Advertisement

by Sonnveld » Sun Jul 19, 2009 12:00 am

by Treznor » Sun Jul 19, 2009 9:41 am
greed and death wrote:The party Whip tried that. Then threatened to cut off their funds for reelection.
Then the blue dogs reminded the party whip they are largely in contested districts so without funds they are giving the seats to the republican party. And to drive home the point the blue dogs have elected not to put any funds into the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm? ... E6FB9129B8

by Greed and Death » Sun Jul 19, 2009 9:47 am
Treznor wrote:greed and death wrote:The party Whip tried that. Then threatened to cut off their funds for reelection.
Then the blue dogs reminded the party whip they are largely in contested districts so without funds they are giving the seats to the republican party. And to drive home the point the blue dogs have elected not to put any funds into the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm? ... E6FB9129B8
Given that they vote like Republicans, we may as well be honest about it and let the Republicans have those seats. Better yet, replace these assholes with proper progressives, but even if that's not possible I join the call to get the lying Blue Dogs out.

by Muravyets » Sun Jul 19, 2009 9:51 am
Lunatic Goofballs wrote:Until 'No Child Left Behind' when the federal government set requirements on the state's education requirements and then withdrew the funds they promised the states to help them meet those requirements so instead of more children meeting minimum education standards, you have education standards lowering to meet the requirements.
This is what happens when the government mandates the states to do something without providing the ability to do so.
Now in the case of Healthcare, my biggest problem with public systems in each state instead of one federal system is that each state would have their own legislatures voting on what would and wouldn't be covered. Now I don't know if you oticed, but we have some real wackos in state legislatures. We'll get states that don't cover birth control pills and states that don't cover abortions and states that don't cover HIV treatments and medications and all sorts of wackiness like that. I think it's amazing that the people who don't want politicians running healthcare are often the most likely to use their own political agenda to dictate the terms of it.

by Muravyets » Sun Jul 19, 2009 9:53 am
Ryadn wrote:Muravyets wrote:That entire Congress sold out this country. If I'd had my way, not one of them would be in politics now. The fact that many got reelected makes me despair of Americans.
Hey, hey, hey! Don't be so hasty. There would be ONE still in politics---Barbara Lee. She did Cali proud.

by Eugene Zolo » Sun Jul 19, 2009 9:55 am
Ryadn wrote:Sibirsky wrote:The_pantless_hero wrote:Neither is not providing education, police, or military protection.
If I throw a brick at your head the police are there to arrest me. Because I have violated your rights. The police exist to prevent me from doing that. Not that'd I ever do it, it's just an example.
So if you throw a brick at my head, my tax dollars go toward the police that arrest you... but not towards any of the stitches to close the gash in my head?

by Treznor » Sun Jul 19, 2009 10:37 am
greed and death wrote:Treznor wrote:greed and death wrote:The party Whip tried that. Then threatened to cut off their funds for reelection.
Then the blue dogs reminded the party whip they are largely in contested districts so without funds they are giving the seats to the republican party. And to drive home the point the blue dogs have elected not to put any funds into the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm? ... E6FB9129B8
Given that they vote like Republicans, we may as well be honest about it and let the Republicans have those seats. Better yet, replace these assholes with proper progressives, but even if that's not possible I join the call to get the lying Blue Dogs out.
A quick look at their districts shows that progressives would not win there. For the most part you are either deal with the blue dogs, or deal with the republicans.

by Greed and Death » Sun Jul 19, 2009 10:39 am
Treznor wrote:greed and death wrote:Treznor wrote:Given that they vote like Republicans, we may as well be honest about it and let the Republicans have those seats. Better yet, replace these assholes with proper progressives, but even if that's not possible I join the call to get the lying Blue Dogs out.
A quick look at their districts shows that progressives would not win there. For the most part you are either deal with the blue dogs, or deal with the republicans.
Then let the seats go to the Republicans. At least let them be honest about what they're voting for.

by Treznor » Sun Jul 19, 2009 10:41 am
greed and death wrote:Treznor wrote:greed and death wrote:A quick look at their districts shows that progressives would not win there. For the most part you are either deal with the blue dogs, or deal with the republicans.
Then let the seats go to the Republicans. At least let them be honest about what they're voting for.
Then the republicans have a majority in the house and health care is put off.

by Greed and Death » Sun Jul 19, 2009 10:43 am
Treznor wrote:greed and death wrote:Treznor wrote:Then let the seats go to the Republicans. At least let them be honest about what they're voting for.
Then the republicans have a majority in the house and health care is put off.
Health care is put off anyway because of the Blue Dogs. Let the nation see who is denying them the help they need instead of smoothing it over in the name of "bipartisanship."
by Sibirsky » Sun Jul 19, 2009 10:55 am

by Ryadn » Sun Jul 19, 2009 5:08 pm
Sibirsky wrote:Face it, I could have linked to anything and Muravyets would have shot it down as not a plan. What is so special about healthcare? How is it different from food, clothes and shelter? Other basic needs are met through the private sector.
We can all agree the the biggest problem is rapidly rising costs. That is the issue we need to address. And, we do not agree about the cause of the rapidly rising costs. You already know my opinion so I'll leave it out.

by Surote » Sun Jul 19, 2009 5:22 pm
Ryadn wrote:Sibirsky wrote:Face it, I could have linked to anything and Muravyets would have shot it down as not a plan. What is so special about healthcare? How is it different from food, clothes and shelter? Other basic needs are met through the private sector.
We can all agree the the biggest problem is rapidly rising costs. That is the issue we need to address. And, we do not agree about the cause of the rapidly rising costs. You already know my opinion so I'll leave it out.
I don't agree that the "biggest" issue is rapidly rising costs. Am I pissed off about spending a quarter of my net pay on health care? Hell yes. But I'm more upset that there are people who can't take their kids to the doctor because a quarter of their pay isn't enough.
by Sibirsky » Sun Jul 19, 2009 8:34 pm
Ryadn wrote:Sibirsky wrote:Face it, I could have linked to anything and Muravyets would have shot it down as not a plan. What is so special about healthcare? How is it different from food, clothes and shelter? Other basic needs are met through the private sector.
We can all agree the the biggest problem is rapidly rising costs. That is the issue we need to address. And, we do not agree about the cause of the rapidly rising costs. You already know my opinion so I'll leave it out.
I don't agree that the "biggest" issue is rapidly rising costs. Am I pissed off about spending a quarter of my net pay on health care? Hell yes. But I'm more upset that there are people who can't take their kids to the doctor because a quarter of their pay isn't enough.

by Muravyets » Sun Jul 19, 2009 8:35 pm
Sibirsky wrote:Face it, I could have linked to anything and Muravyets would have shot it down as not a plan.
What is so special about healthcare? How is it different from food, clothes and shelter? Other basic needs are met through the private sector.
We can all agree the the biggest problem is rapidly rising costs. That is the issue we need to address. And, we do not agree about the cause of the rapidly rising costs. You already know my opinion so I'll leave it out.

by Surote » Sun Jul 19, 2009 8:45 pm
What is so special about healthcare? How is it different from food, clothes and shelter? Other basic needs are met through the private sector.
by Sibirsky » Mon Jul 20, 2009 3:31 am
Surote wrote:What is so special about healthcare? How is it different from food, clothes and shelter? Other basic needs are met through the private sector.
Healthcare is different cause it's preety much your life line and since everyone can't afford food,clothes and shelter they probably(mostly lower class) use most of there money on those and can't afford healthcare so before you hate universal healthcare think of the lower class children the future of america.

by Opola » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:12 am

by Muravyets » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:17 am
Sibirsky wrote:And we have programs to help them. And charities as well. And I would say food is a more urgent need except for cases of emergency.

by The Tofu Islands » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:36 am
Opola wrote:Yes, the US wastes billions of $ on welfare a year.
Opola wrote:Half of the people on welfare are just bums who do not want to work but instead get payed by the government to sit around all day.
by Sibirsky » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:38 am
Muravyets wrote:Sibirsky wrote:And we have programs to help them. And charities as well. And I would say food is a more urgent need except for cases of emergency.
How much money do you donate to charities?
by Sibirsky » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:39 am
The Tofu Islands wrote:Opola wrote:Yes, the US wastes billions of $ on welfare a year.
I wouldn't exactly call it a waste...Opola wrote:Half of the people on welfare are just bums who do not want to work but instead get payed by the government to sit around all day.
I'm sure you have an impeccable and indisputable source for this, which you accidentally forgot to post, and are perfectly willing to give.
As for the main thread, I don't think the current proposals go far enough. But oh well.

by The_pantless_hero » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:43 am
Sibirsky wrote: And, we do not agree about the cause of the rapidly rising costs.
Bottle wrote:Equality is a slippery slope, people, and if you give it to the gays you have to give it to the polygamists and if you give it to the polygamists you have to give it to the serial dog molesters and if you give it to the serial dog molesters you have to give it to the machine fetishists and the next thing you know you're being tied up by a trio of polygamist lesbian powerbooks and you can't get out because the safety word is case sensistive!

by You-Gi-Owe » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:47 am
Muravyets wrote:Sibirsky wrote:And we have programs to help them. And charities as well. And I would say food is a more urgent need except for cases of emergency.
How much money do you donate to charities?
by Sibirsky » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:48 am
The_pantless_hero wrote:Sibirsky wrote: And, we do not agree about the cause of the rapidly rising costs.
This may be a fallacy, but only idiots disagree about rapidly rising costs and only right-wing industry tools and their sheep say rising costs are the result of malpractice. My ass. The costs of drugs and hospital stays are not going up because of malpractice insurance. I have never seen a drug manufacturer sued for malpractice. Nor a medical supplies manufacturer. Not. Once. The whole drug industry is a giant scam. How many major drug companies are in the game besides Merck? Really? Hell, doesn't Merck make some of the off-brand medicine that 'competes' with their own products? Other countries negotiate with the drug companies to keep the prices down. The US does not and in addition the FDA is in their pocket to prevent competitive, effective drugs from being approved for years and to prevent the import of their own drugs from Canada because they "can't ensure the safety." Really? Is Merck admitting to sending unsafe drugs to Canada? And hell, the medical supplies industry is even worse because they fly under the radar and don't get the coverage the drug industry does but you can be damn sure they are paying more in lobbying money to keep their profits high and getting new products from being reviewed for safety than they are for anything else.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Ameriganastan, Bovad, Land of Corporations, Renovated Germany, The Pirateariat
Advertisement