone that the death panels refer to the rationing of health care to people that are elderly. Start your research now into how that is going to be determined by a board that review each case individually about the need, and expense involved.<<<< So, I can't critique her unless she is elected? I don't understand what you are asking... Also, yes that is what they'll essentially do, but in no way is it a Death Panell which was totally blown out of proportion. In fact it's just like what kar2oon said, it already happens. >>>Point me to the link please that says it will improve my health care. That's all I'm asking.<<< If you stay Private, it won't. As it didn't intent to. It's meant to create new care, not revolutionize what you already have. However, it might drop the price a LOT, seeing competition will be on the rise. >>>Then would you explain to me how we are going to pay for this bill. We are going broke as a nation. How are we going to pay for it. Is God going to miracle the money for us.<<< This, I am not totally sure on, as I have not a mind for economics...but I remember President Obama speaking how the jobs it created would play a role. I'll get back to you, as I'm unprepared. (But I do remember hearing about a way to pay. ;-) )
Originally Posted By MPierce >> Since there is no government run health care, nor even a government "option" and people will be covered only by for-profit providers, those boards are already in place at places like Cigna, Blue Cross, Kaiser Permanente, etc., etc., etc. << If everything is already like that, then why did we need a bill? Are you saying a Government run plan is off the table then. Make sure you are correct with your response.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> I don't know, it just seems contrived to me. She might do all those things, just for the politics of it. How is this related to her politics, though? This is totally on personality. << You can't give me an example of how it's contrived, you just feel it is. Kind of like those people that think Obama is a Muslim or wasn't born in America.How can you seperate Sarah from politics. I'm just saying I feel you probably wouldn't seem quite so fake to you if she were a Democrat with your political point of view.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> That video was debunked LONG ago, by Media Matters and others. First of all, he got the facts wrong, regardless of what he may have scrawled across his chalkboard. << How can it be debunked if it's posted on their web site. Go to the links you posted, and read listen to it for yourself. You provided the link. I didn't.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> It goes on and on like that, day after day. Truthiness over truth and yet he has his fans to defend him. << I'm not a fan. I think he's boring. I just asked these people that saids he is lying to point it out. Now care to take my challenge about tonights show?
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>If everything is already like that, then why did we need a bill?<< Because there were millions of people without any health care at all. Flawed as it is, and boy is it, it's better than the GOP plan which is basically "Tough luck, Charlie." >>Are you saying a Government run plan is off the table then. Make sure you are correct with your response.<< I am saying that in spite of terms like "Obamacare" and such, there is no "government takeover of private healthcare" or whatever it is conservative pundits bray on about. The healthcare bill, as it stands now, does not provide a "public option" and this was a big, big story throughout the healthcare debate. Remember that the lack of a government insurance option means that private insurers control the prices/benefits, etc., which was a reason many on the left were against it. At best, this bill represents a starting point. I hope that in the future, we'll continue to look at health care, correct the flaws, fix what's missing, and do so in a fiscally responsible way. I also hope that Republicans and Democrats and independents all work towards finding a way to provide heath care that is reasonable, fair and inclusive of as many Americans as possible. It's great to have private insurance, provided by an employer. But even in a booming economy, not all employers offer healthcare benefits, and trying to purchase it on your own is hugely expensive. How do I know? I paid over $800 per month for my family out of pocket for several years. That'll eat into the ol' Disneyland budget, let me tell you. But as we can see, when the economy implodes, when jobs just aren't there, people still need health care. And we don't let people die in the streets. We treat them, in ERs, in the most cost-inefficient way possible, because we'd rather do that than deal with reality. Just about every other country makes healthcare a priority. We can do this, too.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> Guess what? For-profit insurance companies, by her logic, already have "death panels" when they deny coverage or opt for less expensive medical care for their customers. But she doesn't seem to have a problem with that. << Please provide the link where she says that Death Panels for private Insurance companys are OK. Everyone is saying health care needs an overhaul. It's just that some are saying it needs to be done in a rational thought out way.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Now care to take my challenge about tonights show?<< No thanks. But if you want to point to a youtube clip or two, I'd be happy to have at it. >>I just asked these people that saids he is lying to point it out.<< I did. Just a couple off-the-cuff examples. There are many more. How many will it take? Remember when he called Obama a racist? <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2K8R2PDmbmA" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...R2PDmbmA</a> That's how he rolls. One moment says Obama has "revealed himself, over and over again, to have a deep-seated hatred of white people, or the white culture, I don't know what it is..." Corrected by his fellow Fox News host, he went on "I'm not saying that he doesn't like white people..." (of course, he had just seconds before said he hated white people. LOL!) "I'm saying this guy has a problem, he is, I believe, a racist." Beck doesn't even know what the hell he's talking about half the time. He lied right in that little clip -- saying Obama hates white people one moment, but he's not saying he hates white people, but that he's a racist with a problem. It's a lot of gibberish.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Please provide the link where she says that Death Panels for private Insurance companys are OK.<< She never acknowledges that private insurance companies make choices about which kind of care to offer. Instead, she twits along about "death panels" to her facebook fans, hooray for this Great nation, sis-boom. Bah. I'd like to see a link where she rails against the private insurance companies for "rationing" healthcare. Let me know when you find that, won't you?
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Anyway, this thread sort of turned into Walt Disney World Events. Pop on over to World Events and we can continue the debate there so that this thread doesn;'t get moved away.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> So, I can't critique her unless she is elected? I don't understand what you are asking... << I wasn't asking anything with that statment. I was pointing something out to you. Don't you think that you should be much mor concernede with your elected officials rather than poor Sarah? Of course you can critque heer. My point is though you are bias because of your political views. Not because of any personal knowledge you have of her. I guess I am going to have to start pointing out the difference to you 2 guys about a person being a commentator. A person being a journalist. A person being an elected official. You do understand that there is a difference in the way each should approach a subject, don't you?
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>You do understand that there is a difference in the way each should approach a subject, don't you?<< Gosh, yes. I wonder if they do?
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Don't you think that you should be much mor concernede with your elected officials rather than poor Sarah?<< "Poor Sarah" was nearly a heartbeat away from the presidency. And all indications are that she'll likely throw her hat in the ring in 2012. Also, she's made something of an ongoing circuit of going from state to state, injecting herself into local and statewide races. While I'd be happy if she just went away, she has other ideas. So that's why people are going to have an opinion about her and her "folksy" act and inane twits and tweets.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>You can't give me an example of how it's contrived, you just feel it is. Kind of like those people that think Obama is a Muslim or wasn't born in America.How can you seperate Sarah from politics. I'm just saying I feel you probably wouldn't seem quite so fake to you if she were a Democrat with your political point of view.<<< No, not so, I don't think Hillary or Pelosi is genuine, and I share their ideas. Don't paint me to be totally with my party, Pierce. ;-) I'm too independent, for my own good, which isn't bad. LOL.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> I am saying that in spite of terms like "Obamacare" and such, there is no "government takeover of private healthcare" or whatever it is conservative pundits bray on about. << So you are saying that there is no way this bill will impose laws onto people requiring them to purchase health insurance then? That it will not impose laws onto businesses that will require them to provide healthcare to all employees. Since all the polls show that the majority of Americans are not in favor of a bill that they are not sure about, they are wrong, and the minority rules. >> The healthcare bill, as it stands now, does not provide a "public option" and this was a big, big story throughout the healthcare debate. Remember that the lack of a government insurance option means that private insurers control the prices/benefits, etc., which was a reason many on the left were against it. << The phrase as it stands now is what bothers me. If you want better prices, and fair competition all you have to do is repeal the laws that stop insurance company's from selling in certain states. If you are for free enterprise just open up the borders, and allow accredited insurance companies from any State to sell insurance in all the States, and Territories if they so choose. >> I also hope that Republicans and Democrats and independents all work towards finding a way to provide heath care that is reasonable, fair and inclusive of as many Americans as possible. << Somebody has to pay for all that. If that is what you want, why don't you Democrats just come out, and say your taxes are going up to cover this new law. Look at the rest of the counties with socialized healthcare. You pay taxes for that coverage. Asked anyone in this forum from Great Britian or Canada. It takes money to support this program, so lets be honest about it. >> It's great to have private insurance, provided by an employer. But even in a booming economy, not all employers offer healthcare benefits, and trying to purchase it on your own is hugely expensive. >> How do I know? I paid over $800 per month for my family out of pocket for several years. That'll eat into the ol' Disneyland budget, let me tell you. << I was paying $765 a month for my wife, and myself, and I'm retired. I don't even have a job, and I live on a semi-fixed income. Many people pay a lot more. Nobody here is saying that it's fair. Everybody thinks there needs to be reform. However some people think it needs to be thought out, and not rammed down the consummers throat. If the administration was concerned about comprehensive healthcare they would have made the bill simple, and hopefully bipartisan. they would have given the American people time to read the bill, and contact their represeatives. >> But as we can see, when the economy implodes, when jobs just aren't there, people still need health care. And we don't let people die in the streets. We treat them, in ERs, in the most cost-inefficient way possible, because we'd rather do that than deal with reality. << I'm in agreement with you on this point. >> Just about every other country makes healthcare a priority. We can do this, too. << They pay for that healthcare with tax money. If that's what this administration wants to do, just be honest about it.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> At best, this bill represents a starting point. I hope that in the future, we'll continue to look at health care, correct the flaws, fix what's missing, and do so in a fiscally responsible way. ,, I'm not in favor of passing a flawed bill in the hopes that our Government will fix it in the future.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer And all I said was that I liked Boston, wanted to move there, and that the people were more respectful... LOL.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>hopefully bipartisan<< Yes, that would be nice. I had hoped that Republicans and Democrats would work together on the bill in the name of doing what's best for the American people. But the GOP made the cynical, political move of basically being against this bill, that bill, ANY bill, because it played to their political base. They even were against the things they asked to be part of the plan! Does that make any kind of sense? Is it reasonable to be that way? That isn't leadership. It's obstruction. And it doesn't do a thing to solve the problem of what to do about healthcare in this country. >>Somebody has to pay for all that.<< Of course. I can tell you that I would MUCH rather my tax dollars be going towards providing healthcare to people than on wars of choice in the middle east. How much healthcare could we pay for if we weren't spending billions, trillions, whatever it now is, rebuilding Iraq (which is going to just be what it was before we got there anyway once we're out). Never was there any serious talk from the so-called fiscal conservatives about raising taxes to pay for these wars. Nope, it's all on a credit card, plus interest. >>So you are saying that there is no way this bill will impose laws onto people requiring them to purchase health insurance then?<< I said that the government wasn't going to be running healthcare. And they're not. Yes, people will need to purchase health care, through and employer or individually, and those that can't afford it will get assistance. That's how you pay for it. The alternative is to leave it as it is now, which we both agree is unrealistic and inefficient and expensive. But if you have a better plan in mind, I'm all ears.
