Ed Scultz - "Republicans Want You Dead" [Archive] - Debate Policy

red states rule

09-25-2009, 10:20 PM

straw man

who ever said anything about totally dismantling anything?

Are YOU happy with the state of the healthcare delivery system in America?

A majority of people are in fact happy with the way things are Virigl

As Obama Pushes National Health Care, Most Americans Already Happy With Coverage

As the Obama administration pushes for a national health care plan, studies show that most Americans are overwhelmingly happy with their own health care -- including most of the 46 million Americans without insurance.
By John R. Lott, Jr.

FOXNews.com

As the Obama administration pushes for a national health care plan, studies show that most Americans are overwhelmingly happy with their own health care -- but they are dissatisfied with the country's overall system, because most Americans who have insurance believe that those who don't have it are not receiving care.

Those same studies, however, show that a surprisingly large 70 percent of the estimated 46 million Americans who don't have insurance say they do, in fact, receive health care, and that a vast majority of them are satisfied with it.

A survey conducted jointly by the Kaiser Family Foundation, ABC News and USA Today, released in October 2006, found that 89 percent of Americans were satisfied with their own personal medical care, but only 44 percent were satisfied with the overall quality of the American medical system. The survey is the only recent poll for which data is publicly available that allows for a comparison of the satisfaction of insured and uninsured Americans. (The data from a just-completed New York Times/CBS poll won't be publicly available for several months; the results that have been reported so far don't make the comparisons discussed in this article.)

Those with recent serious health problems, possibly the people with the best knowledge of how health care is working, were generally the most satisfied. Ninety-three percent of insured Americans who had recently suffered a serious illness were satisfied with their health care. So were 95 percent of those who suffered from chronic illness.

President Obama, in his press conference on Tuesday, seemed to understand that degree of satisfaction. While promising to help people who are "out of luck" on insurance, he said: "If you like your plan and you like your doctor, you won't have to do a thing. You keep your plan; you keep your doctor. If your employer's providing you good health insurance, terrific. We're not going to mess with it."

But while insured Americans say overwhelmingly that they are satisfied, more than half of them -- 52 percent -- believe that becoming uninsured poses a "critical problem," 36 percent view the threat as "serious but not critical," and another 7 percent see it as a "problem, but not serious." Only 4 percent view it as "not much of a problem."

Uninsured Americans, not surprisingly, are not as satisfied as people who have insurance. Nonetheless, 70 percent of the uninsured who indicated their level of satisfaction said they were either "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with their health care, and only 17.5 percent said they were "very dissatisfied."

Analysts say legislators should pay close attention before enacting a national health care plan.

"If the insured come to believe that the uninsured are not that dissatisfied with their health care, it is extremely important. It could throw a real wild card into the whole health care debate," Jack Calfee, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, told FOXNews.com.

"It is a common finding in public opinion research," Henry Aaron, a senior fellow for economic studies at the Brookings Institution, told FOXNews.com. "People are satisfied in the small, but dissatisfied in the large. People are satisfied with their child's teachers or school, but dissatisfied with schools generally.... They are satisfied with their doctor or their last visit to the hospital, but they are dissatisfied with what they perceive is happening with medical care as a whole. This finding is just one additional example."

The Kaiser/ABC News/USA Today survey found that about 13.4 percent of Americans were uninsured (a number slightly smaller than the 15.5 percent estimate used in policy debates from a Department of Labor survey). In crunching the numbers, since 13.4 percent multiplied by the 17.5 percent of the uninsured said that they were "very dissatisfied," it follows that out of all Americans, only 2.3 percent are both uninsured and "very dissatisfied" with the care they receive. The number rises to 3.9 percent when you include all the uninsured who are dissatisfied in any way with their health care.

To put those numbers differently, 5 million uninsured Americans are very dissatisfied with their health care. Including those dissatisfied in any way raises that to 8.4 million.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/24/obama-pushes-national-health-care-americans-happy-coverage/

maineman

09-25-2009, 10:24 PM

A majority of people are in fact happy with the way things are Virigl

WRONG

from your own link:

"only 44 percent were satisfied with the overall quality of the American medical system."

pwned!:dance:

red states rule

09-25-2009, 10:28 PM

WRONG

from your own link:

"only 44 percent were satisfied with the overall quality of the American medical system."

pwned!:dance:

The entire sentence Virgil

A survey conducted jointly by the Kaiser Family Foundation, ABC News and USA Today, released in October 2006, found that 89 percent of Americans were satisfied with their own personal medical care, but only 44 percent were satisfied with the overall quality of the American medical system.

So the government will deliver BETTER quality? Obamcare will RATION care Virgil

Missileman

09-25-2009, 10:30 PM

straw man

who ever said anything about totally dismantling anything?

Are YOU happy with the state of the healthcare delivery system in America?

It is the foregone conclusion of the legislation they are attempting to pass. They are setting in motion the end of private insurance companies, leaving the federal government as the only source of insurance which turns into a single payer system. I'd call the resulting socialized, government run fiasco a total dismantling.

red states rule

09-25-2009, 10:31 PM

It is the foregone conclusion of the legislation they are attempting to pass. They are setting in motion the end of private insurance companies, leaving the federal government as the only source of insurance which turns into a single payer system. I'd call the resulting socialized, government run fiasco a total dismantling.

The Dems are out to put private ins companies OUT OF BUSINESS. That is their intent

Some Dems at least are honest enough to admit it

maineman

09-25-2009, 10:33 PM

It is the foregone conclusion of the legislation they are attempting to pass. They are setting in motion the end of private insurance companies, leaving the federal government as the only source of insurance which turns into a single payer system. I'd call the resulting socialized, government run fiasco a total dismantling.

bullshit.

forcing the insurance companies to compete is not legislating their dismantling.

and why is it that the rest of the civilized world does their healthcare for pennies on the dollar compared to us and covers everyone?

red states rule

09-25-2009, 10:34 PM

bullshit.

forcing the insurance companies to compete is not legislating their dismantling.

and why is it that the rest of the civilized world does their healthcare for pennies on the dollar compared to us and covers everyone?

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dT4mV3R7vu4&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dT4mV3R7vu4&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

maineman

09-25-2009, 10:35 PM

The entire sentence Virgil

A survey conducted jointly by the Kaiser Family Foundation, ABC News and USA Today, released in October 2006, found that 89 percent of Americans were satisfied with their own personal medical care, but only 44 percent were satisfied with the overall quality of the American medical system.

So the government will deliver BETTER quality? Obamcare will RATION care Virgil
what about the part of the sentence that I quoted did you NOT understand?

YOU said:

"A majority of people are in fact happy with the way things "

if only 44% are satisified with the overalll quality of the American medical system, your sentence cannot be correct.

red states rule

09-25-2009, 10:37 PM

what about the part of the sentence that I quoted did you NOT understand?

YOU said:

"A majority of people are in fact happy with the way things "

if only 44% are satisified with the overalll quality of the American medical system, your sentence cannot be correct.

A huge majoirty are happy with their coverage, and Obamacare will take it away. If they lose thier coverage they are not allowed to buy ins from the company of their choice - they must buy Obamacare

maineman

09-25-2009, 10:39 PM

A huge majoirty are happy with their coverage, and Obamacare will take it away. If they lose thier coverage they are not allowed to buy ins from the company of their choice - they must buy Obamacare

your sentence was incorrect...and your own link proved it.

people may be happy with THEIR coverage but still realize that the system, as a whole, is broken and inefficient and be dissatisfied with that.

deal with it.:dance:

and nothing in any bill that I have seen would not allow people to buy insurance from the company of their choice.

Kathianne

09-25-2009, 10:39 PM

bullshit.

forcing the insurance companies to compete is not legislating their dismantling.

and why is it that the rest of the civilized world does their healthcare for pennies on the dollar compared to us and covers everyone?

There is nothing there for competition, all is for dismantling. You know that, we know that. It is wrong, my guess you know that, but don't want to go there.

maineman

09-25-2009, 10:42 PM

There is nothing there for competition, all is for dismantling. You know that, we know that. It is wrong, my guess you know that, but don't want to go there.

there is certainly room for competition. My guess is, insurance companies could be a lot more competitive if they weren't so incredibly greedy. $24M for CEO salary???? really? is THAT competition?

Having a public option might help move them in that direction.

red states rule

09-25-2009, 10:43 PM

your sentence was incorrect...and your own link proved it.

people may be happy with THEIR coverage but still realize that the system, as a whole, is broken and inefficient and be dissatisfied with that.

deal with it.:dance:

and nothing in any bill that I have seen would not allow people to buy insurance from the company of their choice.

Hey Virgil, your party has all the power - alot of Dems are the ones who see what a sham this Obamacrae bill - and they are the ones blocking it

They have gotten an earfull back in their districts - the PEOPLE DO NOT WANT THIS

Here is the part of the bill that does prevent you from buying your own ins

snip

It didn't take long to run into an "uh-oh" moment when reading the House's "health care for all Americans" bill. Right there on Page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal.
When we first saw the paragraph Tuesday, just after the 1,018-page document was released, we thought we surely must be misreading it. So we sought help from the House Ways and Means Committee.

It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of "Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage," the "Limitation On New Enrollment" section of the bill clearly states:

"Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day" of the year the legislation becomes law.

So we can all keep our coverage, just as promised — with, of course, exceptions: Those who currently have private individual coverage won't be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers.

http://theblogprof.blogspot.com/2009/07/house-health-care-bill-makes-private.html

Missileman

09-25-2009, 10:43 PM

bullshit.

forcing the insurance companies to compete is not legislating their dismantling.

and why is it that the rest of the civilized world does their healthcare for pennies on the dollar compared to us and covers everyone?

You are short sighted. The government is not going to be fair competition to the private insurance companies. The government doesn't have to make a profit, they don't have to break even, hell, they can run a gazillion dollars to the negative and then just raise our taxes to pay for their stupidity. At the same time they undercut the private insurance premiums, they pass rules which makes running an insurance company UNPROFITABLE. When the insurance companies can no longer make a profit, they WILL close their doors.

Ask a Canadian what value they place on their coverage.

maineman

09-25-2009, 10:44 PM

Hey red...why can't you deal with the fact that your own link disproved your assertion?:poke:

red states rule

09-25-2009, 10:45 PM

there is certainly room for competition. My guess is, insurance companies could be a lot more competitive if they weren't so incredibly greedy. $24M for CEO salary???? really? is THAT competition?

Having a public option might help move them in that direction.

Virgil, ins companies rank 86TH in total profit margin in the US - at 3.3%

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/08/health-insurance-industry-ranks-86-by.html

maineman

09-25-2009, 10:49 PM

red states rule

09-25-2009, 10:51 PM

and employee compensation is covered before profit is determined, yes?

$24MILLION????

Do you know how much money a run of the mill state farm insurance agent makes in the middle of maine? take a guess.

So likeObama you want to cap the income of people, as well as force them to take Obamcare?

That should do wonders for the economy, the free market, and the quality of healthcare

So far you and Obama have been busted in multipal lies. No wonder so many Dems are not suporting it, and the voters have loudly expressed their disapproval of Obamacare

maineman

09-25-2009, 10:54 PM

So likeObama you want to cap the income of people, as well as force them to take Obamcare?

That should do wonders for the economy, the free market, and the quality of healthcare

So far you and Obama have been busted in multipal lies. No wonder so many Dems are not suporting it, and the voters have loudly expressed their disapproval of Obamacare

I don't want to cap anyone's income, and I certainly don't want to force anyone to take the public option.

Like I said....you made a statement...and then you posted a link that disproved that very statement. Until you admit that, I guess you got nothing but smoke to blow up someone ELSE's ass.

g'nite.

red states rule

09-25-2009, 10:59 PM

I don't want to cap anyone's income, and I certainly don't want to force anyone to take the public option.

Like I said....you made a statement...and then you posted a link that disproved that very statement. Until you admit that, I guess you got nothing but smoke to blow up someone ELSE's ass.

g'nite.

What are you babbling about. My links show people will NOT be able to buy coverage from a company, Dems are out to put ins companies out of business, ins companies do NOT make an "obscene" profit, and people are happy with their coverage and do not want the government to take it away

Deal with it Virgil. Voters do NOT want this, and some Dems in Congress are NOT supporting it

avatar4321

09-25-2009, 11:07 PM

so yurt.... I take it that you are quite content to leave our healthcare system untouched?

what we need to do is let go of it completely. the governments choked it enough. how do you think we got this problem

red states rule

09-25-2009, 11:12 PM

what we need to do is let go of it completely. the governments choked it enough. how do you think we got this problem

If libs get their hands on the healthcare industry, they will then be able to control nearly every aspect of our lives. What we eat, what type of car we drive, what we do in our homes, what hobbies we enjoy, what sprots we take part in, and the list goes on

They will able to order us how to live since it would have a direct impact on our healthcare

That is what libs want, and they will stop at nothing to get the increased power and influence

maineman

09-26-2009, 07:28 AM

What are you babbling about. My links show people will NOT be able to buy coverage from a company, Dems are out to put ins companies out of business, ins companies do NOT make an "obscene" profit, and people are happy with their coverage and do not want the government to take it away

Deal with it Virgil. Voters do NOT want this, and some Dems in Congress are NOT supporting it

I showed you a quote from your own link that showed that a majority of Americans were unhappy with the healthcare system in America.... which is directly opposite from the statement you made.

maineman

09-26-2009, 08:07 AM

Kathianne

09-26-2009, 08:26 AM

People want the costs to come down or at least stop rising so fast. They want those unable to be insured, to get insured. They are not keen on forcing anyone to buy that do not want to.

Yet, at the heart of this of the issue is 'trust.' While they don't necessarily 'trust' their insurance companies, my guess is they do so a lot more than the government:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gJK9ly3ovzfflxGjV-dxk2sLILKgD9ASOPSO2

Budget chief contradicts Obama on Medicare costs
By ERICA WERNER (AP) – 3 days ago

WASHINGTON — Congress' chief budget officer on Tuesday contradicted President Barack Obama's oft-stated claim that seniors wouldn't see their Medicare benefits cut under a health care overhaul.

The head of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, Douglas Elmendorf, told senators that seniors in Medicare's managed care plans could see reduced benefits under a bill in the Finance Committee.
The bill would cut payments to the Medicare Advantage plans by more than $100 billion over 10 years.

Elmendorf said the changes "would reduce the extra benefits that would be made available to beneficiaries through Medicare Advantage plans."...

maineman

09-26-2009, 08:40 AM

do you intend to address the two poll questions in my last post, or simply ignore them?

maineman

09-26-2009, 08:56 AM

a few more that might need some comment from the right:

CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. Sept. 11-13, 2009. N=1,012 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3 (for all adults).

"Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling health care policy?"
Approve 51%
Disapprove 47%
Unsure 2%

"From everything you have heard or read so far, do you favor or oppose Barack Obama's plan to reform health care?"
Favor 51%
Oppose 46%
Unsure 3%

Missileman

09-26-2009, 09:03 AM

http://www.pollingreport.com/health.htm

a few interesting questions from the latest New York Times/CBS News poll:

"Which of the following three statements comes closest to expressing your overall view of the health care system in the United States? (1) On the whole, the health care system works pretty well and only minor changes are necessary to make it work better. OR, (2) There are some good things in our health care system, but fundamental changes are needed. OR, (3) Our health care system has so much wrong with it that we need to completely rebuild it."

Minor 19%
Changes Fundamental 51%
Changes Completely 27%
Rebuild Unsure 3%

9/19-23/09

That is 78% who feel that we need fundamental change or a complete rebuild of the system!!

"Regardless of how you usually vote, who do you think has better ideas about reforming the health care system: Barack Obama, or the Republicans in Congress?"

Barack Obama 52%
Republicans in Congress 27%
Both 2%
Neither 11%
Unsure 8%

9/19-23/09

and that would appear to indicate that the people don't believe the GOP has any answers. Maybe it's time for them to sit down, stfu, and let the president do what the people sent him to Washington to do.

Nice little bit of selective posting there...hack!

From your same poll:

Only 47% approve of the way Obama is handling healthcare.

78% are Very or Somewhat satisfied with the quality of their healthcare.

Almost 2/3rds or respondents don't fully understand the proposed changes to our healthcare system so any answers to questions about them are at best, uninformed.

46% say they need more info before they can decide on whether to support Obama's plans. Only 30% currently "mostly support" and those numbers have been dropping steadily as more and more of the shit they're trying to rush trhough the process comes to light.

All in all, maybe it's time for you to sit down and stfu

maineman

09-26-2009, 09:05 AM

Nice little bit of selective posting there...hack!

From your same poll:

Only 47% approve of the way Obama is handling healthcare.

78% are Very or Somewhat satisfied with the quality of their healthcare.

Almost 2/3rds or respondents don't fully understand the proposed changes to our healthcare system so any answers to questions about them are at best, uninformed.

46% say they need more info before they can decide on whether to support Obama's plans. Only 30% currently "mostly support" and those numbers have been dropping steadily as more and more of the shit they're trying to rush trhough the process comes to light.

All in all, maybe it's time for you to sit down and stfu

selective posting?

are you suggesting that I MADE UP those numbers?

Rather than simply throw more numbers back at me, why not try to explain the ones that I posted?

Care to take a stab at that?

I didn't think so.:poke:

Missileman

09-26-2009, 09:07 AM

maineman

09-26-2009, 09:08 AM

LOL...didn't like the 47% approval in the latest poll Virgil?

different polls.

Now...do you HAVE an answer for the numbers I posted or is this silly shit all you have?

Missileman

09-26-2009, 09:13 AM

selective posting?

are you suggesting that I MADE UP those numbers?

Rather than simply throw more numbers back at me, why not try to explain the ones that I posted?

Care to take a stab at that?

I didn't think so.:poke:

Firstly, buy a dictionary. Selective has nothing to do with making things up.

You cherry picked 2 questions out of a series and painted a rosy picture of your position.

All I've done is point out other questions and responses in the same poll that show there are lots of thorns in those roses of yours.

Missileman

09-26-2009, 09:14 AM

different polls.

Now...do you HAVE an answer for the numbers I posted or is this silly shit all you have?

The lower number is in the later poll...hack!

maineman

09-26-2009, 09:35 AM

The lower number is in the later poll...hack!

still a different polling firm...comparing them is apples and oranges....

now are you gonna address the questions I posted or not?

maineman

09-26-2009, 09:36 AM

Firstly, buy a dictionary. Selective has nothing to do with making things up.

You cherry picked 2 questions out of a series and painted a rosy picture of your position.

All I've done is point out other questions and responses in the same poll that show there are lots of thorns in those roses of yours.

all you did was selectively cherry pick OTHER numbers...

I see.

now... are you gonna address the first two I posted or not?

Missileman

09-26-2009, 10:01 AM

all you did was selectively cherry pick OTHER numbers...

I see.

now... are you gonna address the first two I posted or not?

Sure Virgil...just for you. "Fundamental change" is too vague a concept to be used as an argument of support for what's being proposed in DC. A MORE appropriate question would have been, "Do you favor fixing the few things that are wrong with our healthcare system OR do you want to throw away the whole thing and start from scratch with government-run healthcare.

A fundamental change could be something as simple as interstate health insurance to increase competition and lower prices. So, "in favor of fundamental change", is in NO WAY an indorsement for Obama's plans...as much as you'd wish they were.

As for the second part, the GOP isn't an obstacle in the boondoggle going on in DC, the dems have a majority. It's the bill itself that's the problem.

maineman

09-26-2009, 01:03 PM

Sure Virgil...just for you. "Fundamental change" is too vague a concept to be used as an argument of support for what's being proposed in DC. A MORE appropriate question would have been, "Do you favor fixing the few things that are wrong with our healthcare system OR do you want to throw away the whole thing and start from scratch with government-run healthcare.

A fundamental change could be something as simple as interstate health insurance to increase competition and lower prices. So, "in favor of fundamental change", is in NO WAY an indorsement for Obama's plans...as much as you'd wish they were.

As for the second part, the GOP isn't an obstacle in the boondoggle going on in DC, the dems have a majority. It's the bill itself that's the problem.

a fundamental change is certain more than minor tweaking or sitting doing nothing which is exactly what the insurance industry wants to have happen. How do you account for the fact that nearly 50% MORE americans want a complete change than those who favor only minor change?

And you cannot escape the second question. The republicans in congress are not trusted by Americans on this issue.... they should step aside and let those who are MORE trusted do what the people sent them to do.

and while we're being all buddy buddy, missileman, what is YOUR first name so that I can be just as familiar with you as you are with me?

Missileman

09-26-2009, 03:14 PM

a fundamental change is certain more than minor tweaking or sitting doing nothing which is exactly what the insurance industry wants to have happen. How do you account for the fact that nearly 50% MORE americans want a complete change than those who favor only minor change?

How do you account for over half of Americans wanting neither of those 2 options?

And you cannot escape the second question. The republicans in congress are not trusted by Americans on this issue.... they should step aside and let those who are MORE trusted do what the people sent them to do.

and while we're being all buddy buddy, missileman, what is YOUR first name so that I can be just as familiar with you as you are with me?

And you can't escape the fact that the dems have no interest in fixing the things that are wrong with our system, but engaged in efforts to grab power and increase the flow of taxpayer money into DC...money that will no doubt get diverted into more pork projects instead of being used to improve healthcare.

You can call me Missileman, Virgil.

maineman

09-26-2009, 03:20 PM

How do you account for over half of Americans wanting neither of those 2 options?

51% of Americans want FUNDAMENTAL change. Flap your gums all you want, but the republican party is, in NO way, supporting any sort of FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE in our health care system.

And you can't escape the fact that the dems have no interest in fixing the things that are wrong with our system, but engaged in efforts to grab power and increase the flow of taxpayer money into DC...money that will no doubt get diverted into more pork projects instead of being used to improve healthcare.

that's because what you claim to be a FACT, isn't anything but your hack opinion.

You can call me Missileman, Virgil.

and you can call me maineman, missileman. If you wanna do shit to deliberately antagonize our discussions, we just won't have them anymore.

got it? good.

Missileman

09-26-2009, 03:44 PM

51% of Americans want FUNDAMENTAL change. Flap your gums all you want, but the republican party is, in NO way, supporting any sort of FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE in our health care system.

You sound like an Obama sound bite...all fluff, no substance. On and on and on and saying NOTHING. C'mon Virgil...explain what FUNDAMENTAL changes are being proposed by the dems if interstate health insurance is your idea of a minor tweak.

and you can call me maineman, missileman. If you wanna do shit to deliberately antagonize our discussions, we just won't have them anymore.

got it? good.

No problem Virgil...we can just sit quietly and watch the annihilation of the dems running for re-election in 2010.

Gaffer

09-26-2009, 03:49 PM

You sound like an Obama sound bite...all fluff, no substance. On and on and on and saying NOTHING. C'mon Virgil...explain what FUNDAMENTAL changes are being proposed by the dems if interstate health insurance is your idea of a minor tweak.

No problem Virgil...we can just sit quietly and watch the annihilation of the dems running for re-election in 2010.

I gotta spread the rep around, but I'll get back to ya. :beer:

red states rule

09-27-2009, 06:32 AM

I gotta spread the rep around, but I'll get back to ya. :beer:

Took care of it for you Gaffer

Meanwhile, liberals ignore the polls, the town halls, and continue to try and ram thru government run healthcare

Liberals to fight for public option in health plan

Influential Senate Democrats eager to produce a more progressive health care reform bill will push this week for a public option and to require employers to provide insurance, pitting liberal Democrats against both their party's moderate members and Republicans in major battles.

As the Senate Finance Committee enters its second week of debate, Democratic Sens. John D. Rockefeller IV of West Virginia and Charles E. Schumer of New York plan to try and insert a public option, a government-run insurance plan proponents say will help contain medical costs by competing with private insurers.

"We're going to have a full-blown debate in the committee," Mr. Schumer said. "This is the starting gate, and we know that it will get better and better as we move on."

Mr. Schumer concedes that the public option is the "underdog" in the moderate-conservative panel led by Sen. Max Baucus, Montana Democrat.

If Democrats can't get the public option tacked onto the bill in the Finance Committee, they'll have another shot when the Finance Committee bill is merged with another health bill from the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. There will be yet another chance when the bill gets to the Senate floor. Final changes would be made when the House and Senate bills are merged.

"True health care reform cannot be realized without a strong public insurance option that works for American families, and I intend to offer this amendment in the Senate Finance Committee," Mr. Rockefeller said.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/27/liberals-to-fight-for-public-option/

red states rule

09-27-2009, 06:35 AM

51% of Americans want FUNDAMENTAL change. Flap your gums all you want, but the republican party is, in NO way, supporting any sort of FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE in our health care system.

that's because what you claim to be a FACT, isn't anything but your hack opinion.

and you can call me maineman, missileman. If you wanna do shit to deliberately antagonize our discussions, we just won't have them anymore.

got it? good.

Virgil, you do NOT need a SINGLE Republican vote to pass Obamacare. It is your fellow Dems who are preventing its passage

Unlike you, they can see what a bad bill it is. They do not like the cost which will add to the deficit and the national debt. They do not like the tax increases. They do not like fines and jail time it would impose on people who decline Obamacare

Unlike YOU, there are some Dems who care more how this bill will hurt the people and the economy then they do about winning a political fight

maineman

09-27-2009, 07:39 AM

Virgil, you do NOT need a SINGLE Republican vote to pass Obamacare. It is your fellow Dems who are preventing its passage

Unlike you, they can see what a bad bill it is. They do not like the cost which will add to the deficit and the national debt. They do not like the tax increases. They do not like fines and jail time it would impose on people who decline Obamacare

Unlike YOU, there are some Dems who care more how this bill will hurt the people and the economy then they do about winning a political fight

I showed you the polling data that supports my position. you conveniently avoid discussing any of it. no surprise there.

if we pass healthcare reform withour republican support, so be it. It will get passed, which most Americans think is a good thing, despite you and the loud vocal minority who would tend to make everyone think otherwise.

Maybe Maelstrom has some cute post somewhere online that you can go find to respond with. Go look... and then plagiarize him like you did before:poke:

red states rule

09-27-2009, 07:43 AM

I showed you the polling data that supports my position. you conveniently avoid discussing any of it. no surprise there.

if we pass healthcare reform withour republican support, so be it. It will get passed, which most Americans think is a good thing, despite you and the loud vocal minority who would tend to make everyone think otherwise.

Maybe Maelstrom has some cute post somewhere online that you can go find to respond with. Go look... and then plagiarize him like you did before:poke:

You are running one ONE stat Virgil - while ignoring about 8 others. Keep ducking them Virgil - and keep ignoring the lack of support from your own party for this tax and spend bill

You are only interested in a political win - and could not care less this bill will NOT lower the cost of healthcare or IMPROVE the quality of care

maineman

09-27-2009, 07:45 AM

You are running one ONE stat Virgil - while ignoring about 8 others. Keep ducking them Virgil - and keep ignoring the lack of support from your own party for this tax and spend bill

You are only interested in a political win - and could not care less this bill will NOT lower the cost of healthcare or IMPROVE the quality of care

I am running several and you fail to explain any of them.

because you have no testicles.:laugh2:

red states rule

09-27-2009, 07:47 AM

I am running several and you fail to explain any of them.

because you have no testicles.:laugh2:

My links show people will NOT be able to buy coverage from a company, Dems are out to put ins companies out of business, ins companies do NOT make an "obscene" profit, and people are happy with their coverage and do not want the government to take it away

Deal with it Virgil. Voters do NOT want this, and Dems in Congress are NOT supporting it. You do not need a SINGLE Republicna vote to pass it

Support for this bill is at its lowest level - yet Dem leaders want to ram it thru, as you want to do

maineman

09-27-2009, 07:56 AM

My links show people will NOT be able to buy coverage from a company, Dems are out to put ins companies out of business, ins companies do NOT make an "obscene" profit, and people are happy with their coverage and do not want the government to take it away

Deal with it Virgil. Voters do NOT want this, and Dems in Congress are NOT supporting it. You do not need a SINGLE Republicna vote to pass it

Support for this bill is at its lowest level - yet Dem leaders want to ram it thru, as you want to do

CBS News/New York Times Poll. Sept. 19-23, 2009. N=1,042 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

[1]
"Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling health care?"
Approve 47
Disapprove 45
Unsure 8

[2]
"Which of the following three statements comes closest to expressing your overall view of the health care system in the United States? (1) On the whole, the health care system works pretty well and only minor changes are necessary to make it work better. OR, (2) There are some good things in our health care system, but fundamental changes are needed. OR, (3) Our health care system has so much wrong with it that we need to completely rebuild it."

Minor Changes 19
Fundamental Changes 51
Completely Rebuild 27
Unsure 3

[3]
"Regardless of how you usually vote, who do you think has better ideas about reforming the health care system: Barack Obama, or the Republicans in Congress?"

Barack Obama 52
Republicans in Congress 27
Both 2
Neither 11
Unsure 8

[4]
Would you favor or oppose the government offering everyone a government-administered health insurance plan -- something like the Medicare coverage that people 65 and older get -- that would compete with private health insurance plans?"

Favor 65
Oppose 26
Unsure 9

QUIT RUNNING AWAY. EXPLAIN THE RESPONSES TO THOSE FOUR QUESTIONS! :lol:

red states rule

09-27-2009, 08:00 AM

This mornings daily tacking poll

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/var/plain/storage/images/media/obama_index_graphics/september_2009/obama_approval_index_september_27_2009/250539-1-eng-US/obama_approval_index_september_27_2009.jpg

So much for your posts where Obama's numbers WENT UP AFTER THE 9-12 PROTESTS

and as far as support for Obamacare

Friday, September 18, 2009

56% of voters nationwide now oppose the health care reform proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. That’s the highest level of opposition yet measured and includes 44% who are Strongly Opposed.

Just 43% now favor the proposal, including 24% who Strongly Favor it.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform

maineman

09-27-2009, 08:26 AM

Can't quite find the testicles necessary to explain those four poll questions?

Not surprising.

red states rule

09-27-2009, 08:33 AM

Can't quite find the testicles necessary to explain those four poll questions?

Not surprising.

Ypu are grasping at straws Virgil

red states rule

09-27-2009, 09:15 AM

CBS News/New York Times Poll. Sept. 19-23, 2009. N=1,042 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

[1]
"Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling health care?"
Approve 47
Disapprove 45
Unsure 8

[2]
"Which of the following three statements comes closest to expressing your overall view of the health care system in the United States? (1) On the whole, the health care system works pretty well and only minor changes are necessary to make it work better. OR, (2) There are some good things in our health care system, but fundamental changes are needed. OR, (3) Our health care system has so much wrong with it that we need to completely rebuild it."

Minor Changes 19
Fundamental Changes 51
Completely Rebuild 27
Unsure 3

[3]
"Regardless of how you usually vote, who do you think has better ideas about reforming the health care system: Barack Obama, or the Republicans in Congress?"

Barack Obama 52
Republicans in Congress 27
Both 2
Neither 11
Unsure 8

[4]
Would you favor or oppose the government offering everyone a government-administered health insurance plan -- something like the Medicare coverage that people 65 and older get -- that would compete with private health insurance plans?"

Favor 65
Oppose 26
Unsure 9

QUIT RUNNING AWAY. EXPLAIN THE RESPONSES TO THOSE FOUR QUESTIONS! :lol:

You mean this NY Times-CBS poll Virgil with a huge OVERSAMPLE OF DEMS?

NY Times's Latest Heavily Pro-Democratic Poll Still Finds Resistance to Obama-Care
By Clay Waters (Bio | Archive)
September 25, 2009 - 14:35 ET

The latest New York Times-CBS poll was reported by Adam Nagourney and Dalia Sussman for Friday's front page -- "Public Wary of Obama on War and Health Care, Poll Finds." The news wasn't great for Barack Obama's agenda, though Nagourney, the paper's chief political reporter, performed some helpful spinning for the president.

Revealingly, the poll still gives the president a 56% approval rating, one of his highest recent numbers. The Gallup poll, for example, has him in the low fifties of late, and Rasmussen Reports has him at 51% today.

One possible reason for Obama's relatively high standing is the Times' opaque "poll weighting" methodology. The "weighting" formula applied by the pollsters in this latest poll increased the gap between Democrat and Republican respondents from a "raw" six-point gap in actual respondenst (34%-28% Democrats over Republicans) to a 15-point chasm in the "weighted" final poll (37%-22% Democrats over Republicans).

Those raw figures showing a six-point gap come from the CBS version of the poll, which unlike the Times version shows the actual, "unweighted" numbers of Democrat and Republican respondents as well as the "weighted" numbers used in the poll itself.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/clay-waters/2009/09/25/ny-timess-latest-heavily-pro-democratic-poll-still-finds-resistance-oba

maineman

09-27-2009, 10:20 AM

Still running away, I see.

predictable.

and clearly, you have no idea what the term "oversampling" even means. :lol:

red states rule

09-27-2009, 10:23 AM

Still running away, I see.

predictable.

Hey Virgil, you are the one pushing a poll with a heavy oversample of Dems. What is new? Dems want higher taxes, more government control of the nations healthcare system, and YOU think it reflects the overall will of the nation

Obama is indeed tanking int he polls, support for Obamacare is heading South - and YOU still think people are for it

Remember Virgil - it is your fellow Dems preventing it from passing

Something you still keep ducking

gabosaurus

09-27-2009, 10:45 AM

http://i36.tinypic.com/1177d77.jpg

red states rule

09-27-2009, 10:58 AM

Just for you Gabby - and for Virigl as well

http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/99-500.gif

maineman

09-27-2009, 11:53 AM

Hey Virgil, you are the one pushing a poll with a heavy oversample of Dems. What is new? Dems want higher taxes, more government control of the nations healthcare system, and YOU think it reflects the overall will of the nation

Obama is indeed tanking int he polls, support for Obamacare is heading South - and YOU still think people are for it

Remember Virgil - it is your fellow Dems preventing it from passing

Something you still keep ducking

we proved months ago, that you don't have a clue what the term "oversampling" even means. I asked you to explain why people would answer those four questions in the way that they did. And all you can do in response is show that you are an idiot AND a coward.:laugh2:

red states rule

09-27-2009, 12:02 PM

we proved months ago, that you don't have a clue what the term "oversampling" even means. I asked you to explain why people would answer those four questions in the way that they did. And all you can do in response is show that you are an idiot AND a coward.:laugh2:

TRANSLATION - Do not point out the poll I am so proud of has alot more Democrats polled then Republicans and Independents. Only talk about how I was (for a few moments) riding high ans sprewing my usual bullshit. Can we please now get back to the loaded and one sided poll questions I want to talk about and stop bringing facts in the damn discussion?

maineman

09-27-2009, 12:09 PM

TRANSLATION - Do not point out the poll I am so proud of has alot more Democrats polled then Republicans and Independents. Only talk about how I was (for a few moments) riding high ans sprewing my usual bullshit. Can we please now get back to the loaded and one sided poll questions I want to talk about and stop bringing facts in the damn discussion?

again... you don't know what the term oversampling even means... and you hide behind your ignorance as a means of not having to display your cowardice. If you could address those questions and their answers, that would be greatg, but as long as I have known you, I have NEVER known anyone better than you at ducking and dodging and running away from simple questions.

red states rule

09-27-2009, 12:13 PM

again... you don't know what the term oversampling even means... and you hide behind your ignorance as a means of not having to display your cowardice. If you could address those questions and their answers, that would be greatg, but as long as I have known you, I have NEVER known anyone better than you at ducking and dodging and running away from simple questions.

This is what I know Mr Hack - the poll you are basing your arguments on that people want Obamacare has 37% Dems and 22% Republican.

You contnue to ignore the fact it is Dems who are preventing Obamacare from passing, and opposition for Obamacare is at its highest levels

Obama's media blitz lowered his personal approval numebrs, and has done nothing to gather support for his plan to have the government takeover of the healthcare industry

maineman

09-27-2009, 12:15 PM

still can't address those four questions, eh?

red states rule

09-27-2009, 12:17 PM

still can't address those four questions, eh?

Eh I did Virgil. I expressed my "shock" a poll with an oversample of Dems wanted Obamacare

Now keep ducking my points - it is all you can do. You can't spin the numbers

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/var/plain/storage/images/media/obama_index_graphics/september_2009/obama_approval_index_september_27_2009/250539-1-eng-US/obama_approval_index_september_27_2009.jpg

maineman

09-27-2009, 12:29 PM

Eh I did Virgil. I expressed my "shock" a poll with an oversample of Dems wanted Obamacare

Now keep ducking my points - it is all you can do. You can't spin the numbers

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/var/plain/storage/images/media/obama_index_graphics/september_2009/obama_approval_index_september_27_2009/250539-1-eng-US/obama_approval_index_september_27_2009.jpg

and you continue to duck my points by hiding behind your ignorance of what the poling term "oversampling" actually means.

sad.

red states rule

09-27-2009, 12:39 PM

and you continue to duck my points by hiding behind your ignorance of what the poling term "oversampling" actually means.

sad.

Virgil, I am also not surprised you would jump on a poll with an oversample of Dems - that way you get the results you want

Problem is, it is NOT the way a majority of Americans think

Are you still going to say how Obama's number went UP after the 9-12 protest - or are you going to go by say the Daily Kos poll to plug Obama's approval numbers?

maineman

09-27-2009, 01:06 PM

red states rule

09-27-2009, 01:25 PM

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html

still above 50%. Seems as if his opposition has slipped a bit recently...

and you STILL won't admit that you have ZERO idea what the term "oversampling" means.

You do want to ignore what is going on don't you Virgil?

Keep doing that - iot is what you do best and keeps you in your secure liberal bubble

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history

Nukeman

09-27-2009, 01:29 PM

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html

still above 50%. Seems as if his opposition has slipped a bit recently...

and you STILL won't admit that you have ZERO idea what the term "oversampling" means.

ANY poll taken of ANYONE who does not have the final price tag for each and EVERY tax payer in the US is pure speculation. These Polls are BS since anyone being polled does not have the proper informaiton to make a valid decision!!!!!

I guarentee MM if the people were asked that if they wanted health care reform and it was only going to cost them x number of thousands of dollars in new taxes your approval would not even exist!!!!!!!!!!!!

maineman

09-27-2009, 01:33 PM

you "guarantee" huh?

got some sort of cyrstal ball?:lol:

opinions are like assholes... everyone's got one and everyone else's smells.

red states rule

09-27-2009, 01:35 PM

you "guarantee" huh?

got some sort of cyrstal ball?:lol:

opinions are like assholes... everyone's got one and everyone else's smells.

Here ya go Virgil - read it and spin, duck, dodge, amd lie

Poll: Americans want health care bill, but not the cost

WASHINGTON — Most Americans say it's important to overhaul health care this year, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds, but they are less enthusiastic about some of the proposals to pay for it.

And while a majority say controlling costs should be the legislation's top goal, more than nine in 10 oppose limits on getting whatever tests or treatments they and their doctors think are necessary.

The findings underscore the difficult path ahead for the White House and Congress as the health care debate enters crunch time. President Obama, who has called for the House and Senate to pass bills before their August recess, met Monday with two key congressional chairmen to try to hammer out financing for the $1 trillion-plus legislation.

"For those naysayers and cynics who think that this is not going to happen, don't bet against us," Obama said at the White House.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-07-13-poll-health-care_N.htm

Nukeman

09-27-2009, 01:38 PM

you "guarantee" huh?

got some sort of cyrstal ball?:lol:

opinions are like assholes... everyone's got one and everyone else's smells.

I am sure you know all about assholes (since your head is up yours most of the time). By the way great language I see from you!!! Good God fearing man that you are!!!!!!!!!!

Missileman

09-27-2009, 01:40 PM

opinions are like Virgils...

Fixed that for ya! No thanks necessary.

maineman

09-27-2009, 03:23 PM

Poll: Americans want health care bill.

no kidding. thanks for that.

Kathianne

09-27-2009, 03:35 PM

no kidding. thanks for that.

whoops, you forgot the dependent clause. No surprise for a liar.

red states rule

09-27-2009, 03:51 PM

no kidding. thanks for that.

Deperate people do desperate things Virgil. In your world, that is what the headline is of the story you said that did not exist

Once a lying hack - always a lying hack. I guess you have lied so much it is now a standard everyday part of your life

red states rule

09-27-2009, 03:51 PM

whoops, you forgot the dependent clause. No surprise for a liar.

Gotta spread the rep around Kathianne - I owe you

maineman

09-27-2009, 07:13 PM

Gotta spread the rep around Kathianne - I owe you

birds of a smelly feather stick together.

YOur own post says that Americans want the health care bill. Of COURSE Americans are worried about it costing too much... so am I. But that doesn't mean that I don't want congress to pass comprehensive health care reform legislation that moves toward covering all citizens, moves to eliminate waste and fraud, moves toward providing a public option to private profiteering insurance companies, moves to eliminate the practice of denying coverage, providing portability and stopping the practice of denying coverage for preexisting conditions.... those are all things that Americans want... those are all things that the republican - and blue dog democrat - whores in congress who owe their soles to the insurance companies do NOT want.

THAT is why the people are quite clear that they much prefer President Obama pushing HIS ideas through than they do the fucking republican sluts in congress.

red states rule

09-27-2009, 07:20 PM

birds of a smelly feather stick together.

YOur own post says that Americans want the health care bill. Of COURSE Americans are worried about it costing too much... so am I. But that doesn't mean that I don't want congress to pass comprehensive health care reform legislation that moves toward covering all citizens, moves to eliminate waste and fraud, moves toward providing a public option to private profiteering insurance companies, moves to eliminate the practice of denying coverage, providing portability and stopping the practice of denying coverage for preexisting conditions.... those are all things that Americans want... those are all things that the republican - and blue dog democrat - whores in congress who owe their soles to the insurance companies do NOT want.

THAT is why the people are quite clear that they much prefer President Obama pushing HIS ideas through than they do the fucking republican sluts in congress.

Look Virgil, and I know this is so difficult for a lying hack like you to grasp - a majority of people do NOT support Obamacare. You must be ingoring the poll that blows your ass out of the water. Nothing new for you however

Dems do not need a single Republican vote to pass their bill

Is "private profiteering" a mere 3.3% profit margin? That is what health care ins companies make Virgil

If there is waste and abusee - why has Obama NOT stopped it by now?

Cover all citizens? Does that mean FORCING people to take coverage they do not want? Illegals?

So now the blue dogs are whores? Oh I knew you would turn on them when they dare to listen to their constituents and not Obama. They are in DC to serve Obama - not the people that voted to put them in office :laugh2:

maineman

09-27-2009, 07:33 PM

Look Virgil, and I know this is so difficult for a lying hack like you to grasp - a majority of people do NOT support Obamacare. You must be ingoring the poll that blows your ass out of the water. Nothing new for you however

Dems do not need a single Republican vote to pass their bill

Is "private profiteering" a mere 3.3% profit margin? That is what health care ins companies make Virgil

If there is waste and abusee - why has Obama NOT stopped it by now?

Cover all citizens? Does that mean FORCING people to take coverage they do not want? Illegals?

So now the blue dogs are whores? Oh I knew you would turn on them when they dare to listen to their constituents and not Obama. They are in DC to serve Obama - not the people that voted to put them in office :laugh2:

and Democrats will, in all probability, PASS a health care reform bill with little to no republican support. That's fine with me. You refuse to acknowledge that your own link pointed out that the people DO want a health care reform bill to pass... and they KNOW that republicans aren't the ones to deliver it to them, because you all are in bed with the insurance companies... the polling data shows that... you just refuse to acknowledge it... or blow smoke about oversampling when you don't even KNOW WHAT THE TERM MEANS!!!!

We're getting health care reform this year... I'd bet you money on it, but I know you'd welch on your bets like you always do....and if it DOES contain the public option and you don't want to take it, you can just stay with your current company.... but unless you've got polaroid pictures of your boss having sex with a sheep and your job, therefore, is totally secure, you, of all people, had better HOPE that health care legislation passes than contains reform that denies insurance companies from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions, because I can imagine it would be pretty damned devastating if you had to find a new job and your new insurance company wouldn't cover you because of your previous condition. I'll bet, if that happened, you'd wished that the republicans had fought for YOUR ass as much as they fight for the insurance company CEOs.

red states rule

09-27-2009, 07:38 PM

and Democrats will, in all probability, PASS a health care reform bill with little to no republican support. That's fine with me. You refuse to acknowledge that your own link pointed out that the people DO want a health care reform bill to pass... and they KNOW that republicans aren't the ones to deliver it to them, because you all are in bed with the insurance companies... the polling data shows that... you just refuse to acknowledge it... or blow smoke about oversampling when you don't even KNOW WHAT THE TERM MEANS!!!!

We're getting health care reform this year... I'd bet you money on it, but I know you'd welch on your bets like you always do....and if it DOES contain the public option and you don't want to take it, you can just stay with your current company.... but unless you've got polaroid pictures of your boss having sex with a sheep and your job, therefore, is totally secure, you, of all people, had better HOPE that health care legislation passes than contains reform that denies insurance companies from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions, because I can imagine it would be pretty damned devastating if you had to find a new job and your new insurance company wouldn't cover you because of your previous condition. I'll bet, if that happened, you'd wished that the republicans had fought for YOUR ass as much as they fight for the insurance company CEOs.

So ignore the points I made and facts you continue to ignore Virgil. republicans have offered many ideas - all of them shot down by Dems

Many common sense ideas that would lower the cost - something Dems do not want. What is worng will allowing ins companies to sell across state lines? Or loser pays tort reform? OPr bning illegals drom getting coverage? Or no Federal money for abortions?

These are some of the ideas Republicnas offered - only to be voted down by the Dems

Again, your party does not care about lowering the cost of healthcare Virgil - they want to run healthcare in the US

maineman

09-27-2009, 07:45 PM

So ignore the points I made and facts you continue to ignore Virgil. republicans have offered many ideas - all of them shot down by Dems

Many common sense ideas that would lower the cost - something Dems do not want. What is worng will allowing ins companies to sell across state lines? Or loser pays tort reform? OPr bning illegals drom getting coverage? Or no Federal money for abortions?

These are some of the ideas Republicnas offered - only to be voted down by the Dems

Again, your party does not care about lowering the cost of healthcare Virgil - they want to run healthcare in the US

I don't ignore any of your points, Gomer....
the American people trust the president more than the GOP in congress by about 2:1. YOU seem to ignore that fact.

I care a great deal about lowering the costs of healthcare and so does my party.

and what WILL you do if you lose your job and democrats don't pass a health care reform bill that denies insurance companies from refusing you coverage for pre-existing conditions...like colon cancer? What will YOU do if that happens and your cancer returns? I'll tell you what you will do: you will die penniless... that is what you will do, and you will have no one to thank other than your beloved GOP who cares a HELL of a lot more for insurance company CEO's than they do for your sorry ass.

red states rule

09-27-2009, 07:53 PM

I don't ignore any of your points, Gomer....
the American people trust the president more than the GOP in congress by about 2:1. YOU seem to ignore that fact.

I care a great deal about lowering the costs of healthcare and so does my party.

and what WILL you do if you lose your job and democrats don't pass a health care reform bill that denies insurance companies from refusing you coverage for pre-existing conditions...like colon cancer? What will YOU do if that happens and your cancer returns? I'll tell you what you will do: you will die penniless... that is what you will do, and you will have no one to thank other than your beloved GOP who cares a HELL of a lot more for insurance company CEO's than they do for your sorry ass.

Still ducking and dodging Virgil? Not even a lame defense of your party for rejecting common sense ideas that would lower the cost of health ins?

Your only concern is winning a political fight - not "helping" the common folk and making their lives easier

You have shown over and over your party comes beofre all else. It is good to see you shown your hayte for your fellow Dems who are not bowing before Obama and doing his bidding. I am surprised you kept it bottled up for as long as you did

I doublt if I will lose my job Virgil. Oabma's economic policies are keeping collections, loan modifications, and defaults busy. No letup anytime soon

At least that segment of the economy is being stimulated :laugh2:

Such rational and reasonable post from a "minister" and on Sunday no less :rolleyes:

red states rule

09-27-2009, 07:55 PM

I don't ignore any of your points, Gomer....
the American people trust the president more than the GOP in congress by about 2:1. YOU seem to ignore that fact.

This from the hack who said Obama's approval number went up after the 9-12 rally :laugh2:

maineman

09-27-2009, 08:01 PM

This from the hack who said Obama's approval number went up after the 9-12 rally :laugh2:

which it did. Check RCP... you know, the site you used to SWEAR by?

my statement is accurate.

The people don't trust your party on health care as far as they can throw you.

and why DO you avoid the discussion about pre-existing conditions? pussy.

Missileman

09-27-2009, 08:16 PM

which it did. Check RCP... you know, the site you used to SWEAR by?

my statement is accurate.

The people don't trust your party on health care as far as they can throw you.

and why DO you avoid the discussion about pre-existing conditions? pussy.

RSR's got nothing to worry about...YOU'RE the only cancerous asshole around here.

red states rule

09-27-2009, 08:17 PM

RSR's got nothing to worry about...YOU'RE the only cancerous asshole around here.

I own someone else some rep

Virgil could also be described as a huge, puss filled, festering boil on the ass of America

Silver

09-27-2009, 08:21 PM

Friday, September 18, 2009

Fifty-six percent (56%) of voters nationwide now oppose the health care reform proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. That’s the highest level of opposition yet measured and includes 44% who are Strongly Opposed.

Just 43% now favor the proposal, including 24% who Strongly Favor it.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform

maineman

09-27-2009, 08:22 PM

Gomer: do you see ANY numbers on the left hand column that are under 50%

http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_job.htm

any comments on this:

CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. Sept. 11-13, 2009. N=1,012 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3 (for all adults).

"Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling health care policy?"

Approve 51%
Disapprove 47%
Unsure 2%

or this:

From everything you have heard or read so far, do you favor or oppose Barack Obama's plan to reform health care?"

Favor 51%
Oppose 46%
Unsure 3%

or this:

"From everything you have heard or read so far, do you favor or oppose Barack Obama's plan to reform health care?" If favor or oppose: "Do you favor/oppose that plan strongly or only moderately?"

Favor Strongly 26%
Favor Only Moderately 25%
Oppose Only Moderately 14%
Oppose Strongly 32%
Unsure 4%

or this:

"In reacting to President Obama's health care proposals, do you think the Republicans are generally offering constructive criticism, or are they being obstructionist for mostly political reasons?"

Constructive 31%
Obstructionist 61%
Unsure 5%

or this:

ABC News/Washington Post Poll. Sept. 10-12, 2009. N=1,007 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.5 (for all adults).

"Who do you trust to do a better job handling health care reform: Obama or the Republicans in Congress?"

Obama 48%
Republicans in Congress 36%
Both 1%
Neither 12%
Unsure 3%

any comments?:lol:

maineman

09-27-2009, 08:24 PM

maineman

09-27-2009, 08:26 PM

RSR's got nothing to worry about...YOU'RE the only cancerous asshole around here.

as long as he keeps his job at Walmart, let's hope you're right.

but if he loses it.... and his next employer's insurance policy - if they ever HAVE one - does not cover pre-existing conditions, he's screwed.

and he doesn't even have the balls to admit it.

maineman

09-27-2009, 08:28 PM

I own someone else some rep

Virgil could also be described as a huge, puss filled, festering boil on the ass of America

a post that is nothing but insults.... classic RSR

red states rule

09-27-2009, 08:31 PM

as long as he keeps his job at Walmart, let's hope you're right.

but if he loses it.... and his next employer's insurance policy - if they ever HAVE one - does not cover pre-existing conditions, he's screwed.

and he doesn't even have the balls to admit it.

Sorry to bust your bubble Virgil - but my job is safe

As I posted - and you ignored

Still ducking and dodging Virgil? Not even a lame defense of your party for rejecting common sense ideas that would lower the cost of health ins?

Your only concern is winning a political fight - not "helping" the common folk and making their lives easier

You have shown over and over your party comes before all else. It is good to see you shown your hayte for your fellow Dems who are not bowing before Obama and doing his bidding. I am surprised you kept it bottled up for as long as you did

I doublt if I will lose my job Virgil. Oabma's economic policies are keeping collections, loan modifications, and defaults busy. No letup anytime soon

At least that segment of the economy is being stimulated

Such rational and reasonable post from a "minister" and on Sunday no less :rolleyes:

I am secrewed as long as Dems are running things. Massive debt, increased taxes, bigger government, and more handouts that need to be paid for

I am screwed, and so is the country

But as long as Dems have increased power and control -you are happy. Regardless of how it hurts workers, and the economic condition of the nation. Neither ever mattered much to your anyway

maineman

09-27-2009, 08:32 PM

and Gomer... I forgot to add this one to the other ones in post #96:

"Would you support or oppose having the government create a new health insurance plan to compete with private health insurance plans?"

Support 55%
Oppose 42%
Unsure 3%

and comments on that one, too?:laugh2:

red states rule

09-27-2009, 08:32 PM

a post that is nothing but insults.... classic RSR

but such an accurate descrpition of the preacher man from Maine :lol:

red states rule

09-27-2009, 08:33 PM

and Gomer... I forgot to add this one:

"Would you support or oppose having the government create a new health insurance plan to compete with private health insurance plans?"

Support 55%
Oppose 42%
Unsure 3%

and comments on that one, too?:laugh2:

Compete Virgil. Dems want to put private ins companies out of business

Keep lying Virgil - it is what you do best

maineman

09-27-2009, 08:35 PM

Compete Virgil. Dems want to put private ins companies out of business

Keep lying Virgil - it is what you do best

55% support a public option. why do you run away from poll questions that don't fit your agenda?

pussy

maineman

09-27-2009, 08:37 PM

and why not show some testicles and address all the other polling questions I posted in #96.

why not?

cuz you don't HAVE any!!!:lol:

red states rule

09-27-2009, 08:38 PM

55% support a public option. why do you run away from poll questions that don't fit your agenda?

pussy

They do not support it Virgil

If they did Dems would have voted to pass Obamcare.

Again, keep the lies flowing - it is all you can do when the facts get int he way of the discussion

snip

One thing that did change during the month of August is that public perception of the protesters improved. after the initial shock wore off. Most voters came to believe that the purpose of the town hall meetings was for members of Congress to listen rather than speak.

That’s partly because just 22% believe Congress has a good understanding of the legislation.
While some Democrats have charged that opposition to the president’s plan is based upon racism, just 12% of voters agree.

Prior to the president's speech, most people with insurance said it’s likely they would be forced to change coverage if the plan passes. As Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, wrote recently in the Wall Street Journal: “The most important fundamental is that 68% of American voters have health insurance coverage they rate good or excellent … Most of these voters approach the health care reform debate fearing that they have more to lose than to gain.”

If the plan passes, 26% of voters say the quality of care will get better, and 51% say it will get worse. In August, the numbers were 23% better and 50% worse.

Fifty-one percent (51%) say passage of the plan will make the cost of health care go up while 20% say it will make costs go down. In August, 52% thought the plan would lead to higher costs, and just 17% thought it would achieve the stated goal of lowering costs.

Voters overwhelmingly believe that every American should be able to buy the same health insurance plan that Congress has. Most favor limits on jury awards for medical malpractice claims and think that tort reform will significantly reduce the cost of health care. Forty-eight percent (48%) want a prohibition on abortion in any government subsidized program while 13% want a mandate requiring abortion coverage.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform

maineman

09-27-2009, 08:40 PM

They do not support it Virgil

I gave you the polling data that says they do, Gomer. why do you run away from it?

red states rule

09-27-2009, 08:40 PM

and why not show some testicles and address all the other polling questions I posted in #96.

why not?

cuz you don't HAVE any!!!:lol:

From the poll wherethere was an oversample of Dems? Why comment? Does it come as a shock Dems want government run healthcare, or that they trust Obama more then Reopublicans?

If Hitler ran as a Dem, you would have voted for him, and openly supported his policies Virgil. No surprise in that - and no surprise you would try and pass off a Dem poll as a mandate for the nation

red states rule

09-27-2009, 08:41 PM

I gave you the polling data that says they do, Gomer. why do you run away from it?

You do pick and choose and try to ignore facts - dob't you Virgil?

If they did Dems would have voted to pass Obamcare.

Again, keep the lies flowing - it is all you can do when the facts get int he way of the discussion

snip

One thing that did change during the month of August is that public perception of the protesters improved. after the initial shock wore off. Most voters came to believe that the purpose of the town hall meetings was for members of Congress to listen rather than speak.

That’s partly because just 22% believe Congress has a good understanding of the legislation.
While some Democrats have charged that opposition to the president’s plan is based upon racism, just 12% of voters agree.

Prior to the president's speech, most people with insurance said it’s likely they would be forced to change coverage if the plan passes. As Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, wrote recently in the Wall Street Journal: “The most important fundamental is that 68% of American voters have health insurance coverage they rate good or excellent … Most of these voters approach the health care reform debate fearing that they have more to lose than to gain.”

If the plan passes, 26% of voters say the quality of care will get better, and 51% say it will get worse. In August, the numbers were 23% better and 50% worse.

Fifty-one percent (51%) say passage of the plan will make the cost of health care go up while 20% say it will make costs go down. In August, 52% thought the plan would lead to higher costs, and just 17% thought it would achieve the stated goal of lowering costs.

Voters overwhelmingly believe that every American should be able to buy the same health insurance plan that Congress has. Most favor limits on jury awards for medical malpractice claims and think that tort reform will significantly reduce the cost of health care. Forty-eight percent (48%) want a prohibition on abortion in any government subsidized program while 13% want a mandate requiring abortion coverage.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...th_care_reform

maineman

09-27-2009, 08:43 PM

Fropm the poll wherethere was an oversample of Dems? Why comment? Does it come as a shock Dems want government run healthcare, or that they trust Obama more then Reopublicans?

If Hitler ran as a Dem, you would have voted for him, and openly supported his policies Virgil. No surprise in that - and no surprise you would try and pass off a Dem poll as a mandate for the nation
run away.... you're so good at it.... you are the BIGGEST fucking pussy I have ever met on the internet...bar none. YOU don't have the balls to serve your country yet denigrate those of us who did... you don't have the balls to answer any questions posed to you... you can't address poll questions that clearly disprove your assertions... all you are is a flaming gasbag of cowardly methane.

you fuckin' stink.

red states rule

09-27-2009, 08:47 PM

run away.... you're so good at it.... you are the BIGGEST fucking pussy I have ever met on the internet...bar none. YOU don't have the balls to serve your country yet denigrate those of us who did... you don't have the balls to answer any questions posed to you... you can't address poll questions that clearly disprove your assertions... all you are is a flaming gasbag of cowardly methane.

you fuckin' stink.

The preacher man bellows another sermon. Why is Virgil you get so upset over facts, the truth, reality, and actual numbers from your own polls?

Are you upset I exposed the oversampling of Dems in the poll you were trying to pass off as a mandate for the nation?

With your bad ticker, you really should calm down and take a break. The thought of you being slumped over the keyboard and clutching your chest is indeed troubling

Of course it would justice to have to kick off cussing out Republicans, posting a profanity laced reply, while at the same time, passing yourself as a minister

Silver

09-27-2009, 08:49 PM

any comments? You ask...

Well I guess it shows that pinhead liberals like to answer the poll questions online more than Conservatives.....thats obvious

maineman

09-27-2009, 08:50 PM

The preacher man bellows another sermon. Why is Virgil you get so upset over facts, the truth, reality, and actual numbers from your own polls?

Are you upset I exposed the oversampling of Dems in the poll you were trying to pass off as a mandate for the nation?

With your bad ticker, you really should calm down and take a break. The thought of you being slumped over the keyboard and clutching your chest is indeed troubling

Of course it would justice to have to kick off cussing out Republicans, posting a profanity laced reply, while at the same time, passing yourself as a minister

I post facts...I posted tons of polling data from a variety of polls and you ignore ALL of it. Go back to #96 and address those questions. YOu don't have the balls to.... because you're a coward.

you ARE a coward, RSR...we both know that. ANd we both know why I can confidently assert that, don't we?:poke:

Silver

09-27-2009, 08:57 PM

http://www.pollingreport.com/right.htm

Slightly interesting....but I'm not into polls as a true barometer of public opinion....

red states rule

09-27-2009, 09:00 PM

maineman

09-27-2009, 09:02 PM

http://www.pollingreport.com/right.htm

Slightly interesting....but I'm not into polls as a true barometer of public opinion....

it takes a long time to turn a big ship of state around.

Go back and look at right track/wrong track polling data from October of last year.... and then comment honestly about what you think has caused the incredible change.

we both know that such honest commentary is beyond your ability.:poke:

Silver

09-27-2009, 09:15 PM

it takes a long time to turn a big ship of state around.

Go back and look at right track/wrong track polling data from October of last year.... and then comment honestly about what you think has caused the incredible change.

we both know that such honest commentary is beyond your ability.:poke:

I know what caused the data then.

And what is causing it now.....the incredible power of the left wing media....from simple nonsense that claims Michelle Obama is the fashion genius of the world, to MSM feeding the delusion that Obama is much greater, smarter and more powerful and influential than he really is...his constant presence on TV and coverage, propaganda in the schools, etc.....
In reality, it could truthfully be called, "a vast left-wing conspiracy".....and so far, its working.

red states rule

09-28-2009, 06:01 AM

I post facts...I posted tons of polling data from a variety of polls and you ignore ALL of it. Go back to #96 and address those questions. YOu don't have the balls to.... because you're a coward.

you ARE a coward, RSR...we both know that. ANd we both know why I can confidently assert that, don't we?:poke:

You post polls that had an oversample of Obama supporters so the poll taker will get the results they wanted

You turn around and bellow how it is proof the voters want more tax and spend liberalism

You Virgil are the worst kind of political hack. You live many lies, and hide behind your "service" as well as your keyboard. You have indeed put your political party ahead of your nation - and its citizens

I respect anyone who has served Virgil - I do not believe you did.

When someone lied as much as you have, it is nearly impossible to tell when they are telling the truth

red states rule

09-28-2009, 06:04 AM

it takes a long time to turn a big ship of state around.

Go back and look at right track/wrong track polling data from October of last year.... and then comment honestly about what you think has caused the incredible change.

we both know that such honest commentary is beyond your ability.:poke:

Yep, what a job the Dems are doing. A full 1/3 like the direction of the nation

I know damn well you are in that 1/3 Virgil. Dems could do anything, and you would be building them up - and tearing down anyone who dared to speak out against those policies

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/right_direction_or_wrong_track

maineman

09-28-2009, 06:27 AM

You post polls that had an oversample of Obama supporters so the poll taker will get the results they wanted

You turn around and bellow how it is proof the voters want more tax and spend liberalism

You Virgil are the worst kind of political hack. You live many lies, and hide behind your "service" as well as your keyboard. You have indeed put your political party ahead of your nation - and its citizens

I respect anyone who has served Virgil - I do not believe you did.

When someone lied as much as you have, it is nearly impossible to tell when they are telling the truth

I really don't care what you believe, Gomer. I know what I did and I know what you are paying me every month. thanks.

run away from the variety of polls and poll questions that I posted.... run back and hide behind rasmussen and your own ignorance. it's really all you got.:poke:

Jeff

09-28-2009, 06:50 AM

maineman

09-28-2009, 07:03 AM

wow thats the pot calling the kettle black, MM calling someone a coward, the same guy to invite me on this very board to kick my butt but once there ya pussied out like a little bitch

I didn't invite you anywhere to kick your butt. I invited you to my town to have a cup of coffee, as I can recall. You got as far as the next state over and were shocked that I wasn't willing to drop whatever I was doing and drive a hundred miles to see YOU.:poke:

glockmail

09-28-2009, 07:38 AM

glockmail

09-28-2009, 07:40 AM

I didn't invite you anywhere to kick your butt. I invited you to my town to have a cup of coffee, as I can recall. You got as far as the next state over and were shocked that I wasn't willing to drop whatever I was doing and drive a hundred miles to see YOU.:poke:Virgil doesn't want to get too far away from Mickey. LOL

red states rule

09-28-2009, 08:29 AM

Back to the topic at hand

Support for Obamacare continues to head south

Health Care Reform
Support for Health Care Plan Hits New Low

Monday, September 28, 2009

Just 41% of voters nationwide now favor the health care reform proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. That’s down two points from a week ago and the lowest level of support yet measured.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 56% are opposed to the plan.

Senior citizens are less supportive of the plan than younger voters. In the latest survey, just 33% of seniors favor the plan while 59% are opposed. The intensity gap among seniors is significant. Only 16% of the over-65 crowd Strongly Favors the legislation while 46% are Strongly Opposed.

For the first time ever, a slight plurality of voters now express doubt that the legislation will become law this year. Forty-six percent (46%) say passage is likely while 47% say it is not. Those figures include 18% who say passage is Very Likely and 15% who say it is Not at All Likely. Sixty percent (60%) are less certain.

Sixty-eight percent (68%) of Democrats say the plan is at least somewhat likely to become law. Sixty-one percent (61%) of Republicans disagree. Among those not affiliated with either major party, 34% say passage is at least somewhat likely while 58% say it is not.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform

glockmail

09-28-2009, 08:42 AM

Oh look, 56% of us are racists.

red states rule

09-28-2009, 08:44 AM

Oh look, 56% of us are racists.

and the tanking numbers for Obama, and Obamacare, are all due to the vast right wing conspiracy :laugh2:

maineman

09-28-2009, 10:52 AM

and the tanking numbers for Obama, and Obamacare, are all due to the vast right wing conspiracy :laugh2:

http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_job.htm

see any numbers in the left hand column that are less than 50%:lol:

glockmail

09-28-2009, 12:41 PM

http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_job.htm

see any numbers in the left hand column that are less than 50%:lol:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/25/us...cs/25poll.html

The NYT's poll shows that only 30% "mostly support" Obamacare.

BTW- your last PM threatening me- I've sent to Mickey. Your life is about to change. LOL

maineman

09-28-2009, 01:55 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/25/us...cs/25poll.html

The NYT's poll shows that only 30% "mostly support" Obamacare.

BTW- your last PM threatening me- I've sent to Mickey. Your life is about to change. LOL

I take it that your latest avatar is a photo of your latest romantic interest?

glockmail

09-28-2009, 04:25 PM

I take it that your latest avatar is a photo of your latest romantic interest? No its your boyfriend.

maineman

09-28-2009, 04:29 PM

No its your boyfriend.

I am happily married. I don't have a boyfriend. Why would you have the photo of some man as your avatar if not because of your affection for him?

glockmail

09-28-2009, 04:33 PM

I am happily married. I don't have a boyfriend. Why would you have the photo of some man as your avatar if not because of your affection for him? So you have an affair on the side to make you extra happy. No big deal, since homosexuality according to liberals is normal moral natural and healthy. And you do like to be healthy, don't you?

Folks have avatars for all different reasons. Some have pictures of Obama even though they hate the bastard.

maineman

09-28-2009, 04:35 PM

Folks have avatars for all different reasons. Some have pictures of Obama even though they hate the bastard.

and you have this guy.... do you hate him, or love him?

and if you DO think that he has some connection to me, isn't putting him up as YOUR avatar just proof of your unhealthy obsession with me?

glockmail

09-28-2009, 04:36 PM

and you have this guy.... do you hate him, or love him?

and if you DO think that he has some connection to me, isn't putting him up as YOUR avatar just proof of your unhealthy obsession with me? I think Mickey's great guy. Don't you think so?

Silver

09-28-2009, 04:37 PM

http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_job.htm

see any numbers in the left hand column that are less than 50%:lol:

Read it and weep, comrade Marxist....

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform

maineman

09-28-2009, 04:39 PM

Read it and weep, comrade Marxist....

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform

ah...rasmussen... the only pollster out there with Obama under 50. Why did I know that you would be a fan of his?

maineman

09-28-2009, 04:40 PM

I think Mickey's great guy. Don't you think so?

So.... you DO have a crush on him after all.

I thought as much.

Missileman

09-28-2009, 05:18 PM

http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_job.htm

see any numbers in the left hand column that are less than 50%:lol:

Lots under 50% on this page...especially on the subject of HEALTHCARE...read em and weep, Virgil.

http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_ad.htm

glockmail

09-28-2009, 05:28 PM

So.... you DO have a crush on him after all.

I thought as much.As usual, the first thing you think about is homosexuality. Why is that Virgil?

maineman

09-28-2009, 07:08 PM

As usual, the first thing you think about is homosexuality. Why is that Virgil?

I dunno.... maybe because you inexplicably use the photographs of strange men as your avatar?

seems rather fag-like to me.

maineman

09-28-2009, 07:10 PM

Lots under 50% on this page...especially on the subject of HEALTHCARE...read em and weep, Virgil.

http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_ad.htm

the post was in regards to RSR suggesting that Obama's ratings were sinking like a stone.... like I said... still above 50% in every single poll but one.... that means that every pollster in America except one finds that a majority of Americans still approve of the President's job performance.

read that and weep, douchebag.

glockmail

09-28-2009, 07:34 PM

I dunno.... maybe because you inexplicably use the photographs of strange men as your avatar?

seems rather fag-like to me. Lots of folks use strange things as avatars. Does mine bother you for some reason?

maineman

09-28-2009, 07:36 PM

Lots of folks use strange things as avatars. Does mine bother you for some reason?

bother me? not in the least.

confirm my suspicions about your twisted sexuality? absolutely

although I must say, this guy looks a lot older than the kind of fellows I had previously thought you particularly enjoyed.

Missileman

09-28-2009, 07:39 PM

the post was in regards to RSR suggesting that Obama's ratings were sinking like a stone.... like I said... still above 50% in every single poll but one.... that means that every pollster in America except one finds that a majority of Americans still approve of the President's job performance.
read that and weep, douchebag.

Not as it pertains to HEALTHCARE...though you probably want to ignore that fact and keep harping about his overall approval even though we're discussing HEALTHCARE in this thread. That's the problem with hacks such as yourself...and dems in DC, for that matter. When confronted with info that contradicts what you cling so desperately to, that which you so desperately want to believe, you close your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears and just pretend you never saw or heard it. The looks of astonishment when the dems get ousted next election will be particulary priceless. So keep dancin', Virgil. You might as well get some return on those tap lessons you invested in.

maineman

09-28-2009, 07:48 PM

Not as it pertains to HEALTHCARE...though you probably want to ignore that fact and keep harping about his overall approval even though we're discussing HEALTHCARE in this thread. That's the problem with hacks such as yourself...and dems in DC, for that matter. When confronted with info that contradicts what you cling so desperately to, that which you so desperately want to believe, you close your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears and just pretend you never saw or heard it. The looks of astonishment when the dems get ousted next election will be particulary priceless. So keep dancin', Virgil. You might as well get some return on those tap lessons you invested in.

no doubt... the insurance industry hacks have made health care reform a tough sell.... but we'll get it done this year. We may not get all of it in the first bite, but we'll get a lot, and Americans will be pleased with the result and that will make it easier to get the rest the next time around.

glockmail

09-28-2009, 08:46 PM

bother me? not in the least.

confirm my suspicions about your twisted sexuality? absolutely

although I must say, this guy looks a lot older than the kind of fellows I had previously thought you particularly enjoyed.

Again you think of homosexuality, now calling it "twisted". How do you justify that, since the liberal line is that homosexuality is normal moral natural and healthy?

maineman

09-28-2009, 08:52 PM

Again you think of homosexuality, now calling it "twisted". How do you justify that, since the liberal line is that homosexuality is normal moral natural and healthy?

if you could find one post of mine that ever said that homosexuality was normal or moral or natural or healthy, you would do so.

But we both know that you won't.... and we both know that you don't have the fully developed testicles to admit that you misstated my position. pussy.

because you are a closeted gay man who apparently likes older fellows.....

whlat do you SEE in that guy, anyway?

Jeff

09-28-2009, 09:16 PM

if you could find one post of mine that ever said that homosexuality was normal or moral or natural or healthy, you would do so.

But we both know that you won't.... and we both know that you don't have the fully developed testicles to admit that you misstated my position. pussy.

because you are a closeted gay man who apparently likes older fellows.....

whlat do you SEE in that guy, anyway?

I have to ask, if you think homo sex is wrong why as a man of the cloth would you marry them?

oooo and by the way Glock your avatar looks like one of those fags I seen up in the north east, LOL

Jeff

09-28-2009, 09:21 PM

I didn't invite you anywhere to kick your butt. I invited you to my town to have a cup of coffee, as I can recall. You got as far as the next state over and were shocked that I wasn't willing to drop whatever I was doing and drive a hundred miles to see YOU.:poke:

Virgil I wont clutter up this thread with trash, but I know you think everyone here is beneath you, but do you honestly think they can't remember either, LOL

glockmail

09-28-2009, 09:24 PM

if you could find one post of mine that ever said that homosexuality was normal or moral or natural or healthy, you would do so.

But we both know that you won't.... and we both know that you don't have the fully developed testicles to admit that you misstated my position. pussy.

because you are a closeted gay man who apparently likes older fellows.....

whlat do you SEE in that guy, anyway?

But, but, you're a Yellow Dog Liberal Democrat, and you undyingly support a Party that champions homosexuality. If fact you have stated previously that you would gladly perform a marriage ceremony for gays at your church. How do you justify these positions if you don't believe that homosexuality is normal moral natural and healthy?

maineman

09-28-2009, 09:28 PM

But, but, you're a Yellow Dog Liberal Democrat, and you undyingly support a Party that champions homosexuality. If fact you have stated previously that you would gladly perform a marriage ceremony for gays at your church. How do you justify these positions if you don't believe that homosexuality is normal moral natural and healthy?

Like I said....if you could find ONE post of mine where I extolled the virtues of homosexuality, you would have done so by now.

I guess you're shit out of luck, eh?

and what DO you see in that elderly guy?

fag

glockmail

09-28-2009, 09:31 PM

Like I said....if you could find ONE post of mine where I extolled the virtues of homosexuality, you would have done so by now.

I guess you're shit out of luck, eh?

and what DO you see in that elderly guy?

fag How do you justify your personal hypocrisy? :lol:

Jeff

09-28-2009, 09:31 PM

glockmail

09-28-2009, 09:32 PM

I have to ask, if you think homo sex is wrong why as a man of the cloth would you marry them?

oooo and by the way Glock your avatar looks like one of those fags I seen up in the north east, LOL Yeah he's one of those overweight crappy golfers, like Virgil. LOL

Jeff

09-28-2009, 09:36 PM

Yeah he's one of those overweight crappy golfers, like Virgil. LOL

Almost looks like one of those guys that hunt the 7-11's for a living, LOL

red states rule

09-28-2009, 10:39 PM

no doubt... the insurance industry hacks have made health care reform a tough sell.... but we'll get it done this year. We may not get all of it in the first bite, but we'll get a lot, and Americans will be pleased with the result and that will make it easier to get the rest the next time around.

No Obama made it a tough sell with his multipal lies, huge cost, tax increases, and increased government bureaucracy

People are buying the BS that Obama can add 40 million to the public rolls and LOWER the cost

red states rule

09-28-2009, 10:56 PM

BTW Virgil, the main reason Dems are giving for Obamacare is a sham.

Obama (and his dornes like you) keeps saying that healthcare is so broken that it must be fixed immediately. The nation can't go on with the current condition of our healthcare system.

First, Obama wanted Obamcare done before the August recess. Now, we are told it will be finished by Thanksgiving.

If it's so critical to have this done immediately, why would it not take effect until 2013 if it did pass?

Perhaps Obama and the Dems know this bill stinks, it will not do what is promised, and Obama wants the 2012 election behind him before the voters feel the effects of Obamacare

Jeff

09-29-2009, 06:06 AM

But, but, you're a Yellow Dog Liberal Democrat, and you undyingly support a Party that champions homosexuality. If fact you have stated previously that you would gladly perform a marriage ceremony for gays at your church. How do you justify these positions if you don't believe that homosexuality is normal moral natural and healthy?

Wow that new avatar almost looks like deputy dope, LOL

red states rule

09-29-2009, 06:10 AM

Wow that new avatar almost looks like deputy dope, LOL

Reminds me of Inspector Droopy

http://www.posteremag.ro/imagini/419-Droopy.jpg

glockmail

09-29-2009, 07:04 AM

Almost looks like one of those guys that hunt the 7-11's for a living, LOL "Officer Fat Ass" LOL

glockmail

09-29-2009, 07:06 AM

....

If it's so critical to have this done immediately, why would it not take effect until 2013 if it did pass? ... Wow I didn't realize that. Crickets chirping now with Preacher Fat Ass.

Jeff

09-29-2009, 07:06 AM

"Officer Fat Ass" LOL

If I had to be chased by the police I hope it is one just like him, lol, I could be very wealthy, LOL

glockmail

09-29-2009, 07:14 AM

If I had to be chased by the police I hope it is one just like him, lol, I could be very wealthy, LOL Can you imagine him and Virgil huffing and puffing around the golf course? LOL

Jeff

09-29-2009, 07:29 AM

Can you imagine him and Virgil huffing and puffing around the golf course? LOL

LMAO, I imagine them doing other things, LOL

red states rule

09-29-2009, 07:31 AM

Jeff

09-29-2009, 07:36 AM

and now we can sit back and enjoy Virgil's Cricket Serenade

http://www.audiosparx.com/sa/archive/Insects/Crickets/Katydid-and-Cricket-Serenade/242160

Virgil and officer porky our out eating at the local buffet before a round of miniature golf, LOL

red states rule

09-29-2009, 08:06 AM

The reason Obama is having a hard time "seling" Obamacare is becuase the lies about his plan are being exposed on a daily basis

Does Cost of Uncompensated Care Justify Forcing People to Buy Insurance?
by Jacob Sullum

At a July press conference, President Obama claimed "the average American family is paying thousands of dollars in hidden costs" because uncompensated health care for the uninsured drives up the price of medical coverage. In an interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos on Sunday, by contrast, he said uncompensated care costs the average family $900.

According to a 2008 report from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, both of those estimates are way off. The foundation's analysis indicates that the true annual cost per family is more like $200, with uncompensated care accounting for "less than 1 percent of private health insurance costs."

These numbers are important because the president's main justification for requiring every American to buy health insurance, a central element of his reform plan, is that uninsured people unfairly impose costs on their fellow citizens. That rationale not only has a weak empirical basis, it conceals the real motivation for the individual insurance mandate, while dodging moral and constitutional questions about it.

During the presidential campaign, Obama castigated his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, for saying the federal government should force everyone to buy health insurance. Five months into his presidency, however, Obama said he supported "making every American responsible for having health insurance coverage."

In a speech this month, he argued that "the young and the healthy" cannot be permitted to "take the risk and go without coverage" because "such irresponsible behavior costs all the rest of us money," since "we pay for these people's expensive emergency room visits."

The problem with this argument is not just that the cost of such uncompensated care seems to be much lower than the president claims. It's also his assumption that everyone who goes without insurance is a freeloader.

What about the young and healthy (or middle-aged and wealthy) person who decides insurance is not worth his money but pays all his medical expenses out of his own pocket? His choice does not impose costs on anyone, but under Obama's plan he would still be punished for it.

The real reason Obama insists upon making the young and healthy buy insurance they don't want is not the relatively minor free-rider problem, but the potentially ruinous adverse selection problem: The most expensive patients are the ones who are most likely to sign up for coverage. To keep the official 10-year price tag of his plan below that magical $1 trillion threshold, he needs to balance sick people who rack up big bills with healthy people who pay for insurance but don't use it. Instead of acknowledging this reality, Obama portrays the healthy uninsured as irresponsible leeches.

http://townhall.com/columnists/JacobSullum/2009/09/23/does_cost_of_uncompensated_care_justify_forcing_pe ople_to_buy_insurance

glockmail

09-29-2009, 08:07 AM

LMAO, I imagine them doing other things, LOL True, maineman was obviously projecting back there, and he must know the guy. Imagine the scandal, the local chief of police and the local preacher on youtube, caught in the act poking each other up the ass. LOL

But hey, its normal natural moral and healthy behavior between two Democrats. LOL

maineman

09-29-2009, 08:16 AM

red states rule

09-29-2009, 08:22 AM

I have not read any provision of any bill under consideration that postpones enactment until 2013. Can you provide me with a link through Thomas to that section of any legislation that includes that provision?

I guess you are like most Dems and Obama - you want the bill [assed but you have NOT read it

Here is one link that shows Obamacare will not take effect until after the 2012election

Published on TheHill.com September 22, 2009

Now that the various healthcare plans are being reduced to print, the financial details are emerging and with them a fundamental conclusion is becoming evident: The Obama plan is a giant tax increase for much of the American people (not just the rich).

Start with the mandate that falls on those whose welfare is the supposed object of the entire program — the uninsured. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the average uninsured person or family will have to pay between 15 and 20 percent of his or their total income on health insurance (counting premiums, deductibles and co-payments) before any of the subsidy in the Baucus bill kicks in. Even in the more generous House bill, the tab that the uninsured must pay is very, very high.

Most uninsured would likely be quite happy to avoid paying this much of their income for health insurance. But they will be forced to shell out the money under the program. Others would want catastrophic coverage (which for the young would likely not be too costly) but the Obama program requires comprehensive insurance that is costly to satisfy the government requirement.

Having spent the entire campaign speaking about “affordable” coverage, it turns out the program is not at all affordable, but a massive new tax on the average uninsured American.

Then there is the tax on health insurance premiums that is to finance about a quarter of the subsidy for the uninsured. This tax, billed as only to be levied on “gold-plated” policies, will, in fact, reach down to the average American. The Baucus bill specifies that the tax of 35 percent would be put on all premiums over $8,000 for an individual and on proportionately higher premiums for families. Current estimates are that about one-tenth of the current health insurance policies would be taxable. But the $8,000 premium level that will trigger coverage is not indexed for inflation, let alone for medical inflation, which typically runs twice as high. ObamaCare will take effect in 2013. By then, the percentage of Americans subject to the tax will doubtless expand dramatically. Indeed, this trigger is a new Alternative Minimum Tax waiting to happen. As inflation pushes more and more Americans into tax eligibility, it will become a universal health insurance excise tax of 35 percent. While the tax will be imposed on health insurers and employers, it will, obviously, be passed along to the policyholders.

http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/2009/09/23/obamacare-taxes-for-everyone/

maineman

09-29-2009, 08:25 AM

so....nothing from any legislation? just something from Dick Morris?

I'll wait until you can substantiate that claim with something real.

red states rule

09-29-2009, 08:27 AM

so....nothing from any legislation? just something from Dick Morris?

I'll wait until you can substantiate that claim with something real.

Well, we have this Virgil. It is much like the so called "stimulus" bill. It is so important that is passes right away - but it does nothing for YEARS

But the tax increases will happen ASAP

OBAMACARE, IF APPROVED, WON'T BEGIN UNTIL 2013
http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=513...

CNSNews.com
Medicare Took One Year; Overhaul to Take Nearly 10
Monday, July 20, 2009
By Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Associated Press

Washington (AP) - President Lyndon Johnson signed the Medicare law on July 30, 1965, and 11 months later seniors were receiving coverage. But if President Barack Obama gets to sign a health care overhaul this fall, the uninsured won't be covered until 2013 - after the next presidential election.

In fact, a timeline of the 1,000-page health care bill crafted by House Democrats shows it would take the better part of a decade - from 2010-2018 - to get all the components of the far-reaching proposal up and running. The moving parts include a national insurance marketplace overseen by a brand new federal bureaucracy - the Health Choices Administration.

Medicare was big. This could be bigger. If a bill passes, Americans probably will be discovering - and debating - its effects for years.

"It touches every part of the health care system," said Dan Mendelson, a health care consultant who served in Bill Clinton's administration during the second term. "We are only just beginning to explore and understand what the effects would be on premiums, providers and the evolution of health care technology."

The plan is "at least as far-reaching" as what former President Clinton and first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton attempted in the 1990s, says Mendelson, now president of Avalere Health.

Did anybody think it was going to be simple?

The House bill isn't close to becoming law. The Senate has its own ideas. But the House proposal represents the most comprehensive effort by lawmakers to meet Obama's twin goals of guaranteeing coverage to all Americans and slowing the pace of rising medical costs.

It advances the first goal slowly, and independent analysts doubt it will meet the second.

First comes the pain. In 2011, the government would start collecting higher taxes on upper-income people to pay for the overhaul. The uninsured would have to wait until 2013 before they started receiving the benefits - after the 2010 and 2012 elections.

Collecting the taxes up front - and paying for the benefits later - would help to keep costs manageable over the 10-year window Congress uses for budget estimates. Still, it's not yet adding up. The Congressional Budget Office says the plan would increase the government's deficit by about $240 billion over that period. Long-range forecasts could turn out worse.

One thing isn't in dispute - the role of the federal government would increase each year.

"Having accepted a government bailout of the financial system, and with the government having a big part in running GM, it is just a very different attitude now in terms of the government," said Gail Wilensky, who ran Medicare for President George H.W. Bush "We're seeing that in this package."

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/obamacare-if-approved-wont-begin-until-2013/blog-113141/

maineman

09-29-2009, 08:31 AM

red states rule

09-29-2009, 08:34 AM

more partisan sites... can you point to a section of any legislation listed on Thomas that shows implementation being delayed until 2013?

Simple question. one word answer is all that is needed.

yes or no?

Can;t admit you are BUSTED again Virgil? It is clear the ems do not care about "fixing" the nations healthcare system - only the power and money they will get from it

Another link

If Obama's not stupid …

Thomas Sowell
Posted: September 08, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

The most important thing about what anyone says are not the words themselves but the credibility of the person who says them.

The words of convicted swindler Bernie Madoff were apparently quite convincing to many people who were regarded as knowledgeable and sophisticated. If you go by words, you can be led into anything.

No doubt millions of people will be listening to the words of President Barack Obama tomorrow night when he makes a televised address to a joint session of Congress on his medical-care plans. But, if they think that the words he says are what matters, they can be led into something much worse than being swindled out of their money.

One plain fact should outweigh all the words of Barack Obama and all the impressive trappings of the setting in which he says them: He tried to rush Congress into passing a massive government takeover of the nation's medical care before the August recess – for a program that would not take effect until 2013!

Whatever President Obama is, he is not stupid. If the urgency to pass the medical-care legislation was to deal with a problem immediately, then why postpone the date when the legislation goes into effect for years – more specifically, until the year after the next presidential election?

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=109141

maineman

09-29-2009, 08:38 AM

red states rule

09-29-2009, 08:42 AM

I asked you for a simple link to anything of substance.... and all you provide is more partisan editorializing... most of what your links talk about are portions of various House Bills which clearly will not be the final product. Now....can you just answer my simple question?

if the answer is no, just say so.

This is why Obamacare is not "selling" Virgil. To many damn pesky facts keep getting in the way of your party leaders trying to ram the bill thru

Why don't YOU set the record set and post when Obamacare will take effect?

You can't. Like the mega pork stimuls bill, it will take effect AFTER the elections and when Dems think they will be safe from thw wrath of the voters

glockmail

09-29-2009, 08:54 AM

It looks like RSR was right. From the bill itself:
(b) Effective Date- The amendments made by subsection (a) shall apply to periods beginning after December 31, 2012. http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3200/text?version=ih&nid=t0:ih:1101

Kathianne

09-29-2009, 08:55 AM

and from Senate Finance Committee:

http://finance.senate.gov/press/Bpress/2009press/prb090909.pdf

glockmail

09-29-2009, 08:56 AM

Also from this link, they have a little poll going:

21% Users Support Bill
1568 in favor / 5802 opposed

Missileman

09-29-2009, 09:03 AM

more partisan sites... can you point to a section of any legislation listed on Thomas that shows implementation being delayed until 2013?

Simple question. one word answer is all that is needed.

yes or no?

How about the same story from a liberal news source?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/07/22/eveningnews/main5181012.shtml

red states rule

09-29-2009, 09:04 AM

Like the Dems, Virgil knows damn well most voters would - and are reacting unfavorably to what is in the Obamcare bills

That's is why all the changes will begin after the 2012, and why they are desperate to ran it thru when nobody is looking

It's all a sham, a scam, and a typical Democrat power grab

red states rule

09-29-2009, 09:20 AM

Looks like Virgil has left the thread in shame

This is Virgils reply to all the links that show Obamacare will take effect in 2012

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/CQFEY9RIRJA&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CQFEY9RIRJA&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

maineman

09-29-2009, 11:59 AM

How about the same story from a liberal news source?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/07/22/eveningnews/main5181012.shtml

that talks only about house bills, does it not? Arew you suggesting that the public option amendments to Baucus' bill, that were submitted this morning by Rockefeller and Shumer were somehow known to CBS News a week ago?

maineman

09-29-2009, 12:01 PM

Looks like Virgil has left the thread in shame

I left nothing in shame. As I am sure you forgot, I visit a hospice patient every tuesday and thursday morning for two hours each day. She's 91 years old and a HUGE Obama supporter!

maineman

09-29-2009, 12:07 PM

It looks like RSR was right. From the bill itself: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3200/text?version=ih&nid=t0:ih:1101

THE bill?:lol:

YOu mean Rangel and Waxman's bill. NOT the bill being debated in the Senate Finance Committee.

Missileman

09-29-2009, 01:04 PM

that talks only about house bills, does it not? Arew you suggesting that the public option amendments to Baucus' bill, that were submitted this morning by Rockefeller and Shumer were somehow known to CBS News a week ago?

Are you saying that the amendment will start Obamacare earlier than 2013 or is this just more off topic crap?

maineman

09-29-2009, 01:54 PM

Are you saying that the amendment will start Obamacare earlier than 2013 or is this just more off topic crap?

I am saying that I don't know and I am sure than none of the posters from the right know either. The amendments just were offered a few hours ago. To suggest that the house bills are THE bill is pretty silly, don't you think?

I actually could support Oly Snowe's "trigger" proposal.

Missileman

09-29-2009, 02:16 PM

I am saying that I don't know and I am sure than none of the posters from the right know either. The amendments just were offered a few hours ago. To suggest that the house bills are THE bill is pretty silly, don't you think?

I actually could support Oly Snowe's "trigger" proposal.

I'm not a proponent of waiting for the final version to roll out to then look and see what's in it.

And it really sounds like you want to pretend that the House bills AREN'T bills and we needn't be worried about anything they might contain.

Missileman

09-29-2009, 05:59 PM

Little-Acorn

09-29-2009, 06:34 PM

The sticking point of any health care reform is going to be the public option insurance. The House apparently won't pass anything without it, and the Senate can't pass one with it.

Textbook definition of a win-win situation. :dance:
The Framers designed our government so that three (actually four) very different groups had to agree on a law, or else it would never get passed.

1.) The House (citizen-legislators who were only in for two years, whose job was to get good stuff for the people in their district, then after two years they went back to their real jobs),
2.) The Senate (Professional politicians whose job is to get good things for their state, and make sure their state didn't lost any of its powers to the Fed govt),
3.) The President (A man selected for his character and integrity, whose job is to check and if necessary veto the excesses of the Congress and make sure only laws that conform to the Constitution get passed),
4.) The Courts (mostly lawyers and judges, immune to political pressure once seated, whose job is to make sure new laws don't conflict with older ones).

Only if all three (or four) very different groups agreed on a law, could it go into the books and stay there. The system was designed so that the only laws that got passed, were laws that LOTS of people wanted.

Naturally, that plan has gone askew to varying degrees, some wildly so. Horsetrading in Congress (Hey, you vote for my law and I'll vote for yours) undercuts the different-groups-must-agree philosophy; the 17th amendment practically destroyed the Senate's vital preserving-state-power function; judges on the courts who hold bizarre views of the Constitution's philosophy have permitted vast Federal usurpation of formerly-state power; and as for the President's integrity and Constitutional adherence... well.

But here with the (unconstitutional) Govt Healthcare Plan, it looks like a remnant of that design philosophy is still active. If the House and Senate can't agree on such a major provision as the "public option" (aka Big Govt's foot in the door of taking over health care), then the Health Care plan SHOULD NOT BE PASSED AT ALL.

And that's just the way the Framers wanted it. :D

Missileman

09-29-2009, 07:01 PM

Textbook definition of a win-win situation. :dance:
The Framers designed our government so that three (actually four) very different groups had to agree on a law, or else it would never get passed.

1.) The House (citizen-legislators who were only in for two years, whose job was to get good stuff for the people in their district, then after two years they went back to their real jobs),
2.) The Senate (Professional politicians whose job is to get good things for their state, and make sure their state didn't lost any of its powers to the Fed govt),
3.) The President (A man selected for his character and integrity, whose job is to check and if necessary veto the excesses of the Congress and make sure only laws that conform to the Constitution get passed),
4.) The Courts (mostly lawyers and judges, immune to political pressure once seated, whose job is to make sure new laws don't conflict with older ones).

Only if all three (or four) very different groups agreed on a law, could it go into the books and stay there. The system was designed so that the only laws that got passed, were laws that LOTS of people wanted.

Naturally, that plan has gone askew to varying degrees, some wildly so. Horsetrading in Congress (Hey, you vote for my law and I'll vote for yours) undercuts the different-groups-must-agree philosophy; the 17th amendment practically destroyed the Senate's vital preserving-state-power function; judges on the courts who hold bizarre views of the Constitution's philosophy have permitted vast Federal usurpation of formerly-state power; and as for the President's integrity and Constitutional adherence... well.

But here with the (unconstitutional) Govt Healthcare Plan, it looks like a remnant of that design philosophy is still active. If the House and Senate can't agree on such a major provision as the "public option" (aka Big Govt's foot in the door of taking over health care), then the Health Care plan SHOULD NOT BE PASSED AT ALL.

And that's just the way the Framers wanted it. :D

I've no doubt that some pork will get added to the bill to get a few votes...such are the PoS politicians we have working in DC. The f**kers will use our own money against us!

maineman

09-29-2009, 07:25 PM

Hey Virgil...the Rockefeller and Shumer amendments both died a horrible death. The sticking point of any health care reform is going to be the public option insurance. The House apparently won't pass anything without it, and the Senate can't pass one with it.

so...missiledick... as a republican with no skin in the game, why don't you just stfu, sit back and wait and see what bill finally makes it past all the democratic self imposed hurdles?

Yurt

09-29-2009, 07:35 PM

I've no doubt that some pork will get added to the bill to get a few votes...such are the PoS politicians we have working in DC. The f**kers will use our own money against us!

unfortunately true...pork and lobbyist....two promises obama failed to keep and i think he purposefully lied about it in order to help his election bid....

Missileman

09-29-2009, 07:37 PM

so...missiledick... as a republican with no skin in the game, why don't you just stfu, sit back and wait and see what bill finally makes it past all the democratic self imposed hurdles?

Ouch...missiledick. How'd you find out my wife's nickname for me? Was that supposed to hurt me Virgil? What are you...12?

Sitting back and waiting is exactly what the dems were hoping for with their trojan horse of a bill. That tactic would have resulted in coverage for illegal aliens among other things not good for the American people. The more info that comes out about what those asshats are plotting in their legislation, the better. That info btw is what is driving support away from the bill, enraging voters, and providing the basis for a dem ouster next year. Sucks to be you!

maineman

09-29-2009, 07:42 PM

Ouch...missiledick. How'd you find out my wife's nickname for me? Was that supposed to hurt me Virgil? What are you...12?

Sitting back and waiting is exactly what the dems were hoping for with their trojan horse of a bill. That tactic would have resulted in coverage for illegal aliens among other things not good for the American people. The more info that comes out about what those asshats are plotting in their legislation, the better. That info btw is what is driving support away from the bill, enraging voters, and providing the basis for a dem ouster next year. Sucks to be you!

I beg to disagree. My party owns the white house and both houses of congress.... and we'll defintely pass some form of health care reform this session... in that case, it does suck to be you, regardless of the fanstasies you treat yourself to.... the last time she talked to me, your wife was laughing at the little vienna sausage your had for a dick... "missiledick"

Missileman

09-29-2009, 07:46 PM

I beg to disagree. My party owns the white house and both houses of congress.... and we'll defintely pass some form of health care reform this session... in that case, it does suck to be you, regardless of the fanstasies you treat yourself to.... the last time she talked to me, your wife was laughing at the little vienna sausage your had for a dick... "missiledick"

I may have set your mental age a couple years too high. And of course as is the rule of the board, you can cease any talk about my wife immediately. Got it? Good.

maineman

09-29-2009, 07:51 PM

I may have set your mental age a couple years too high. And of course as is the rule of the board, you can cease any talk about my wife immediately. Got it? Good.
you bring your wife into the conversatoin, expect me to continue her participation. got it? good.

fuckin' douchebag

Missileman

09-29-2009, 07:55 PM

you bring your wife into the conversatoin, expect me to continue her participation. got it? good.

fuckin' douchebag

You just aren't too smart are you. I'm allowed to talk about my wife, you aren't...and I'll wager a mod will agree. So shut your lying fuckin mouth, assclown!

maineman

09-29-2009, 07:57 PM

You just aren't too smart are you. I'm allowed to talk about my wife, you aren't...and I'll wager a mod will agree. So shut your lying fuckin mouth, assclown!

so..your wife calls you missledick?

and she tells me that you've got a penis the size of a pencil.

I wonder who she is telling the truth to?

notice how I didn't stop talking about your wife since you brought her up?

Kathianne

09-29-2009, 08:01 PM

I may have set your mental age a couple years too high. And of course as is the rule of the board, you can cease any talk about my wife immediately. Got it? Good.

I'm certain you wife is upstanding, as you are. Never engage the likes of MM, a known liar and scourge of the military to set your standards. Trust me, none will do so. Ignore the ijit.

maineman

09-29-2009, 08:03 PM

I'm certain you wife is upstanding, as you are. Never engage the likes of MM, a known liar and scourge of the military to set your standards. Trust me, none will do so. Ignore the ijit.
but are you certan that his upstanding wife calls him "missiledick"?

THAT is the question!:lol:

Kathianne

09-29-2009, 08:04 PM

but are you certan that his upstanding wife calls him "missiledick"?

THAT is the question!:lol:

As certain your wife calls you limp dick.

Kathianne

09-29-2009, 08:06 PM

I'm certain you wife is upstanding, as you are. Never engage the likes of MM, a known liar and scourge of the military to set your standards. Trust me, none will do so. Ignore the ijit.

MM 'neg'd' me here, though of course he is unable to pos or neg anything. Bottom line, he sucks. Both in opinion and ability to influence.

Missileman

09-29-2009, 08:12 PM

but are you certan that his upstanding wife calls him "missiledick"?

THAT is the question!:lol:

She would have no way of knowing, since she, like you, have never talked to my wife. You'll have to take my word for it Virgil. I know it sucks that your 10-year-old wit formulated an insult that wasn't really an insult, but hey...it is an improvement over your normal 8-year-old wit. Keep up the good work.

What is a certainty is that you can't move your lips or fingers without creating a lie.

Jeff

09-29-2009, 08:40 PM

Did Virgil go and get himself banned again, LOL, damn could we have a do over I wasn't here for it, LOL

Yurt

09-29-2009, 08:51 PM

Did Virgil go and get himself banned again, LOL, damn could we have a do over I wasn't here for it, LOL

good lord, does that lying loser never stop....he has no place to go now...banned at another board as well....

no loss

red states rule

09-29-2009, 10:36 PM

good lord, does that lying loser never stop....he has no place to go now...banned at another board as well....

no loss

He has plenty of places to go. Dem Underground, Daily Kos, and all the porn sites

Virgil will be back. Like a stray cat, he never goes very far away

red states rule

09-30-2009, 06:42 AM

Did Virgil go and get himself banned again, LOL, damn could we have a do over I wasn't here for it, LOL

It has only been a few hours, and I feel so miserable without Virgil; it's almost like having him here

red states rule

09-30-2009, 06:57 AM

What will Pelosi, and Reid do now? There own fellow Dems are voting agaist government run healthcare

Will Reid change the rules and try to get 51 votes?

Liberals Refuse to Give Up on Gov't Health Option

After a so-called public health insurance option failed to pass in the Senate Finance Committee, supporters vow to keep up their fight as the bill moves toward the Senate floor

WASHINGTON -- A sweeping health overhaul bill has survived a major challenge from the left, but onslaughts loom from the right on thorny issues including abortion and insurance coverage for illegal immigrants.

Liberal Democrats failed in two efforts Tuesday to include a government-run insurance option in the legislation before the Senate Finance Committee. Finance is the last of five congressional panels completing work on President Barack Obama's No. 1 domestic priority, a top-to-bottom reshaping of the U.S. health care system to hold down costs and extend coverage to the uninsured.

The outcome was expected in the moderate committee, which is the only of the five not to have embraced an new federally-run insurance plan that would compete with private insurers. Advocates say the competition would help consumers while opponents say it would destroy private companies and result in a government takeover of health care.

The committee's chairman, Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., said he saw features to like in the so-called public plan but that it wouldn't get the 60 votes necessary to advance in the Senate. "My first job is to get this bill across the finish line," said Baucus, who'd proposed nonprofit, member-owned cooperatives instead.

Supporters of the so-called "public option" vowed to keep up their fight as the bill moves toward the Senate floor, and then to negotiations with the House. Democratic leaders in both chambers are pushing for floor votes in the fall.

"We are going to keep at this and at this and at this until we succeed because we believe in it so strongly," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.

But first the bill has to get out of the Finance Committee, where hurdles will greet senators as they reconvene Wednesday for their sixth day of work. Among them: amendments expected to be offered by minority Republicans to strengthen prohibitions against illegal immigrants getting federal funding to buy insurance.

Also pending are amendments to ensure there is no federal funding for abortion.

Baucus has already tightened up language in his bill on both those issues, but they are highly fraught and critics see loopholes they want to close.

Those issues are also still pending in the House, where Democratic leaders hope to finalize legislation this week that would merge the work of three separate committees into one. Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., was to meet with the full Democratic caucus Wednesday morning to discuss issues including the final shape of a public plan she intends to include in the House bill, and how to pare the bill down to $900 billion over 10 years -- Obama's preferred price tag and about how much the Senate Finance version costs.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/30/liberals-refuse-public-option/