Opposition to Obama's destruction of the health care sector is not about race
Wilson Woods
access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters who say
it's about race know they've lost the debate.
Nickname unavailable
it race and stupidity, which ever comes first.
Wilson Woods
> On Oct 12, 9:03 pm, Wilson Woods <banm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and
>> access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters who say
>> it's about race know they've lost the debate.
>
> it race and
It's not race.
frie...@zoocrewphoto.com
I have good insurance right now. I have to work a minium 15 hours per
week and pay $7 a week out of my paycheck. That allows me to work work
part time at a regular job and work full time on my small business and
still have good health insurance.
If the new health care plan passes with a government subsidized plan,
the insurance companies will either raise rates or go out of business.
In addition, my employee will find that it is cheaper to pay the
penalty than to offer insurance. So, they could simply drop my
insurance next may when the contract expires. I could go from paying
$28 a month to $400 a month and still end up with worse insurance than
my current plan. But if I don't pay it, I could then be forced to pay
more than a thousand dollars in fines for not having insurance.
I'm sorry, but this is not a good plan, the way it is currently
written. We do need improvements, but creating a huge pyramid scheme
isn't the way to go about it. We already have one with medicare and
social security, and we have seen that it only works when there are a
bunch of people paying in that don't need anything paid out. That is
why they want to force everybody to pay for insurance even if they
don't want it. And while they say the government won't force us to use
their plan, it will be teh only plan available if we get dropped by
our employer or the insurance companies go out of business. So, no, I
don't want this plan.
I didn't want the bailouts either, and that includes the one from
Bush. It was stupid then. And it's stupid now.
We can't spend our way out of debt.
larrylaundry
It's about the Republican party sitting back while the average idiot
Republican does their dirty work for them, while the average idiot
thinks they are saving the day by acting like a bunch of complete
idiots.
Race, that just comes with the territory of the anti-Democratic
Republican minds.
Geopinion
I agree, it's not about race. It's about insurance companies' fear
that they'll be cut off from their 30% cut of each U.S. health care
dollar.
Now insurance companies are threatening to raise rates if health care
reform occurs. We should fuck the insurance companies before they fuck
us. Pass a single-payer insurance plan, or a strong public option
plan, and drive those bastards out of the health care business. I'd
rather pay a little more in taxes to have a government agency with a
mandate to provide health care benefits than pay another dime to the
CEOs and lobbyists of the insurance companies, whose books and methods
are not open to the public. At least with a government option, we
have some way to effect changes and improvements through our elected
representatives; and the books would be open to government auditors
and the public.
We don't owe insurance companies a living.
MLW
Wilson Woods
> On Oct 12, 7:03 pm, Wilson Woods <banm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and
>> access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters who say
>> it's about race know they've lost the debate.
>
> I agree, it's not about race. It's about insurance companies' fear
> that they'll be cut off from their 30% cut of each U.S. health care
> dollar.
It's about citizens' legitimate fear that they're going to have worse
health care, and worse access to what health care they get, after Obama
fucks up the health care system.
Nickname unavailable
then you admit its stupidity:)
Wilson Woods
It's about citizens' legitimate fear that they're going to have worse
Nickname unavailable
no, you admitted is was about stupidity. i will take your word for it
this time:)
Geopinion
You think handing the insurance companies 30 cents out of each health
care dollar is a good system? They don't provide an ounce of health
care and are in charge of every decision that is made about your
health care. A government-run system wouldn't be trying to maximize
profits to pay their CEOs, shareholders and lobbyists - and the bean
counters who do nothing but think of ways to deny coverage.
MLW
Wilson Woods
Wilson Woods
> On Oct 12, 7:51 pm, Wilson Woods <banm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Geopinion wrote:
>>> On Oct 12, 7:03 pm, Wilson Woods <banm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and
>>>> access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters who say
>>>> it's about race know they've lost the debate.
>>> I agree, it's not about race. It's about insurance companies' fear
>>> that they'll be cut off from their 30% cut of each U.S. health care
>>> dollar.
>> It's about citizens' legitimate fear that they're going to have worse
>> health care, and worse access to what health care they get, after Obama
>> fucks up the health care system.
>
> You think handing the insurance companies 30 cents out of each health
> care dollar is a good system?
I think lengthening the wait times /most/ people face is a shitty reform.
The Real Bev
> It's about citizens' legitimate fear that they're going to have worse
> health care, and worse access to what health care they get, after Obama
> fucks up the health care system.
I agree with everything you say, but I really wish you'd eliminate
misc.consumers.frugal-living from your newsgroup list. You might like arguing
among yourselves, but (as shown by the list of participants in your threads)
none of us is interested in the continued wrangle no matter how important the
subject is.
--
Thanks, Bev
==============================================================
"Arguing on the internet is like running a race in the Special
Olympics: even if you win, you're still retarded."
Tim Crowley
Tim Crowley
the OP is insane. For her and most racists the stupidity comes first.
But make no mistake about it. All the OP about is hate. Hate and
ignorance. She's a sad, sad case.
Tim Crowley
> Wilson Woods wrote:
> > It's about citizens' legitimate fear that they're going to have worse
> > health care, and worse access to what health care they get, after Obama
> > fucks up the health care system.
>
> I agree with everything you say, but I really wish you'd eliminate
> misc.consumers.frugal-living from your newsgroup list. Y
She is insane. She spams usenet with hate cause she needs the
attention. WEventually she looses her internet access and then comes
back with new service and a new collection of aliases.
Nickname unavailable
and she admitted it was stupidity, now she is trying to back track.
Wilson Woods
Grown men don't misappropriate "Dilbert" dialog as Usenet commentary.
Wilson Woods
>> On Oct 12, 7:34 pm, Nickname is fuckwit, a looter, wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 12, 9:03 pm, Wilson Woods <banm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and
>>>> access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters who say
>>>> it's about race know they've lost the debate.
>>> it race and stupidity, which ever comes first.
>> the OP is insane. For her and most racists the stupidity comes first.
>> But make no mistake about it. All the OP about is hate. Hate and
>> ignorance. She's a sad, sad case.
>
SgtMinor
It's about the corporate ox being gored. It's about power and money.
Our choice is whether to do this collectively, or continue to live at
the mercy of a system intent on extracting from us our last drop of blood.
The corporate powers can always count on the support of a group of
ignoramuses to fight their battles. Ignoramuses are not known for any
socially progressive positions, and tend to have little or no racial
tolerance.
Tim Crowley
the OP is insane. For her and most racists the stupidity comes first.
Tim Crowley
BUahahahahahahaha.
hint: you're insane.
Tim Crowley
Grown men laugh at you.
Buahahahahahaha.
hint: you're an insane, racist puke. You shall always be treated
thus.
larrylaundry
Yea, we saw this coming, the so-called tea parties. Saw it coming,
where they claim that everybody, even Democrats were there. But
obviously it was only designed to get racists and anti-Democratic
liberal haters into a mindless frenzy, to get them to do the corporate
Republican dirty work.
After all, if the legislation for healthcare reform get passes, the
free ride for corporate interests
will be in jepordy, then the tobacco lobby, on down the line.
The lobbying shit is why our consumer protection is so screwed up. Why
buisness as usual is damaging to the entire nation. Why Republicans
only work for themselves and not the people.
Wilson Woods
> Wilson Woods wrote:
>> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and
>> access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters who
>> say it's about race know they've lost the debate.
>
It's about preventing government from fucking over the vast majority of
Americans who are happy with their health care and their access to that
care.
Wilson Woods
> On Oct 12, 8:34 pm, Wilson Woods <banm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Tim Crowley wrote:
>>> On Oct 12, 7:03 pm, Wilson Woods <banm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and
>>>> access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters who say
>>>> it's about race know they've lost the debate.
>>> BUahahahahahahaha.
>> Grown men don't misappropriate "Dilbert" dialog as Usenet commentary.
>
> Grown men
You don't know anything about grown men, crawley. You're a retarded boy.
Lisa Lisa
> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and
> access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters who say
> it's about race know they've lost the debate.
I hear that you got down on your knees and gave Kaiser Permanente's
CEO a blowjob.
I believe it!
Lisa
Wilson Woods
No, you didn't hear that, looter.
So, why in the hell did you even bother with that lie about not being
interested in "multiculturalism"? Of *course* you're interested in it,
you goddamned lying cunt. You're *obsessed* with race, and that
naturally includes supporting "multi-culti". So why did you tell such a
preposterous lie? If you're going to lie - and you *are* going to lie,
obviously - at least make the lies plausible.
Lisa Lisa
I think he just did! Bwahaha!
Lisa
Wilson Woods
> On Oct 12, 11:00 pm, Nickname is fuckwit, a looter, wrote:
>> On Oct 12, 9:40 pm, Wilson Woods <banm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Nickname is fuckwit, a looter, wrote:
>>>> On Oct 12, 9:03 pm, Wilson Woods <banm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and
>>>>> access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters who say
>>>>> it's about race know they've lost the debate.
>>>> it race and
>>> It's not race.
>> then you admit its stupidity:)
>
> I think he just did!
No.
Lisa Lisa
wrote:
Yep. Woods is KKKrazy!
Lisa
Lisa Lisa
> Lisa Lisa, a racist looter, wrote:
>
> > On Oct 12, 10:03 pm, Wilson Woods <banm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and
> >> access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters who say
> >> it's about race know they've lost the debate.
>
> > I hear that you got down on your knees and gave Kaiser Permanente's
> > CEO a blowjob.
>
> No, you didn't hear that, looter.
Yeah, I did.
> So, why in the hell did you even bother with that lie about not being
> interested in "multiculturalism"?
There you go again, racist. You clearly are KKKrazy.
Lisa
....the_pc_jellllybean!!.!!!!.
"Wilson Woods" <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:HMmdndq9N4R0Qk7X...@earthlink.com...
> It's about preventing the government f<SMAK!>
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
It's probably good to keep in mind that this loon Ron (wilson woodduck) is a
kook who thinks milk is a govt conspiracy.
That puts it all into a bit of perspective for you.
*snicker*
btw Ronny, how's my system clock looking these days, ya stupid dipshit? ??
....the_pc_jellllybean!!.!!!!.
Hey man, did you ever get your dear old mom's air conditioning sorted out?
Ga...@comcast.net
damn you hillbillies are always minding everyone else's business,
fuck off, we're sick of fat ass, loud mouth, gutless, fat ass losers,
failures, and other assorted cross eyed,
bow legged, inbred, cocksucking hillbillies
"The Real Bev" <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:hb0s4i$aqv$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
....the_pc_jellllybean!!.!!!!.
>> I agree with everything you say, but I really wish you'd eliminate
>> misc.consumers.frugal-living from your newsgroup list.
LOL! What a fuckwit newsgroup tha must be!
Wilson Woods
You have no evidence - *none* - that opposition to Obama's plan to wreck
American health care is based on race.
Robert of St Louis
HA HA HA HA HA.
Wilson Woods
> Yeah I'm with you..."Keep the federal government out of my Medicare"
End Medicare.
Lisa Lisa
And I'm sure that most Pugs would want to do just that. All that
caterwauling about Obama wanting to throw Grandma in front of a bus
was just a Pug smokescreen for their real intention.
I'm going to steal a page from Joe Wilson, and shout out to all you
Pugs: "YOU LIE!"
Lisa
Exposer
<.... tHe_PC_JelLlLy BeAn!! .! !!! .> wrote in message
news:36tq5c....@news.alt.net...
Wilson Woods is;
Rudy Canoza is one of the biggest Usenet trolls of all times. He's a
guy with a huge inferiority complex. At 155 pounds and 70 years old,
he's also one of the biggest littlest bully-cowards in the newsgroups.
He's a anarchist purist-Libertarian who believes government serves no
purpose. All that know him know this: Rudy Canoza
has quite a long list of alias names -- and forged posts, illegal alien from
Argentina, arrested for stalking, stealing ladies lingerie, stalking radio
stations, Rudy is a glutton for attention like Sarah Palin.
Hey Rudy, go stalk her. See what happens when her militia hoodsters skin you
alive and use you as chili sauce on their next moose burrito,
Following is
an (incomplete) list of bogus names:
Jonathan Balll
R W Emerson
Citizen
Benfez
Wilson Woods
Radical Moderate
Bingo
Edward
George
Bill
Fred
Mystery Poster
Merlin the dog
Bob the dog
sil @ onairos.com
elvira
Dieter
"Dieter d.Schmidt
prickerbush
Abner Hale
Roger Whitaker
Fucktard
Apoo
Ted Bell
notgen @ yahoo.com
Jay Santos
mortons.steakho
Rudy Canoza
Trappist
sb29
Leif Erikson
S. Maizlich
SlipperySlope
Eden
Sylvia Stevens
dh@
chico chupacabra
newest: Will
----
Wilson Woods has infected this group with at least 3000 different nyms. His
real name is
Jonathan Ball of 2030 Jefferson Drive Pasadena CA91104. You
want proof that he's a racist?
Jonathan Ball
Stupid little wog; go back where you came
from. You don't belong in a civilized place.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian/msg/cabaf41717694bf5
You lose. So sorry, little wog. You go now, little wog, chop chop;
make much study, come back, six seven month, yes, sit exam, yes, maybe
you finish schoolee. Hee hee hee!
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.politics.animals/msg/d15bda57bae2ae15
Wilson Woods
Whatever, GregGeorge, you greasy little wog. Go back to your
village (if the Yanks haven't bulldozed it yet...)
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.politics.animals/msg/dd1b540bda0ce11b
Rudy Canoza
>>>>> By the way, Rudy, when I call you a racist because you called someone
>>>>> a "filthy paki wog" and speculated that they were plotting terrorist
>>>>> attacks, I'm
>>>>
>>>> You're just swearing at me. It doesn't mean anything
>>>> else. There was no meaningful content in your cursing.
>>>
>>> So using racial slurs is acceptable,
>>
>> You were simply swearing, rupie, according to the
>> tenets of your religion.
>
> What would you call calling someone a "filthy paki wog"?
GregGeorge *is* a filthy paki wog.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism/msg/f5e5a5fd96cca3dd
>>FUCK OFF, GregGeorge. Just FUCK OFF back to your dusty
>>open sewer village and leave the civilized people alone.
>
> It's "PEOPLE" you illiterate fuck head.
FUCK OFF, GregGeorge, you foot-stamping ignorant
IMPOTENT little wog. Fuck off back to your shithole of
a village in Krumblingstan. You little piece of
mongoose shit.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian/msg/0e55ab46e1e5e722
Wilson Woods
> On Oct 13, 10:25 am, Wilson Woods <banm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Robert of St Louis wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah I'm with you..."Keep the federal government out of my Medicare"
>> End Medicare.
>
> And I'm sure that most Pugs would want to do just that.
Probably not, looter, but it's what should be done.
You still haven't answered why you started bullshitting about race.
Like all other leftists, you find race to be /crucially/ important. You
were lying when you said you're not interested in "multiculturalism" -
you're *obsessed* with it, and with the entire left-wing race obsession.
Why did you lie?
freeisbest
> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and
> access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters who say
> it's about race know they've lost the debate.
Do you get paid for this kind of flat lie? Is it piece work, or
do you get a weekly check working for BigMed Inc. in one of those
little cubicles? I ask because no ordinary citizen would be stupid
enough to ignore the entire First World - all of those prosperous
countries which give universal health care to ALL their citizens - and
bleat about the future as if you actually knew something. You don't.
Tell your boss that people who've lost their house because of BigMed's
profits, those who lost a job because Bush exported their jobs, those
who have seen a relative die early because s/he can't "afford" medical
care - those people aren't falling for BigMed's b.s. any more.
Michael Coburn
> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and
> access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters who say
> it's about race know they've lost the debate.
However, this total lying pig shit from the rightarded is exemplified by
everything "Wilson Woods" presents. The racism of the rightarded is
revealed in every way in most of what they say. And the rightarded are
proud of it and wear it as a badge of honor.
--
"Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson
m...@privacy.net
>hose
>who have seen a relative die early because s/he can't "afford" medical
>care - those people aren't falling for BigMed's b.s. any more.
agree
I know a lot of people who are denied coverage cause of
some stupid pre-existing condition such as gerd
=========================================================
Try to make me, fuckwit - I'll shoot you dead, and laugh about it over a
beer later. Then I'll stub a cigar butt out on your orphan child's head.-Wilson Woods
ne...@millions.com
wrote:
>Robert of St Louis wrote:
>> Yeah I'm with you..."Keep the federal government out of my Medicare"
>
>End Medicare.
Whoa, Big Guy, cleaning up Medicare may be in the cards first.
DCI
Beam Me Up Scotty
In all it's years when has MEDICARE been cost efficient and not over
budget with unfunded mandates?
It needs to be looked at as being grandfathered out of existence.
People need something that will be there and NOT bankrupt in 5 years.
Obama will cut 500billion from Medicare if you believe his lies. That
will gut it or Bankrupt the economy by not cutting it, so either way you
will lose your Quality of care soon.
--
*BE VERY CONCERNED*
Liberal *Nirvana* isn't here yet... but I can hear you lefties "humming"
Koom-Bay-Ya.
SgtMinor
> ne...@millions.com wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 07:25:56 -0700, Wilson Woods <ban...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Robert of St Louis wrote:
>>>> Yeah I'm with you..."Keep the federal government out of my Medicare"
>>> End Medicare.
>> Whoa, Big Guy, cleaning up Medicare may be in the cards first.
>>
>> DCI
>
>
> In all it's years when has MEDICARE been cost efficient and not over
> budget with unfunded mandates?
>
>
> It needs to be looked at as being grandfathered out of existence.
>
> People need something that will be there and NOT bankrupt in 5 years.
>
> Obama will cut 500billion from Medicare if you believe his lies. That
> will gut it or Bankrupt the economy by not cutting it, so either way you
> will lose your Quality of care soon.
>
"Obama will cut 500billion from Medicare..." Do you have a cite for this?
larrylaundry
It is based on race because that is part of the Republican program.
Being anti-Liberal is part of the program, not actually thinking about
things based on you people political opposition is part of the
program.
It's something that can make Republicans say we need to chop off
peoples hands who steal then say the middle east is evil because they
chop off peoples hands that steal. Everything you people are and do is
based on one than and another.
Racist, anti-liberal, Republican, it's all interchangeable.
ne...@millions.com
Where'd get this "you people" stuff?
DCI
Wilson Woods
> freeisbest <demeter...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> hose
>> who have seen a relative die early because s/he can't "afford" medical
>> care - those people aren't falling for BigMed's b.s. any more.
>
> agree
>
> I know a lot of people who are denied coverage
No, you don't. I bet you don't know *anyone* who has been denied
coverage, liar.
larrylaundry
Short version, ok it may get long,
Obviously the Republican party is nothing more than an us against them
thing,
Obama won the peace prize and the whole kit-and-kaboodle Republican
prty at once screamed foul. The tea partiers scream foul over
obamacare, the town-hallers scream foul. Obama smiles, they all scream
foul. They scream foul over everything.
The republican party, ok I'm not much of a star trek fan, but the
Republican party has become a mass 'collective' in political thinking,
the borg if you will.
Some higher up says what to think and do , and the collective just
does it.
Higher ups are, limbaugh, hannity, oriely, worldnutdaily and the like,
they are the main 'collective thinkers.
Everything in the borg's ongoing thinking is designed to oppose, not
help out anything, but the
collective.
you people is, you people.
larrylaundry
I do and it's like saying, fuck you, and I would go as far as saying,
they say, fuck you and your family. We are just in it for the money.
Jerry Okamura
"Nickname unavailable" <Vid...@tcq.net> wrote in message
news:df91bf27-dd5b-4a9a...@e18g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 12, 9:03 pm, Wilson Woods <banm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and
> access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters who say
> it's about race know they've lost the debate.
it race and stupidity, which ever comes first.
Why is it "stupid" to want my fellow citizens to have as much freedom as
possible? Can you be truly free when you are dependent on someone else to
provide for your healthcare needs?
Jerry Okamura
to take care of your healthcare needs. If you value safety above freedom
you deserve neither safety or freedom. When you depend on someone else to
pay for your healtcare needs, you are betting that they will provide those
needs when you need it. Of course since you are dependent on them to
provide you with what you want or need, you have also given them the power
to not provide what you want or need when you think you need it. And "if"
you are dependent on them to provide that need, and they do not give you
what you need, you are shit out of luck....you won't get what you want or
need.
"Geopinion" <wal...@easystreet.net> wrote in message
news:8879ba63-523d-44ed...@z3g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 12, 7:03 pm, Wilson Woods <banm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and
> access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters who say
> it's about race know they've lost the debate.
I agree, it's not about race. It's about insurance companies' fear
that they'll be cut off from their 30% cut of each U.S. health care
dollar.
Now insurance companies are threatening to raise rates if health care
reform occurs. We should fuck the insurance companies before they fuck
us. Pass a single-payer insurance plan, or a strong public option
plan, and drive those bastards out of the health care business. I'd
rather pay a little more in taxes to have a government agency with a
mandate to provide health care benefits than pay another dime to the
CEOs and lobbyists of the insurance companies, whose books and methods
are not open to the public. At least with a government option, we
have some way to effect changes and improvements through our elected
representatives; and the books would be open to government auditors
and the public.
We don't owe insurance companies a living.
MLW
Jerry Okamura
countries in the world today, we are suppose to be unique because we put a
very high value on individual freedom. You have less individual freedom
when you depend on someone else to take care of your healthcare needs. You
have more freedom, when you are able to take care of your own healthcare
needs. So, it is a question that each of us has to ask ourselves....how
important is freedom? If you decide that your safety is more important than
your freedom, that is your decision to make, but in that case, you really do
not deserve either safety or freedom.
"freeisbest" <demeter...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f51e84af-b157-4e2a...@m11g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
Jerry Okamura
<m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:1ih9d5hd3t9agq55q...@4ax.com...
> freeisbest <demeter...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>hose
>>who have seen a relative die early because s/he can't "afford" medical
>>care - those people aren't falling for BigMed's b.s. any more.
>
> agree
>
> I know a lot of people who are denied coverage cause of
> some stupid pre-existing condition such as gerd
>
they have, why even bother to spend money on insurance? Why not wait until
you really need to get that care, then buy the insurance?
Rod Speed
> "Nickname unavailable" <Vid...@tcq.net> wrote in message
> news:df91bf27-dd5b-4a9a...@e18g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 12, 9:03 pm, Wilson Woods <banm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and
>> access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters who
>> say it's about race know they've lost the debate.
>
> it race and stupidity, which ever comes first.
> Why is it "stupid" to want my fellow citizens to have as much freedom as possible?
The debate is always about the 'as possible'
It turns out that with so many prepared to blow themselves
to bits etc that it isnt feasible/sensible to allow complete
freedom to carry anything you like onto aircraft etc.
> Can you be truly free when you are dependent on
> someone else to provide for your healthcare needs?
That isnt what is happenening when we choose to raise
taxes to pay for a decent universal health care system.
Rod Speed
> If you want as much freedom as possible, you do not want to depend on anyone to take care of your healthcare needs.
The modern reality is that some health care
needs are only affordable by the stinking rich.
So we have to work out a mechanism that allows those who do need a
heart bypass or hip replacement to get one without that bankrupting them.
> If you value safety above freedom you deserve neither safety or freedom.
Utterly mindless silly stuff.
> When you depend on someone else to pay for your healtcare needs, you are betting that they will provide those needs
> when you need it.
No bet whatever involved when the voters decide thats what they want the govt to do.
> Of course since you are dependent on them to provide you with what you want or need, you have also given them the
> power to not provide what you want or need when you think you need it.
Wrong again when that has been settled by the voters deciding
what they want the govt to provide, and to pay for via taxation.
Thats what we have always done with public education, the
police, the military, the judiciary etc etc etc and we currently
discussing whether that should be done with health care too.
That debate is LONG gone with vets and those over 65.
Whats being discussed is everyone else.
> And "if" you are dependent on them to provide that need, and they do not give you what you need, you are shit out of
> luck....you won't get what you want or need.
Wrong when the voters have decided that the govt will pay for that when you need it.
Thats what happens with the VA system and medicare and what
is being discussed is what happens for those not covered by those.
Rod Speed
> It is a question of how important our freedoms are.
Nope. The voters LONG ago decided that that is irrelevant
to the VA system, medicare, public education, the military,
the cops, the judiciary etc etc etc and are currently
discussing how best to do health care, essentially because
they have decided that pissing TWICE the percentage of
GDP against the wall that every other modern first and
second world country does is just plain barking mad and
that its completely unacceptible to be bankrupted by a
serious medical problem even if you do have health insurance.
> In America, unlike most countries in the world today, we are suppose to be unique because we put a very high value on
> individual freedom.
That was always been pure bullshit.
Somalia has MUCH more individual freedom than america has, most
obviously because if you dont like paying taxes, you dont have to bother etc.
> You have less individual freedom when you depend on someone else to take care of your healthcare needs.
Mindlessly silly when the govt is legally obliged ot pay for your health care.
> You have more freedom, when you are able
> to take care of your own healthcare needs.
Yes, but the modern reality is that plenty get serious medical problems
that will bankrupt them even if they do have health insurance.
> So, it is a question that each of us has to ask ourselves....how important is freedom?
Thats not what is being discussed.
> If you decide that your safety is more important than your freedom, that is your decision to make, but in that case,
> you really do not deserve either safety or freedom.
Completely off with the fucking fairys, as always.
Ga...@comcast.net
"Jerry Okamura" <okamu...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
news:xSpCm.31919$QG1....@newsfe23.iad...
that's really stupid, and you're really to stupid to understand why,
you're proposing and every man for himself philosophy but you want to make
the rules,
so it's ok to get as much as you possibly can for yourself with no regard to
the consequences for anyone else,
no matter that other people are hungry,cold,sick,unemployed, hopeless and
helpless, use any
practice,tactics,schemes, etc. to enrich yourself at the expense of everyone
else,
but, if a poor person does the same by holding up a liquor store managing to
get $50 where the rich stole $50 billion, then you want
to put him away for the rest of his life
it won't work, eventually, as you can see now, there will be far more people
on the short end than rich people and those rich people and corporations
will be reigned in or destroyed,
with much bloodshed I hope,
you see, ignorant, gutless assholes like you depend on stupid ass
hillbillies to defend you,and keep you in power
but even they will eventually wise up, or they will be outnumbered and
exterminated, my preference of course
surrender now, there is no hope for you, you japs are good at surrendering
after trying to dominate the world anyway,
it's because you had and have nothing to fight for, nothing worth dying for
Jerry Okamura
"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7juue5F...@mid.individual.net...
> Jerry Okamura wrote
>
>> If you want as much freedom as possible, you do not want to depend on
>> anyone to take care of your healthcare needs.
>
> The modern reality is that some health care
> needs are only affordable by the stinking rich.
The "rich" will win regardless of what system we have.
>
> So we have to work out a mechanism that allows those who do need a
> heart bypass or hip replacement to get one without that bankrupting them.
>
>> If you value safety above freedom you deserve neither safety or freedom.
>
> Utterly mindless silly stuff.
Only because you do not put a very high value on freedom.
>
>> When you depend on someone else to pay for your healtcare needs, you are
>> betting that they will provide those needs when you need it.
>
> No bet whatever involved when the voters decide thats what they want the
> govt to do.
It does not matter what the voters want, the simple fact is that when you
depend on someone else to give you what you want or need, you have given
them the right to give you what you want or need, and you have also given
them the right not to give you what you want or need.
>
>> Of course since you are dependent on them to provide you with what you
>> want or need, you have also given them the power to not provide what you
>> want or need when you think you need it.
>
> Wrong again when that has been settled by the voters deciding
> what they want the govt to provide, and to pay for via taxation.
There is not enough taxes you cannot collect to pay for the ever increasing
cost of healthcare.
Jerry Okamura
> Jerry Okamura wrote:
>> "Nickname unavailable" <Vid...@tcq.net> wrote in message
>> news:df91bf27-dd5b-4a9a...@e18g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
>> On Oct 12, 9:03 pm, Wilson Woods <banm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and
>>> access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters who
>>> say it's about race know they've lost the debate.
>>
>> it race and stupidity, which ever comes first.
>
>> Why is it "stupid" to want my fellow citizens to have as much freedom as
>> possible?
>
> The debate is always about the 'as possible'
>
> It turns out that with so many prepared to blow themselves
> to bits etc that it isnt feasible/sensible to allow complete
> freedom to carry anything you like onto aircraft etc.
I did not use the words "complete freedom" did I?
>
>> Can you be truly free when you are dependent on
>> someone else to provide for your healthcare needs?
>
> That isnt what is happenening when we choose to raise
> taxes to pay for a decent universal health care system.
>
Of couse it is. With a Universal healthcare system, you have given up your
freedom to choose to someone else who will make that decision for you
whether you like it or not.
Jerry Okamura
> Jerry Okamura wrote:
>
>> It is a question of how important our freedoms are.
>
> Nope. The voters LONG ago decided that that is irrelevant
> to the VA system, medicare, public education, the military,
> the cops, the judiciary etc etc etc and are currently
> discussing how best to do health care, essentially because
> they have decided that pissing TWICE the percentage of
> GDP against the wall that every other modern first and
> second world country does is just plain barking mad and
> that its completely unacceptible to be bankrupted by a
> serious medical problem even if you do have health insurance.
yes, and they said, when they did that, that our freedom is less important
than our safety.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>> Jerry Okamura wrote
>>> It is a question of how important our freedoms are.
>> Nope. The voters LONG ago decided that that is irrelevant
>> to the VA system, medicare, public education, the military,
>> the cops, the judiciary etc etc etc and are currently
>> discussing how best to do health care, essentially because
>> they have decided that pissing TWICE the percentage of
>> GDP against the wall that every other modern first and
>> second world country does is just plain barking mad and
>> that its completely unacceptible to be bankrupted by a
>> serious medical problem even if you do have health insurance.
> yes, and they said, when they did that, that our freedom is less important than our safety.
None of that has anything to do with freedoms except in the
sense that with them you are free to avoid bankruptcy if you
end up with a serious medical problem and you are more
free of criminals than you would otherwise be etc etc etc.
Rod Speed
>>> Nickname unavailable <Vid...@tcq.net> wrote Wilson Woods <banm...@hotmail.com> wrote
>>>> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot
>>>> leftist looters who say it's about race know they've lost the debate.
>>> it race and stupidity, which ever comes first.
>>> Why is it "stupid" to want my fellow citizens to have as much
>>> freedom as possible?
>> The debate is always about the 'as possible'
>> It turns out that with so many prepared to blow themselves
>> to bits etc that it isnt feasible/sensible to allow complete
>> freedom to carry anything you like onto aircraft etc.
> I did not use the words "complete freedom" did I?
You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly irrelevant.
What words you may or may not have used in spades.
>>> Can you be truly free when you are dependent on
>>> someone else to provide for your healthcare needs?
>> That isnt what is happenening when we choose to raise
>> taxes to pay for a decent universal health care system.
> Of couse it is. With a Universal healthcare system, you have given up your freedom to choose to someone else who will
> make that decision for you whether you like it or not.
Wrong, as always. You are always free to completely ignore
the universal healthcare system and to pay anyone you like
to deliver whatever healthcare services you decide you
want outside of that if you dont like the way it operates.
Rod Speed
>>> If you want as much freedom as possible, you do not want to depend on anyone to take care of your healthcare needs.
>> The modern reality is that some health care
>> needs are only affordable by the stinking rich.
> The "rich" will win regardless of what system we have.
Like hell they do. The bulk of them piss their pathetic
excuses for 'lives' against the wall chasing money.
>> So we have to work out a mechanism that allows those who do need a
>> heart bypass or hip replacement to get one without that bankrupting them.
>>> If you value safety above freedom you deserve neither safety or freedom.
>> Utterly mindless silly stuff.
> Only because you do not put a very high value on freedom.
Wrong, as always. I prefer the freedom to not be bankrupted when I have a serious medical problem.
I still have the freedom to just die or to kill myself if I dont like the best
that medical science can offer if I end up with a serious medical problem.
I certainly wont ever be stupid enough to end up bed ridden in a fucking nursing home etc.
>>> When you depend on someone else to pay for your healtcare needs,
>>> you are betting that they will provide those needs when you need it.
>> No bet whatever involved when the voters decide thats what they want the govt to do.
> It does not matter what the voters want, the simple fact is that when
> you depend on someone else to give you what you want or need,
I'm not when I avail myself of a decent universal health care
system that the voters have decided that is the most appropriate
way to deliver health care services, funded by taxation.
I'm always free to pay for the health care I want outside the universal
system if I dont like some detail of the universal health care system too.
> you have given them the right to give you what you want or need,
Like hell I have when they have a legal obligation to provide the health care that I need.
> and you have also given them the right not to give you what you want or need.
Like hell I have when they have a legal obligation to provide the health care that I need.
And I'm always free to pay out of my own pocket for what health care services
that I decide I need that the health care system refuses to provide as well.
>>> Of course since you are dependent on them to provide you with what you want or need, you have also given them the
>>> power to not provide what you want or need when you think you need it.
>> Wrong again when that has been settled by the voters deciding
>> what they want the govt to provide, and to pay for via taxation.
> There is not enough taxes you cannot collect to pay for the ever increasing cost of healthcare.
THE COST GOES DOWN, FOOL. EVERY OTHER MODERN FIRST
AND SECOND WORLD COUNTRY GETS IT HEALTH CARE FOR HALF
THE PERCENTAGE OF GDP THAT THE US IS STUPID ENOUGH TO
PISS AGAINST THE WALL, AND THEY GET A BETTER RESULT ON
EVERY SENSIBLE MEASURE OF HEALTH CARE TOO LIKE LONGEVITY
AND YEARS IN GOOD HEALTH.
Shawn Hirn
Wilson Woods <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and
> access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters who say
> it's about race know they've lost the debate.
Geez! Isn't it obvious that the health care system in the United States
is imploding? We Americans pay the highest rates for our health care of
any westernized nation, yet we rank near the bottom for most metrics
that determine the quality of our health care such as life expectancy,
infant mortality, etc.
High Miles
Not obvious to the morons who believe rush and beck.
They can't read well enough, or think well enough to understand, so
they simply parrot what they've heard.
Imagine.........that dimwit Alaskan tart and her - death committees.
She's a lying shit sack, like most republicans. Fits right in.
Dave C.
So you think we should fix it by making it a lot worse? What passed
the House amounts to fixing a flat tire by pushing the car off a
cliff. -Dave
Rod Speed
She never ever is. NOT ONE other modern first or second world country has
anything even remotely resembling anything like that, so it aint gunna happen.
Michael Coburn
What passed the House is pretty good. The Senate is doing all it can to
poison it.
--
"Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson
Rod Speed
> Dave C. wrote
>> Shawn Hirn <sr...@comcast.net> wrote
>>> Wilson Woods <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care
>>>> and access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters
>>>> who say it's about race know they've lost the debate.
>>> Geez! Isn't it obvious that the health care system in the United
>>> States is imploding? We Americans pay the highest rates for our
>>> health care of any westernized nation, yet we rank near the bottom
>>> for most metrics that determine the quality of our health care such
>>> as life expectancy, infant mortality, etc.
>> So you think we should fix it by making it a lot worse? What passed
>> the House amounts to fixing a flat tire by pushing the car off a cliff.
> What passed the House is pretty good.
Nope, its just fiddling with the detail of the completely fucked insurance system.
The only thing that works is a decent universal single payer system.
....the_pc_jellllybean!!.!!!!.
Bulk-billing has its merits.
Dave C.
Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 21:17:08 +0800, Dave C. wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:35:05 -0500
> > Shawn Hirn <sr...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> >> In article <HMmdndq9N4R0Qk7X...@earthlink.com>,
> >> Wilson Woods <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care
> >> > and access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist
> >> > looters who say it's about race know they've lost the debate.
> >>
> >> Geez! Isn't it obvious that the health care system in the United
> >> States is imploding? We Americans pay the highest rates for our
> >> health care of any westernized nation, yet we rank near the bottom
> >> for most metrics that determine the quality of our health care
> >> such as life expectancy, infant mortality, etc.
> >
> > So you think we should fix it by making it a lot worse? What
> > passed the House amounts to fixing a flat tire by pushing the car
> > off a cliff. -Dave
>
> What passed the House is pretty good.
What do you like about it? The fact that nobody will be able to keep
their current insurance coverage? The fact that coverage levels are
specified (read: rationing) by the government? The fact that it's
going to bankrupt our country? The fact that it's going to send a
significant percentage of honest citizens to prison when they can't
afford to pay for it? The fact that it does nothing to address the
real problem of skyrocketing medical costs? The fact that it also does
nothing to fix the problem of frivolous medical lawsuits? What is so
good about it?
> The Senate is doing all it can
> to poison it.
>
I don't think the Senate bill is going to be much better. But if the
Senate bill is significantly different, that could actually be a good
thing, if the two bills can not be reconciled. -Dave
George
understand the 2000 pages of mostly incomprehensible writing with
thousands of references.
I will give Congress credit for something when they can deliver a bill
in about 12 pages with clear and concise tables defining the scope and
conditions allowing anyone to interpret their work.
They should be totally embarrassed about the quality of their work
product. They are insulting their employers (us) and deserve not to be
rehired in the next election.
George
Vic Smith
wrote:
Looks like it will be a massive gov subsidy to the insurance
companies.
Insurance subsidies is where the cost is, but they hardly mention
that.
Tax-payer subsidies for the low incomes to buy Wall Street health
insurance.
That's what the Reps want in the end - except they would rather see
the low incomes spending 50% of their income than tax money doing it.
And the Dems are so either so weak-headed or bought off they're
falling right in line.
Corporate socialism in the end.
Hope they kill it or get it right. Looks like a mess.
--Vic
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
> Bulk-billing has its merits.
There's a hell of a lot more involved in a decent health care system than bulk billing.
Michael Coburn
> Michael Coburn wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 21:17:08 +0800, Dave C. wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:35:05 -0500
>>> Shawn Hirn <sr...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <HMmdndq9N4R0Qk7X...@earthlink.com>,
>>>> Wilson Woods <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and
>>>>> access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters who
>>>>> say it's about race know they've lost the debate.
>>>> Geez! Isn't it obvious that the health care system in the United
>>>> States is imploding? We Americans pay the highest rates for our
>>>> health care of any westernized nation, yet we rank near the bottom
>>>> for most metrics that determine the quality of our health care such
>>>> as life expectancy, infant mortality, etc.
>>> So you think we should fix it by making it a lot worse? What passed
>>> the House amounts to fixing a flat tire by pushing the car off a
>>> cliff. -Dave
>>
>> What passed the House is pretty good. The Senate is doing all it can
>> to poison it.
>>
> This is a serious question. You would know that how? I doubt anyone can
> understand the 2000 pages of mostly incomprehensible writing with
> thousands of references.
I have _NO_ doubt that the members of the Senate understand what is in
the Senate bill. That is their job. That is what they were elected to
do. Putting the actual bill on line is ridiculous in that the vast
majority of the people who access to it are incapable of understanding
it. Each Senator has a staff of individuals that go through that bill
with a fine tooth comb and who know the references or can easily find
them. Each Senator is therefore acutely aware of the ramifications of
the bill.
> I will give Congress credit for something when they can deliver a bill
> in about 12 pages with clear and concise tables defining the scope and
> conditions allowing anyone to interpret their work.
The House bill is well summarized on line.
http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AHCAA-
DETAILEDSUMMARY-102909.pdf
The Senate bill is compared here :
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/11/18/cbo-senate-bill/
> They should be totally embarrassed about the quality of their work
> product. They are insulting their employers (us) and deserve not to be
> rehired in the next election.
We observe your moronic childishness and recognize that you are a
Republican.
Michael Coburn
If it was possible to get a Canadian style system through the larcenous,
bought and paid for US Senate then that is what the House would have done
because that is what the majority want. Politics is the art of the
possible.
Michael Coburn
I want a "reconciliation" of the two bills in fact. If "reconciliation"
is supposed to be immune to cloture rules then lets get on with it.
Otherwise:
Elections have consequences.
Michael Coburn
Without a good Public Option that may indeed be the case.
> Insurance subsidies is where the cost is, but they hardly mention that.
Insurance subsidies move the cost of care for the poor from the middle
class to the rich. That is what the House bill undeniably does. The
costs of the uninsured are currently borne by the middle class as those
costs are shifted to the insurance companies.
> Tax-payer subsidies for the low incomes to buy Wall Street health
> insurance.
And so long as thee is a NON PROFIT Highly Transparent Public Option then
the insurance companies cannot gouge the public.
> That's what the Reps want in the end - except they would rather see the
> low incomes spending 50% of their income than tax money doing it. And
> the Dems are so either so weak-headed or bought off they're falling
> right in line.
The Dems are a tad smarter than the Republicans on this one.
> Corporate socialism in the end.
> Hope they kill it or get it right. Looks like a mess.
The Senate is doing all that can to destroy the real benefits of the plan:
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/11/18/cbo-senate-bill/
Michael Coburn
> On 26 Nov 2009 05:57:41 GMT
> Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 21:17:08 +0800, Dave C. wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:35:05 -0500
>> > Shawn Hirn <sr...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> In article <HMmdndq9N4R0Qk7X...@earthlink.com>,
>> >> Wilson Woods <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care and
>> >> > access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist looters
>> >> > who say it's about race know they've lost the debate.
>> >>
>> >> Geez! Isn't it obvious that the health care system in the United
>> >> States is imploding? We Americans pay the highest rates for our
>> >> health care of any westernized nation, yet we rank near the bottom
>> >> for most metrics that determine the quality of our health care such
>> >> as life expectancy, infant mortality, etc.
>> >
>> > So you think we should fix it by making it a lot worse? What passed
>> > the House amounts to fixing a flat tire by pushing the car off a
>> > cliff. -Dave
>>
>> What passed the House is pretty good.
>
> What do you like about it? The fact that nobody will be able to keep
> their current insurance coverage?
The Republican method for all things not strictly Republican is to lie,
and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie. And then lie about the
lying.
> The fact that coverage levels are
> specified (read: rationing) by the government?
Yes! I very much like the idea that government will be regulating snake
oil and that a package that says "Health Insurance" on it must actually
contain health insurance.
> The fact that it's
> going to bankrupt our country?
The Republican method for all things not strictly Republican is to lie,
and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie. And then lie about the
lying.
But I must admit that the Republicans certainly do have the experience
edge on this "bankrupt the country" stuff. You lying sacks of tax
cutting shit have been doing it since Reagan.
> The fact that it's going to send a
> significant percentage of honest citizens to prison when they can't
> afford to pay for it?
The Republican method for all things not strictly Republican is to lie,
and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie. And then lie about the
lying.
But maybe it isn't a lie. Maybe you really are the stone cold stupid.
> The fact that it does nothing to address the real
> problem of skyrocketing medical costs?
The Republican method for all things not strictly Republican is to lie,
and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie. And then lie about the
lying.
The Public Option in conjunction with Medicare and Medicaid will, in
fact, reduce the cost of provider services -- "control skyrocketing
medical costs."
> The fact that it also does
> nothing to fix the problem of frivolous medical lawsuits?
It also does nothing to end the war, establish world peace, arrest all
illegal aliens, and send a thanksgiving dinner to the moon.
> What is so
> good about it?
The NUMBER ONE good is:
It moves the burden for indigent care from the middle class insurance
premium payers to the rich with incomes greater than a million a year. By
subsidizing insurance for those who currently depend on "free" care that
is then cost shifted to the middle class insurance buyers, the bill
reduces the cost of medical insurance for the middle class. Those who had
to rely on "free" care will now be covered by insurance that is
subsidized by the rich and less "FREE" care will be shifted onto the
middle class.
But you aren't actually smart enough to understand that and you are
following along with you nose firmly planted in the ass crack of your
fearless Republican lead liar.
>> The Senate is doing all it can
>> to poison it.
>>
>>
> I don't think the Senate bill is going to be much better. But if the
> Senate bill is significantly different, that could actually be a good
> thing, if the two bills can not be reconciled. -Dave
I hope that "reconciled" means what it says. A simple majority vote on
the "reconciliation" of the two bills. In that case we may get a decent
bill.
Dave C.
> >> What passed the House is pretty good.
> >
> > What do you like about it? The fact that nobody will be able to
> > keep their current insurance coverage?
>
> The Republican method for all things not strictly Republican is to
> lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie. And then lie about
> the lying.
It's not a lie, though. The House bill specifies coverage levels.
What this means is that nobody will be able to keep their current
policy. At the very least, if you have health insurance, you will be
required to switch to a different (read: more expensive) plan with
your current provider.
> > The fact that coverage levels are
> > specified (read: rationing) by the government?
>
> Yes! I very much like the idea that government will be regulating
> snake oil and that a package that says "Health Insurance" on it must
> actually contain health insurance.
What is currently called health insurance is way too fricking expensive
for many people to afford. While there is some merit in trying to
improve coverage, adding more coverage without addressing the COST of
current coverage is simply insane.
>
> > The fact that it's
> > going to bankrupt our country?
>
> The Republican method for all things not strictly Republican is to
> lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie. And then lie about
> the lying.
OK, then tell me...how are we going to be able to afford a 2+ trillion
dollar entitlement program? Before you answer, keep in mind that the
CBO has a nasty habit of under-estimating costs of such things by a
factor of 10 or more. So add another zero or two and then tell me
how you expect us (the taxpayers) to pay for it. And again remember
that there are only about 160 million taxpayers.
>
> But I must admit that the Republicans certainly do have the
> experience edge on this "bankrupt the country" stuff. You lying
> sacks of tax cutting shit have been doing it since Reagan.
>
> > The fact that it's going to send a
> > significant percentage of honest citizens to prison when they can't
> > afford to pay for it?
>
> The Republican method for all things not strictly Republican is to
> lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie. And then lie about
> the lying.
>
> But maybe it isn't a lie. Maybe you really are the stone cold stupid.
Did you read the bill? There are significant penalties assessed to
those who can't afford to buy the new mandatory health insurance.
These penalties include both fines and jail time. So no, it isn't a
lie.
>
> > The fact that it does nothing to address the real
> > problem of skyrocketing medical costs?
>
> The Republican method for all things not strictly Republican is to
> lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie. And then lie about
> the lying.
So you think that medical care in the United States is affordable?
Really?
>
> The Public Option in conjunction with Medicare and Medicaid will, in
> fact, reduce the cost of provider services -- "control skyrocketing
> medical costs."
If the government can't keep medicare or medicaid solvent, what makes
you think that a public option will control costs? The public option
will certainly harm the bottom line of many private insurance
companies. Many of the private insurance companies might be driven out
of business. But being cheaper doesn't necessarily equate to cheap.
The public option is (at best) a ponzi scheme. If health insurance is
cheaper, but your taxes are higher to cover it, did you really save
money? Nope, costs are still going up, and now there are fewer health
insurance providers.
>
> > The fact that it also does
> > nothing to fix the problem of frivolous medical lawsuits?
>
> It also does nothing to end the war, establish world peace, arrest
> all illegal aliens, and send a thanksgiving dinner to the moon.
The primary problems with health care are skyrocketing costs and
frivolous lawsuits, partly responsible for skyrocketing costs. A bill
that does nothing to address these basic issues is useless.
>
> > What is so
> > good about it?
>
> The NUMBER ONE good is:
> It moves the burden for indigent care from the middle class insurance
> premium payers to the rich with incomes greater than a million a
> year. By subsidizing insurance for those who currently depend on
> "free" care that is then cost shifted to the middle class insurance
> buyers, the bill reduces the cost of medical insurance for the middle
> class. Those who had to rely on "free" care will now be covered by
> insurance that is subsidized by the rich and less "FREE" care will be
> shifted onto the middle class.
No, the burden is shifted to low-income younger people, roughly 30
years old and younger. The House bill relies on getting more "healthy"
people (read: younger, lower income) to subsidize health care for
older folks who use more health care services.
Meanwhile, taxes will be raised on everybody, including the middle
class and the "rich".
The fact that you think the rich will carry the burden makes you either
severely misinformed, or the spreader of a very dangerous lie. -Dave
Dave C.
> I have _NO_ doubt that the members of the Senate understand what is
> in the Senate bill. That is their job. That is what they were
> elected to do. Putting the actual bill on line is ridiculous in that
> the vast majority of the people who access to it are incapable of
> understanding it.
It is that kind of arrogance that makes the average citizen fuming mad,
and why the tea parties are gaining in popularity. Not only does the
average citizen understand it, the average citizen is MIGHTY PISSED OFF
BY IT. They wouldn't be so fucking angry if they were just scratching
their heads thinking, "What does that mean?" -Dave
Rod Speed
> George wrote
>> Michael Coburn wrote
>>>>>> It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care
>>>>>> and access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist
>>>>>> looters who say it's about race know they've lost the debate.
>>>>> Geez! Isn't it obvious that the health care system in the United
>>>>> States is imploding? We Americans pay the highest rates for our
>>>>> health care of any westernized nation, yet we rank near the bottom
>>>>> for most metrics that determine the quality of our health care
>>>>> such as life expectancy, infant mortality, etc.
>>>> So you think we should fix it by making it a lot worse? What
>>>> passed the House amounts to fixing a flat tire by pushing the car
>>>> off a cliff.
>>> What passed the House is pretty good. The Senate is doing all it can to poison it.
>> This is a serious question. You would know that how? I doubt anyone
>> can understand the 2000 pages of mostly incomprehensible writing with
>> thousands of references.
> I have _NO_ doubt that the members of the Senate understand what is in the Senate bill.
More fool you.
> That is their job.
It was Greenspan's job to regulate the economy. He fucked it up very spectacularly indeed anyway.
> That is what they were elected to do.
So fucking what ?
> Putting the actual bill on line is ridiculous in that the vast majority
> of the people who access to it are incapable of understanding it.
The Senators in spades.
> Each Senator has a staff of individuals that go through that bill with a
> fine tooth comb and who know the references or can easily find them.
And none of them understand it either.
> Each Senator is therefore acutely aware of the ramifications of the bill.
Only in your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant failed trucker fantasyland.
>> I will give Congress credit for something when they can deliver a
>> bill in about 12 pages with clear and concise tables defining the
>> scope and conditions allowing anyone to interpret their work.
> The House bill is well summarized on line.
> http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AHCAA-DETAILEDSUMMARY-102909.pdf
You have no way of knowing if its well summarised or not.
> The Senate bill is compared here :
> http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/11/18/cbo-senate-bill/
And you have no way of knowing how accurate that is either.
>> They should be totally embarrassed about the quality of their work
>> product. They are insulting their employers (us) and deserve not to
>> be rehired in the next election.
> We observe your moronic childishness and recognize that you are a Republican.
You in spades, demoprat.
Karl
"Dave C." <no...@nohow.never> wrote in message
news:20091125211708...@nohow.never...
That's always the mantra of the rightists. Look we don't HAVE TO do
anything. Once medicare can't make it's payments because the GOP has
successfully blocked any reform what do you think will happen?
Do you think people will say OH that's ok grannie doesn't need to see a Doc
cuz she's REALLY old.....
If you think the senior community will sit by and let the health care system
shut down (that's what will happen when medicare shuts down) you are crazy.
They will scream to BURN DOWN the pentagon if you have to get Medicare
funded.
And this is the whole crux of the issue. Cost. If you don't get costs
under control and soon the system will right itself. It will be painful.
People will die. All because rightwing loons like Palin and Glen Beck
scream SOCIALISM anytime you try and get reforms passed.
Look do you want a single payer system? If you do block the health care
reforms Obama is pushing. Then events in the near future will force a
single payer system on the US.
If you want private insurance shut up and support health care reforms being
pushed in congress.
This is happening it's just a matter of when!
Rod Speed
Only in your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant failed trucker fantasyland.
> Politics is the art of the possible.
You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out.
Karl
"Dave C." <no...@nohow.never> wrote in message
news:20091126055924...@nohow.never...
> On 26 Nov 2009 05:57:41 GMT
> Michael Coburn <mik...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 21:17:08 +0800, Dave C. wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:35:05 -0500
>> > Shawn Hirn <sr...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> In article <HMmdndq9N4R0Qk7X...@earthlink.com>,
>> >> Wilson Woods <ban...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > It's about preventing the government from wrecking health care
>> >> > and access to it that satisfies most people. Idiot leftist
>> >> > looters who say it's about race know they've lost the debate.
>> >>
>> >> Geez! Isn't it obvious that the health care system in the United
>> >> States is imploding? We Americans pay the highest rates for our
>> >> health care of any westernized nation, yet we rank near the bottom
>> >> for most metrics that determine the quality of our health care
>> >> such as life expectancy, infant mortality, etc.
>> >
>> > So you think we should fix it by making it a lot worse? What
>> > passed the House amounts to fixing a flat tire by pushing the car
>> > off a cliff. -Dave
>>
>> What passed the House is pretty good.
>
> What do you like about it? The fact that nobody will be able to keep
> their current insurance coverage?
Can't you READ? You can keep your coverage. You just don't me to be able
sign up for a public option. I wonder why. Do you need ME to subsidize
YOUR health premiums?
The fact that coverage levels are
> specified (read: rationing) by the government? The fact that it's
> going to bankrupt our country?
The CBO says it will CUT the deficit. The CBO is nonpartisan.
The fact that it's going to send a
> significant percentage of honest citizens to prison when they can't
> afford to pay for it? The fact that it does nothing to address the
> real problem of skyrocketing medical costs?
Public option does and right hates it! So you are against cost
containment....WHY?
Michael Coburn
>> >> What passed the House is pretty good.
>> >
>> > What do you like about it? The fact that nobody will be able to keep
>> > their current insurance coverage?
>>
>> The Republican method for all things not strictly Republican is to lie,
>> and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie. And then lie about the
>> lying.
>
> It's not a lie, though. The House bill specifies coverage levels. What
> this means is that nobody will be able to keep their current policy. At
> the very least, if you have health insurance, you will be required to
> switch to a different (read: more expensive) plan with your current
> provider.
Nope. You're a liar. For insurance plans through employers the
grandfathering ends after 5 years but the personal plans remain
unmolested. For the employer plans there is a 5 year grandfathering last
time I looked and that phase doesn't start till 2013. That means you can
keep your ridiculous employer crap until 2018 with no penalty at all. By
that time the laws will probably be changed twice.
Read the @##)$^& bill. It's section 202. You are a liar.
>> > The fact that coverage levels are
>> > specified (read: rationing) by the government?
>>
>> Yes! I very much like the idea that government will be regulating
>> snake oil and that a package that says "Health Insurance" on it must
>> actually contain health insurance.
>
> What is currently called health insurance is way too fricking expensive
> for many people to afford. While there is some merit in trying to
> improve coverage, adding more coverage without addressing the COST of
> current coverage is simply insane.
The cost is a addressed through subsidies that are paid by taxation on
incomes above a million a year. Stop whining and lying. The reason that
Mass. Health insurance is so expensive is that it is NOT subsidized by a
tax on the rich. You are a liar.
>> > The fact that it's
>> > going to bankrupt our country?
>>
>> The Republican method for all things not strictly Republican is to lie,
>> and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie. And then lie about the
>> lying.
>
> OK, then tell me...how are we going to be able to afford a 2+ trillion
> dollar entitlement program? Before you answer, keep in mind that the
> CBO has a nasty habit of under-estimating costs of such things by a
> factor of 10 or more. So add another zero or two and then tell me how
> you expect us (the taxpayers) to pay for it. And again remember that
> there are only about 160 million taxpayers.
The CBO has told you lying pigs that the bill will _REDUCE_ the deficit.
The Democrats say it will _REDUCE_ the deficit. Seems like the only
liars are the same lying filth Republicans that have been lying filth for
the last 30 years and are still lying filth and will be lying filth
henceforth.
>> But I must admit that the Republicans certainly do have the experience
>> edge on this "bankrupt the country" stuff. You lying sacks of tax
>> cutting shit have been doing it since Reagan.
We note the absence of a response to this undeniable TRUTH.
>> > The fact that it's going to send a
>> > significant percentage of honest citizens to prison when they can't
>> > afford to pay for it?
>>
>> The Republican method for all things not strictly Republican is to lie,
>> and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie. And then lie about the
>> lying.
>>
>> But maybe it isn't a lie. Maybe you really are the stone cold stupid.
>
> Did you read the bill?
Yes, you lying pig. And you obviously didn't.
> There are significant penalties assessed to
> those who can't afford to buy the new mandatory health insurance. These
> penalties include both fines and jail time. So no, it isn't a lie.
NO, lying sack of Republican pig shit. The bill will assess a fine on
people who are financially capable of purchasing insurance and who refuse
to do so. That is the end of the bill. There are _NO_ penalties other
than a fine in the bill. If you refuse to pay federal taxes you COULD go
to jail. That has always been as such for many many years and the bill
does NOTHING to change the IRS code. NOTHING.
>> > The fact that it does nothing to address the real problem of
>> > skyrocketing medical costs?
>>
>> The Republican method for all things not strictly Republican is to lie,
>> and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie, and lie. And then lie about the
>> lying.
>
> So you think that medical care in the United States is affordable?
> Really?
NO, you lying sack of Republican pig shit. I never said that.
>> The Public Option in conjunction with Medicare and Medicaid will, in
>> fact, reduce the cost of provider services -- "control skyrocketing
>> medical costs."
>
> If the government can't keep medicare or medicaid solvent, what makes
> you think that a public option will control costs?
Why do you have the insane idea that the government cant keep Medicare
solvent??? That is abject stupidity on steroids. The government can
increase Medicare taxes and the government can cut what it is willing to
pay to providers. Only Republican morons believe they can keep the
common people of the USA from supporting Medicare via their continued
lies and more lies. You need to go bag some more tea.
> The public option
> will certainly harm the bottom line of many private insurance companies.
> Many of the private insurance companies might be driven out of
> business. But being cheaper doesn't necessarily equate to cheap. The
> public option is (at best) a ponzi scheme.
Just one lie after the next. On and on and on and on. The phrase "Ponzi
scheme" has become a Satan word like "socialism", or "communism", or
"fascism" for the Republican brain dead. The words are all equal and are
used to paint something as "bad". The words and phrases need not
actually mean anything as is the case here. The Public Option is a non-
profit non subsidized health insurance provider that is totally funded by
premiums paid in by willing subscribers just like any other competing
insurance company. But you idiotic brain dead morons love the phrase
"Ponzi scheme" soooooooo much that you MUST use it to paint "BAD" on the
Public Option that has no resemblance whatsoever. And it doesn't matter
because the people you are addressing with your lying filth are to
ignorant to know the word definitions anyway.
If health insurance is
> cheaper, but your taxes are higher to cover it, did you really save
> money? Nope, costs are still going up, and now there are fewer health
> insurance providers.
Depends on the numbers. You don't offer any. Your argument always gets
down to your religious conviction that government can NEVER do anything
good other than make wars. And you monkeys do love wars.
>> > The fact that it also does
>> > nothing to fix the problem of frivolous medical lawsuits?
>>
>> It also does nothing to end the war, establish world peace, arrest all
>> illegal aliens, and send a thanksgiving dinner to the moon.
>
> The primary problems with health care are skyrocketing costs and
> frivolous lawsuits, partly responsible for skyrocketing costs. A bill
> that does nothing to address these basic issues is useless.
Another lie. The bill need not address law suits to reduce the costs of
medical care. You say "partly responsible". That ADMITS to other
"parts". And reducing the costs of those other parts will reduce costs
of the whole without messing with lawsuits. Such a bill is only
"useless" to pea brained idiot blind Republican liars.
>> > What is so
>> > good about it?
>>
>> The NUMBER ONE good is:
>> It moves the burden for indigent care from the middle class insurance
>> premium payers to the rich with incomes greater than a million a year.
>> By subsidizing insurance for those who currently depend on "free" care
>> that is then cost shifted to the middle class insurance buyers, the
>> bill reduces the cost of medical insurance for the middle class. Those
>> who had to rely on "free" care will now be covered by insurance that is
>> subsidized by the rich and less "FREE" care will be shifted onto the
>> middle class.
>
> No, the burden is shifted to low-income younger people, roughly 30 years
> old and younger.
Yet another lie. Low income people will be subsidized. That is the
purpose of the bill. You are a liar. And if there is a cost shift from
old to young then the young will get a refund when they get older. You
people have less foresight than a mole. Your "vision" of the future is
next week.
> The House bill relies on getting more "healthy" people
> (read: younger, lower income) to subsidize health care for older folks
> who use more health care services.
So do you think all the young people will die before age 55 and never see
any advantage of the system? Republicans see maybe a year into the
future and after that the world ends:
We believe in science when the word of God agrees
We believe in science that destroys our enemies
We know the end is coming and it's coming with great haste
And everything we don't ab-use will surely go to waste
THE REPUBLICAN 10 YEAR PLAN
> Meanwhile, taxes will be raised on
> everybody, including the middle class and the "rich".
Yet another lie. Future tax adjustments have absolutely _NOTHING_ to do
with the health care bill. _NOTHING_. But we can all rest assured that
any attempt to pay down the deficit EVEN FURTHER THAN IT WILL BE PAID
DOWN BY The Health care plan by raising taxes will be assaulted by you
lying pigs in just this manner.
Taxes are probably going up because we need deficit reduction. The
deficit _WILL_NOT_ be increased by this bill and future tax increases
have _NOTHING_ to do with this bill.
THIS BILL increases taxes on the rich to subsidize health insurance for
lower income people. THAT US WHAT _THIS_ BILL DOES! Your lying pig
claims to the contrary are noted.
> The fact that you think the rich will carry the burden makes you either
> severely misinformed, or the spreader of a very dangerous lie. -Dave
You are a lying sack of miserable pig shit. The Bill says I am right and
you are a liar. Try reading it.
Michael Coburn
>> I have _NO_ doubt that the members of the Senate understand what is in
>> the Senate bill. That is their job. That is what they were elected to
>> do. Putting the actual bill on line is ridiculous in that the vast
>> majority of the people who access to it are incapable of understanding
>> it.
>
> It is that kind of arrogance that makes the average citizen fuming mad,
NO!
It's the sort of reality that makes ignorant asswipes angry in that they
want to love in the 19th century and drive buggies and ride horses.
> and why the tea parties are gaining in popularity.
Oh pleas keep it up. Please, please, please......
> Not only does the
> average citizen understand it, the average citizen is MIGHTY PISSED OFF
> BY IT. They wouldn't be so fucking angry if they were just scratching
> their heads thinking, "What does that mean?" -Dave
The only people that are upset are a bunch of semi-literate screech
monkeys. The "average citizens" find summaries like the ones I posted
before from sources that are not right wing noise machines. The
summaries are easily understood and truthful. That have to be. If they
are not then major shit will hit the fan. Republicans spent YEARS
undermining government and lying to everyone and they expect to "cash in"
on the lack of faith they worked so hard to engender. Maybe you lying
pigs will get away with it with some of the people.
George
imagine yourself as some sort of uber intellectual but just proved
otherwise..
Michael Coburn
I have called it as it is. Childishness seems to be the Republican
condition.
freeisbest
> On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:50:34 +0800, Dave C. wrote:
> >> I have _NO_ doubt that the members of the Senate understand
> >> what is in the Senate bill. That is their job. That is what they
> >> were elected to do. Putting the actual bill on line is
ridiculous
> >> in that the vast majority of the people who access to it are
> >> incapable of understanding it.
>
> > It is that kind of arrogance that makes the average citizen
fuming mad,
>
> NO!
> It's the sort of reality that makes ignorant asswipes angry in that they
>
> > and why the tea parties are gaining in popularity.
>
>
> > Not only does the average citizen understand it, the average
> > citizen is MIGHTY PISSED OFF BY IT. They wouldn't be
> > so fucking angry if they were just scratching
> > their heads thinking, "What does that mean?" -Dave
>
> The only people that are upset are a bunch of semi-literate screech
> monkeys. The "average citizens" find summaries like the ones I posted
> before from sources that are not right wing noise machines. The
> summaries are easily understood and truthful. That have to be. If they
> are not then major shit will hit the fan. Republicans spent YEARS
> undermining government and lying to everyone and they expect to "cash in"
> on the lack of faith they worked so hard to engender. Maybe you lying
> pigs will get away with it with some of the people.
Excellent summary. These professional liars are contemptible,
they know it, and they spend a lot of time explaining away why they've
chosen to be scum. Luckily the incoherent stupidity of the Repub base
is not typical of the American majority... including the many, many
folks who used to vote Repub but who wised up during the Bush
Disaster.
Repubs have spent so many years working to undermine our
government that they're starting to fantasize that the job is done.
Right now their meme is that all they can grab power away from our
elected government by issuing orders to their Mickey Mouse brigade of
teapartiers.
Michael Coburn
> Both Parties are guilty as sin! There is no Party that is for America.
> They only care about the Party!
The Democrats care much more about their own selves than they do about
"The Party" or some ridiculous "principle". Now if their constituents
had a away to hold them accountable that would actually work pretty
well. It ain't pretty. But it would work. The present system is based
on mutually beneficial partisan gerrymandering and demonization of the
opposite party. If you attempt to remove a sitting representative you
will get Satan incarnate from the other bipolar party. It really is so
very simple when you back away and really look at it.
The parties decide how to shape the representative districts. And they
do what is most cost effective in campaign funding. The objective is to
get it down to as few "in play" districts as possible so that all of the
money can be focused on those districts. The inner party of course
controls much of that money. The potential representative is much more
accountable to the dispensers of that money than they are to the people
of the district.
The secret to decent representation is much smaller and regularly shaped
electoral districts in which the representative is more accountable to
the people and much less dependent on the party money dispensers.
--
freeisbest
-snip-
> The secret to decent representation is much smaller and
> regularly shaped electoral districts in which the representative
> is more accountable to the people and much less dependent
> on the party money dispensers.
That seems quite plausible. Ok, we see the promised land, or at
least one version of it. Any idea how to get there from here?