Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Colossus_500 on March 18, 2010, 01:14:20 PM
-
Bret Baier: 1; President Obama: 0
By C. Edmund Wright
americanthinker.com (http://americanthinker.com)
Don't you just love it when a young student hammers the arrogant professor in a debate? That was the distinct feel of last night's "Special Report" program, where Bret Baier interviewed President Obama. In case you have not figured it out, Baier is the victorious young student in this analogy.
Certainly this was not what the White House had in mind when President Obama agreed to sit down and chat with the heretofore-nondescript Fox anchor. Where is Anita Dunn and her war on Fox News when you need her?
With all due respect to Brit Hume and Charles Krauthammer, who didn't acknowledge on air that their colleague bested the president, Baier clearly had Obama fumbling around and stuttering and totally flustered. Like other young and studious-looking white guys Paul Ryan and Eric Cantor, Baier used annoying and inconvenient facts to unveil the childish and petulant Obama that a fawning Jurassic media has never bothered to investigate.
The best example of this was when Obama tried to play an unseemly game of "top this" with Baier over concerned Americans' e-mails:
BAIER: Let me insert this. We asked our viewers to e-mail in suggested questions. More than 18,000 people took time to e-mail us questions. These are regular people from all over the country. Lee Johnson, from Spring Valley, California: "If the bill is so good for all of us, why all the intimidation, arm twisting, seedy deals, and parliamentary trickery necessary to pass a bill, when you have an overwhelming majority in both houses and the presidency?"
Sandy Moody in Chesterfield, Missouri: "If the health care bill is so wonderful, why do you have to bribe Congress to pass it?"
OBAMA: Bret, I get 40,000 letters or e-mails a day.
BAIER: I know.
OBAMA: I could read the exact same e-mail --
BAIER: These are people. It's not just Washington punditry.
OBAMA: I've got the exact same e-mails, that I could show you, that talk about why haven't we done something to make sure that I, a small businessperson, am getting as good a deal as members of Congress are getting, and don't have my insurance rates jacked up 40 percent? Why is it that I, a mother with a child with a preexisting condition, still can't get insurance?
So the issue that I'm concerned about is whether not we're fixing a broken system.
The funny part is that Baier was coming at Obama with a variation of the favored tactic that the president and other Democrats continue to use ad nauseum: quoting e-mail anecdotes as a way to make a point. It clearly got under Obama's skin. The "I get forty thousand letters or e-mails a day" retort from the president was sensationally sophomoric in tone. Like a number-one seed in the NCAA's playing a number sixteen, Obama was clearly caught off-guard by the high level of the competition in this interview.
Evidence that he was off balance could be found in the fact that he avoided answering almost all of Baier's questions and resorted to burying himself in the worn-out clichés of this entire debate, as this early exchange demonstrates:
BAIER: You have said at least four times in the past two weeks: "the United States Congress owes the American people a final up-or-down vote on health care." So do you support the use of this Slaughter rule? The deem and pass rule, so that Democrats avoid a straight up or down vote on the Senate bill?
OBAMA: Here's what I think is going to happen and what should happen. You now have a proposal from me that will be in legislation, that has the toughest insurance reforms in history, makes sure that people are able to get insurance even if they've got preexisting conditions, makes sure that we are reducing costs for families and small businesses, by allowing them to buy into a pool, the same kind of pool that members of Congress have.
We know that this is going to reduce the deficit by over a trillion dollars. So you've got a good package, in terms of substance. I don't spend a lot of time worrying about what the procedural rules are in the House or the Senate.
(BAIER TRIES TO REDIRECT-- CROSS TALK)
OBAMA: What I can tell you is that the vote that's taken in the House will be a vote for health care reform. And if people vote yes, whatever form that takes, that is going to be a vote for health care reform. And I don't think we should pretend otherwise.
(AGAIN, BAIER TRIES TO GET OBAMA BACK TO THE QUESTION, LEADING TO CROSS TALK)
OBAMA: Bret, let me finish. If they don't, if they vote against, then they're going to be voting against health care reform and they're going to be voting in favor of the status quo. So Washington gets very concerned about these procedural issues in Congress. This is always an issue that's -- whether Republicans are in charge or Democrats in charge -- when Republicans are in charge, Democrats constantly complain that the majority was not giving them an opportunity, et cetera.
What the American people care about is the fact that their premiums are going up 25, 40, 60 percent, and I'm going to do something about it.
The "Bret, let me finish" statement had the same feel as the "John [McCain], the campaign's over" moment of the health care summit. It was a juvenile, "I'm going to take my ball and go home" remark.
Another key moment was when Baier pressed the president with an "in your face" question on the Slaughter Rule and the president's call for "courage." In this case, the president's answer had nothing to do with the question.
BAIER: Monday in Ohio, you called for courage in the health care debate. At the same time, House Speaker Pelosi was saying this to reporters about the deem and pass rule: "I like it, this scenario, because people don't have to vote on the Senate bill." Is that the kind of courage that you're talking about?
OBAMA: Well, here's what's taking place - we both know what's going on. You've got a Senate bill that was passed, that had provisions that needed to be changed. Right? People were concerned about, for example, the fix that only fixed Nebraska, and didn't fix the rest of the states.
Now, a lot of the members of the House legitimately say, we want to vote on a package, as the president has proposed, that has those fixes embedded in it. Now that may mean they have to sequence the votes. But the ultimate vote they're taking is on whether or not they believe in the proposal that I put forward, to make sure that insurance reform is fixed, to make sure the deficits are reduced, and premiums go down, and small businesses are helped. That's what they're concerned about.
Frankly, I'm not sure what the president was stammering about in that answer, but since he brought up the provisions that singles states out, Baier pushed for clarifications on which fixes were still in and which ones were out -- and Obama could not give clear answers on those. This snippet is illustrative:
OBAMA: ... this notion that this has been not transparent, that people don't know what's in the bill, everybody knows what's in the bill. I sat for seven hours with --
BAIER: Mr. President, you couldn't tell me what the special deals are that are in or not today.
OBAMA: I just told you what was in and what was not in.
BAIER: Is Connecticut in?
OBAMA: Connecticut -- what are you specifically referring to?
BAIER: The $100 million for the hospital? Is Montana in for the asbestos program? Is -- you know, listen, there are people -- this is real money, people are worried about this stuff.
OBAMA: And as I said before, this -- the final provisions are going to be posted for many days before this thing passes, but --
BAIER: Let me get to some of the specifics on substance, not process.
OBAMA: The only thing --
(BAIER, TRYING TO REDIRECT, LEADING TO CROSSTALK)
BAIER: (INAUDIBLE)
OBAMA: -- the only thing I want to say, just to close up, is that when you talk about one-sixth of the economy, this is one-sixth of the economy that right now is a huge drag on the economy.
Overall, I submit that Fox Contributor A.B. Stoddard was correct when she said that Baier "had the president off-guard" and that "he [Obama] was at his worst" in the interview. While I am not sure exactly what interview Hume and Krauthammer -- two pundits nearing the end of brilliant careers -- were talking about, the one I saw was a clear defeat for President Obama and his health care plan. The fact that he agreed to appear on Fox News likely means that his party is in trouble on the vote count. It also means that he thought Baier, a man lost in the deep shadows of Fox's other stars, would be easy fodder.
As it turns out, Baier was anything but easy fodder. This was easy to score. Baier: 1; Obama: 0.
-
Good questions. Terrible answers. Why isn't the media jumping all over the president?
No wonder he tried to censor Fox News.
-
Good questions. Terrible answers. Why isn't the media jumping all over the president?
No wonder he tried to censor Fox News.
-
lol :D
-
Check this out.
________________________ ________________________ __________
Here's The Truth About That CBO Report (Hint: We're Still Headed For Fiscal Catastrophe)
Megan McArdle | Mar. 18, 2010, 4:44 PM | 791 | 11 Email | x
www.businessinsider.com
________________________ ____________
As fate would have it, on the day that the CBO report is released, I am in standby hell, and running low on laptop juice. So my thoughts on the CBO score, and the revised reconciliation bill, are necessarily somewhat preliminary. But here is what I've noticed so far:
1) Thanks to reconciliation instructions, they needed to improve the budget impact by at least $1 billion in the sidecar. They improved it by exactly $1 billion. Which goes back to what I've now said several times: the CBO process has now been so thoroughly gamed that it's useless.
2) The proposed changes increase spending dramatically, most heavily concentrated in the out-years. The gross cost of the bill has risen from $875 billion to $940 billion over ten years--but almost $40 billion of that comes in 2019. The net cost has increased even more dramatically, from $624 billion to $794 billion. That's because the excise tax has been so badly weakened. This is of dual concern: it's a financing risk, but it also means that the one provision which had a genuine shot at "bending the cost curve" in the broader health care market has at this point, basically been gutted. Moreover, it's hard not to believe that the reason it has been moved to 2018 is that no one really thinks it's ever going to take effect. It's one thing to have a period of adjustment. But a tax that takes effect in eight years is a tax so unpopular that it has little realistic chance of being allowed to stand.
3) As I expected, the size of the magic asterisk--the modern equivalent of David Stockman's infamous "savings to be named later" in the Reagan budgets--has had to be beefed up to offset the new spending.
4) Medicare Advantage is being effectively outlawed--in some areas, the reimbursements will actually be below those of the fee-for-service programs.
5) A disturbingly high percentage of the revenues still come from insurance premiums for other programs. About $53 billion of the net deficit reduction is from Social Security taxes collected on the wages people will now be getting in lieu of health care benefits. But since those contributions raise the amount Social Security will eventually have to pay out, the Republicans convincingly argue that this is not true "deficit reduction"; it's just deficit shifting. Ditto the premiums for the new long-term care insurance.
6) Ultimately, this rests on the question: are we really going to cut Medicare? If we're not, this gargantuan new entitlement is going to end up costing us about $200 billion a year next decade, which even in government terms is an awful lot of money. There are offsetting taxes, but they're either trivial or likely to be unpopular--look forward to a 4% rent increase when your landlord has to stump over the same amount for the new tax on rents. Then look forward to repeal of same.
I think this is a fiscal disaster waiting to happen. But no one on the other side cares, so I'm not sure how much point there is in saying that any more.
From TheAtlantic - shaping the national debate on the most critical issues of our times, from politics, business, and the economy, to technology, arts, and culture.
-
I think he did the audience a disservice by interrupting Obama a million times whil making statements.
A better interviewer - Who is that one interviewer that coirrected Obama with "you mean your Christian faith, right?" - would have asked questions which made obama hesitate and have to reveal painful figures.
For example, let's look at this exchange:
BAIER: Let me get to some of the specifics on substance, not process.
OBAMA: The only thing --
(BAIER, TRYING TO REDIRECT, LEADING TO CROSSTALK)
Baier should have asked a Q which made Obama have to ADMIT NUMBERS on the air. ADMIT FLAWS on the air. He essentially just phrased "People don't like this!" about ten times. Yes, we have seen FOX news recite this mantra for 6 months, and it hasn't worked all that much. You finally get the man under the microscope with nowhere to run, and you essentially bitch at him, without asking quality Qs.
i believe 333386 would have been able to ask better Qs which would have left obama stumbling. This man made a lot of statements, and Obama made statements back. It was like 2 candidates debating. He had a golden chance to ask cold, direct questions, dealing with numbers. Trying to make these preachy intangble statements like "These are people. It's not just Washington punditry.".... I mean, settle down, drama queen.
-
I think he did the audience a disservice by interrupting Obama a million times whil making statements.
Are you kidding. B.O. was going back to his same talking points that he has been using for the past year with every question.
How could he answer hard number figures when he doesn't even know what's in the Bill himself?
-
This is the first time since the O'Reilly interview that President Obama has taken part in a legitimately tough interview. Like the article I posted says, it's quite conceivable that the 2008 Presidential election may have resulted with either a President Hillary Clinton or President John McCain.
President Obama bombed this interview as bad as Sarah Palin did with Charles Gibson and Katie Couric.
-
Of course Obama was returning to talking points. I said that. he was giving a campaign speech.
But the interviewer was lecturing him rather than asking some kickas questions to which a canned response wouldn't work.
The reporter COULD have asked him specific Q about the bill and watched him stumble. Or asked him to look into the camera and admit to americans X,Y,Z.
instead, it's "Mr prez, this is all about PEOPLE" and some other bleeding heart lib crybaby shit. He should have gone at obama hard with facts, numbers, and brutal consequences. Instead, we hear him interrupt 40 times to repeat how the people are ignored. No shit, sherlock, and your repeating of it for 6 months on the air as FOX served as the anti-obamacare network sure didn't help. I doubt whining about it during the precious minutes you have Obama under the lights is going to make a hill of difference.
Face it, anybody who hates obama is going to say "great job buddy, zero sucks!" when looking at this interview. A person with a little les emotion might say "Zero sucks... but given 5 questions I would have disarmed Obama in a much more effective manner!"
-
I guess that's my bottom line. FOX has spent 6 months doing nothing but interviewing old people (receiving govt healthcare) complaining young people don't deserve it. They've interviewed young people who say the bill is marxist, communist, evilist, yada yada.
But they sure as shit haven't come up with a plan for 30 mil uninsured people.
IF IF IF the GOp had come up wtih a better plan than obamacare, FOX could have spent the last 6 months selling it to americans, and they would have been very effective. Instead, they sold a "do nothing" bill to america. They worked to sell inaction. That's it.
That's why I'm so disappointed. We're all high-fiving because "oh yeah, that guy interrupted obama and yes, we kicked ass!" just as the bill is in the final stages of passing. You're high-fiving over who has the nicest seat on the titanic at this point. Celebrating. Geez. They had a nation tired of liberal ass obama, and a year to come up with something better.
it never materialized. We're about to settle for some crap sandwich bill because, well, to many people it is better than INACTION. That is exactly whey the GOP and FOX tried to sell for rising healthcare costs - INACTION. Do nothing and hope somebody just lowers prices.
Well, when this shitty bill passes, we can all look back at high-fiving over the declared wins when Palin's death panels was 'the final nail in the bill' or Howard Dean just sunk the Dem HC plan!
We're gonna end up wtih socialized medicine, sitting in the waiting rooms with illegals for DMV service. Why? Cause the repubs had 12 years of congress, and a year of a captive nation in 2009/2010 begging for an alternative to obamacare... and their only action was INACTION.
-
Sometimes i hate interviews on TV. The interviewer asks a question and the dam politician never answers it and the weak ass interviewer lets him off the hook. This is better than most i guess. Sometimes i wish the interviewer would just say: Answer the dam question and stop dodging!
-
Sometimes i hate interviews on TV. The interviewer asks a question and the dam politician never answers it and the weak ass interviewer lets him off the hook. This is better than most i guess. Sometimes i wish the interviewer would just say: Answer the dam question and stop dodging!
^THIS^
obama is very good at answering a question without answering the question... ::)
Anybody got a link to the interview Id like to watch it
Most ppl let him get away with it which I can understand after all he is the president and most feel they shouldnt question him but I think they should ask tough questions and seek answers in a respectful way.
-
I guess that's my bottom line. FOX has spent 6 months doing nothing but interviewing old people (receiving govt healthcare) complaining young people don't deserve it. They've interviewed young people who say the bill is marxist, communist, evilist, yada yada.
But they sure as shit haven't come up with a plan for 30 mil uninsured people.
IF IF IF the GOp had come up wtih a better plan than obamacare, FOX could have spent the last 6 months selling it to americans, and they would have been very effective. Instead, they sold a "do nothing" bill to america. They worked to sell inaction. That's it.
That's why I'm so disappointed. We're all high-fiving because "oh yeah, that guy interrupted obama and yes, we kicked ass!" just as the bill is in the final stages of passing. You're high-fiving over who has the nicest seat on the titanic at this point. Celebrating. Geez. They had a nation tired of liberal ass obama, and a year to come up with something better.
it never materialized. We're about to settle for some crap sandwich bill because, well, to many people it is better than INACTION. That is exactly whey the GOP and FOX tried to sell for rising healthcare costs - INACTION. Do nothing and hope somebody just lowers prices.
Well, when this shitty bill passes, we can all look back at high-fiving over the declared wins when Palin's death panels was 'the final nail in the bill' or Howard Dean just sunk the Dem HC plan!
We're gonna end up wtih socialized medicine, sitting in the waiting rooms with illegals for DMV service. Why? Cause the repubs had 12 years of congress, and a year of a captive nation in 2009/2010 begging for an alternative to obamacare... and their only action was INACTION.
GMAFB 240. more garbage from you. Seriously, are you drinking to much again?
The MSM 24/7/365 kneepad machine, huge majorities in both houses, the WH, a dumbed down electorate like Mons, Blacken, Julio, Benny, Nicky, Peggy, and Henrietta, etc is was is the cause of these disasatrous policies, not Palin.
-
OH NO bammer real questions run run for the hills, follow robert gibbs panzy ass dodge and run from as many questions as you can
-
OH NO bammer real questions run run for the hills, follow robert gibbs panzy ass dodge and run from as many questions as you can
Its about time reporters take it to this lying POFS communist.
-
main stream media wont , they are too stupid,
-
main stream media wont , they are too stupid,
And to tepid and scared. Most of these reporters are fag lib commies to begin with and would shit their pants even at the thought of taking anyone on.
-
olberman , ed
-
olberman , ed
All of them. The only time they are tough is when they beat up on Palin.
"liberal men" are the most pathetic sad sack of shit on the planet.
-
The Daily Show guy has destroyed a few people in interviews.
-
pretty much
-
The Daily Show guy has destroyed a few people in interviews.
I'm talking about the typical newspaper or TV reporter like "Chuck Todd" or some of these goof balls.
-
I'm talking about the typical newspaper or TV reporter like "Chuck Todd" or some of these goof balls.
If you destroy someone they never come back or take questions again.
Biggest casualty of the OJ trial? News became entertainment. These people have jobs to protect, asking hard questions is out of the question.
-
If you destroy someone they never come back or take questions again.
Biggest casualty of the OJ trial? News became entertainment. These people have jobs to protect, asking hard questions is out of the question.
Sort of like Larry King asking Betty White the other night if she was "easy" and pressing her on it?
Michael Savage has a good term for these people.
-
You know it was a good interview when all of the Liberal Propaganda Outlets like MSNBC and to a lesser extent, CNN, were all over it. Adding to that, those "news" outlets didn't really even TOUCH the substance of the interview, Obama's answers or the questions, no, instead they obfuscated and misdirected on the interviewer being "rude"
-
You know it was a good interview when all of the Liberal Propaganda Outlets like MSNBC and to a lesser extent, CNN, were all over it. Adding to that, those "news" outlets didn't really even TOUCH the substance of the interview, Obama's answers or the questions, no, instead they obfuscated and misdirected on the interviewer being "rude"
See picture above Gigantor.
-
I guess that's my bottom line. FOX has spent 6 months doing nothing but interviewing old people (receiving govt healthcare) complaining young people don't deserve it. They've interviewed young people who say the bill is marxist, communist, evilist, yada yada.
But they sure as shit haven't come up with a plan for 30 mil uninsured people.
This simply isn't true. Most all Americans, even those at Fox want health care reform, however, most Americans, including those at Fox do not want this health care bill. Tons of solutions have been made, tort reform legislation and easing commerce restrictions would do wonders for our system. Both of these ideas were brought forth to the president and both houses numerous times and made known by Fox as well.
Saying those that are opposed don't want health care reform and haven't made any suggestions simply doesn't carry any weight.
They've interviewed young people who say the bill is marxist, communist, evilist, yada yada.
When you have white house staff members who are self-avoid socialist, when you have those in the white house and in both houses of congress who tout Mao as a ideal man of vision to mimic, when you use language that is directly from the Soviet Constitution to back your arguments, it's hard to argue that this bill isn't full of socialistic Marxist ideology.
IF IF IF the GOp had come up wtih a better plan than obamacare, FOX could have spent the last 6 months selling it to americans, and they would have been very effective. Instead, they sold a "do nothing" bill to america. They worked to sell inaction. That's it.
Again, simply not true. Of those who work for Fox and several of their contributors, O'Reily, Beck, Krauthammer, Malkin, Ingram, etc have all pushed for tort reform and freeing comerce restrictions.
That's why I'm so disappointed. We're all high-fiving because "oh yeah, that guy interrupted obama and yes, we kicked ass!" just as the bill is in the final stages of passing. You're high-fiving over who has the nicest seat on the titanic at this point. Celebrating. Geez. They had a nation tired of liberal ass obama, and a year to come up with something better.
it never materialized. We're about to settle for some crap sandwich bill because, well, to many people it is better than INACTION. That is exactly whey the GOP and FOX tried to sell for rising healthcare costs - INACTION. Do nothing and hope somebody just lowers prices.
Well, when this shitty bill passes, we can all look back at high-fiving over the declared wins when Palin's death panels was 'the final nail in the bill' or Howard Dean just sunk the Dem HC plan!
We're gonna end up wtih socialized medicine, sitting in the waiting rooms with illegals for DMV service. Why? Cause the repubs had 12 years of congress, and a year of a captive nation in 2009/2010 begging for an alternative to obamacare... and their only action was INACTION.
Now I will agree with you on some of these last statements. We are headed for socialized medicine, this there is no doubt. And you're right, the GOP had a lot of time to fix the things they are pushing now, but these things haven't needed to be fixed simply for the last 12 years, action has been needed for at least the last 25 years and that's figuring conservative IMO.
Health care does need some reform legislation, however, passing legislation that will make it worse is not the answer. Although I do not agree with inaction, it would still be better than action in the wrong direction. If you're house is on fire you have 2 options...throw gas on it and make it worse or call the fire dept and hope they get there. Calling the fire dept is taking the right action, yes your house may burn before they get there, depending on how bad the fire is but you don't create a bigger fire for them to put out.
-
'GMAFB 240. more garbage from you. Seriously, are you drinking to much again? "
So, please argue one thing I said there.
The LIbs are going to pass Obamacare because the repubs didn't deliver any kind of healthcare for the last 12 years.
If you disagree, please tell us why. Don't just insult me - look at my post and tell me what is incorrect. IMO, inaction on the part of the GOP led people to a desperate point where they are willing to accept (almost) any bill Obama lays out.
-
'GMAFB 240. more garbage from you. Seriously, are you drinking to much again? "
So, please argue one thing I said there.
The LIbs are going to pass Obamacare because the repubs didn't deliver any kind of healthcare for the last 12 years.
If you disagree, please tell us why. Don't just insult me - look at my post and tell me what is incorrect. IMO, inaction on the part of the GOP led people to a desperate point where they are willing to accept (almost) any bill Obama lays out.
Did it ever dawn on you 240 that when 85% of the public like their insurance as it is, the GOP did not really think it was a huge priority to mess with peoples' insurance?
-
in that case, the GOP ignored 30 million uninsured people for 12 years.
This was irresponsible to ignore this group, cause the first snake oil salesman (obama) with a smooth grin and anything resembling healthcare for them would get, say, 53% of the popular vote.
And that "85% of people love their insurance!" number kinda doesn't poll the 1 in 6 americans without any health insurance at all.
Face it, the republicans enjoyed their BBQ as the number of starving people outside the fence grew big enough to climb over the fence to take their food. It's that simple. They should have enacted a voluntary plan for those 1 in 6 americans so this obama mess would never have happened.
-
'GMAFB 240. more garbage from you. Seriously, are you drinking to much again? "
So, please argue one thing I said there.
The LIbs are going to pass Obamacare because the repubs didn't deliver any kind of healthcare for the last 12 years.
If you disagree, please tell us why. Don't just insult me - look at my post and tell me what is incorrect. IMO, inaction on the part of the GOP led people to a desperate point where they are willing to accept (almost) any bill Obama lays out.
I think you're dead-on with this. If Republicans had addressed the issue, we would not be in the predicament we're in now. People might like their insurance, but I doubt anybody likes the exorbitant rates they are paying. I hate this bill and I would agree at this point that the status quo would be better than Obamacare, but the status quo can't continue indefinitely. And as long as Republican lawmakers refuse to address the issue, it's just going to keep coming up again and again, regardless of whether or not Obamacare passes.
-
in that case, the GOP ignored 30 million uninsured people for 12 years.
This was irresponsible to ignore this group, cause the first snake oil salesman (obama) with a smooth grin and anything resembling healthcare for them would get, say, 53% of the popular vote.
And that "85% of people love their insurance!" number kinda doesn't poll the 1 in 6 americans without any health insurance at all.
Face it, the republicans enjoyed their BBQ as the number of starving people outside the fence grew big enough to climb over the fence to take their food. It's that simple. They should have enacted a voluntary plan for those 1 in 6 americans so this obama mess would never have happened.
how many of those 30 million can afford it but choose not to buy in? how many are choosing not to work full time right now?
I think that if the reps really wanted to throw a monkey wrench in the dems plan they would release a bill of their own so I agree that they are to blame for this as well...
but again acting simply to act which seems to be the obama mantra is plain idiocy
-
how many of those 30 million can afford it but choose not to buy in? how many are choosing not to work full time right now?
Plenty of people fall into this category. There are thousands if not millions who are self-employed, fall into the age group of 20-40, can afford it but simply choose not to...it's a different mindset, they don't really think about needing it because at this point they haven't. And you're right again, there are tons of people who only work a little or not at all simply by choice. Obviously they are not insured but whose fault is that really?
I think that if the reps really wanted to throw a monkey wrench in the dems plan they would release a bill of their own so I agree that they are to blame for this as well...
They can't release any bill, that's the problem. They've made suggestion after suggestion, but to get a bill moving forward you have to have support behind the bill and when you're ridiculously outnumbered, that is nearly impossible.
but again acting simply to act which seems to be the obama mantra is plain idiocy
You're right, it's like being unemployed, maybe you can't find a job even though you're trying, so you decide you need to do something so you go out into the street and do a rain dance while you're butt ass naked...hey, at least you're doing something and this bill is the equivalent of that.
-
Plenty of people fall into this category. There are thousands if not millions who are self-employed, fall into the age group of 20-40, can afford it but simply choose not to...it's a different mindset, they don't really think about needing it because at this point they haven't. And you're right again, there are tons of people who only work a little or not at all simply by choice. Obviously they are not insured but whose fault is that really?
They can't release any bill, that's the problem. They've made suggestion after suggestion, but to get a bill moving forward you have to have support behind the bill and when you're ridiculously outnumbered, that is nearly impossible.
You're right, it's like being unemployed, maybe you can't find a job even though you're trying, so you decide you need to do something so you go out into the street and do a rain dance while you're butt ass naked...hey, at least you're doing something and this bill is the equivalent of that.
Exactly! When I started my business i could not afford insurance and just didnt need or want it. I saved the money and kept healthy etc. The idea that the fed gov is going to force young people to purchase insurance they cant afford and or dont want is horrible.
-
unconstitutional is the word.
-
but again acting simply to act which seems to be the obama mantra is plain idiocy
I don't think it's fair to characterize the libs with that. Their not acting for the sake of acting. This has been a major issue for a long time and the Republicans spent years sitting on their asses not addressing a fucking thing. And that apathetic attitude is why this piece of shit bill is being crammed down our throats.
-
I don't think it's fair to characterize the libs with that. Their not acting for the sake of acting. This has been a major issue for a long time and the Republicans spent years sitting on their asses not addressing a fucking thing. And that apathetic attitude is why this piece of shit bill is being crammed down our throats.
Skip - 85% of the people like their insurance. Why would the GOP mess with that?
Also, health insurance is a state issue, not a federal one. Rates for insurance vary greatly by state depending on the regulations in saids states. For example, in NYS we pay a shit load because of state mandates and regulations. We also dont allow catastropihc care, which we should.
Finally, the number of uninsured does not take into account:
1. Those who qualify for an existing program but dont sign up?
2. People who just dont want to buy it, like i did.
3. How many of those are illegals?
4. How many of those are people who will get insurance from another job if the economy rebounds, which now it definately wont.
This entire debate has been filled with lies and distortions to justify this mess called obamacare.
Also, if the govt cant restrain spending in medicare and medicade now, why should be believe a new law will do the trick when the track record already sucks?
-
Skip - 85% of the people like their insurance. Why would the GOP mess with that?
That's not an accurate depiction of the current state of affairs. I like my health insurance too, but nobody, including myself, likes the skyrocketing premiums we've encountered in the last 5 years coupled with a substantial decrease in what services are covered. And not only have premiums gone up, so have co-pays and deductibles. 2 years ago I had no deductible, a co-pays of $5/$10 (primary/specialist). Now, I have a $1500 deductible and co-pays of $25/$50 in 2 years (and I have the high option family plan which means I pay substantially more in premiums!)
Republicans have had plenty of time to address this hyperinflation and chose to sit on their asses. Now, we're all going to suffer for it.
Also, health insurance is a state issue, not a federal one. Rates for insurance vary greatly by state depending on the regulations in saids states. For example, in NYS we pay a shit load because of state mandates and regulations. We also dont allow catastropihc care, which we should.
I suppose I could go either way on this. Their are federal regulations and taxes that drive up healthcare costs. Again, despite this being on the agenda for years, the Republicans did nothing and now we're fucked.
Finally, the number of uninsured does not take into account:
1. Those who qualify for an existing program but dont sign up?
2. People who just dont want to buy it, like i did.
3. How many of those are illegals?
4. How many of those are people who will get insurance from another job if the economy rebounds, which now it definitely wont.
Par for the course. Medical bankruptcies are one of the primary causes of bankruptcies and it just disgusts me that we give huge amounts of aid to Haiti while these people suffer. There's a human aspect that I can't just turn a blind eye towards and again, the Republicans should have addressed these issues. Would've, could've, should've...but they didn't and now we're all getting fucked.
This entire debate has been filled with lies and distortions to justify this mess called obamacare.
Also, if the govt cant restrain spending in medicare and medicade now, why should be believe a new law will do the trick when the track record already sucks?
I don't think this bill will be successful. My own thoughts right now are that it will lead to insurance company executives getting rich beyond their wildest dreams (initially), drain the public of money, make big Pharma even richer if that's possible, and eventually lead to a completely socialized system where insurance companies and jobs will eventually be lost.
-
Tony wrote:
how many of those 30 million can afford it but choose not to buy in? how many are choosing not to work full time right now?
Tony, if any of these 'choosing to be uninsured' gets sick, it becomes the part of the taxpayer to cover their asses. You have sait it yourself that you 'choose' not to carry health insurance, and that is your right. But the system WOULD take care of you, if you walked into an ER bleeding one day. Isn't that socialism? You don't pay insurance, but you know the system will 'take care of you'.
I'm not hating on you for it - when i was in college I could'nt afford health insurance. But looking back, if I had slipped in my bathtub and split my head open, the ambulance that came to my house to bet me, and the stitches that went into my head, would have been paid for by others.
-
I don't think it's fair to characterize the libs with that. Their not acting for the sake of acting. This has been a major issue for a long time and the Republicans spent years sitting on their asses not addressing a fucking thing. And that apathetic attitude is why this piece of shit bill is being crammed down our throats.
I agree, my point is more along the lines of hey the reps have said they want reform just not this reform so scale it down a tad and if the reps still dont support it guess what you have them by the balls in november...
to me it seems like this is a hodge podge of lets get this through and worry about it later cluster fuck...I think more honest debate and evaluation is needed before we act, not some blanket huge ass bill thats my point.
-
They can't release any bill, that's the problem. They've made suggestion after suggestion, but to get a bill moving forward you have to have support behind the bill and when you're ridiculously outnumbered, that is nearly impossible.
The only need to get their bill out to the public it doesnt have to be put to a vote or even ben in the process. Simply lay one out online and let the public know the reps have a plan if they cant get a vote on it or cant get debate on it guess what? who stopped them from doing that?
-
The only need to get their bill out to the public it doesnt have to be put to a vote or even ben in the process. Simply lay one out online and let the public know the reps have a plan if they cant get a vote on it or cant get debate on it guess what? who stopped them from doing that?
There have been many republican reps that have brought tort reform to the house floor and a few to the senate floor. There have been a few, although not as many who brought tort reform to the floor, who brought ease on commerce to the floor taking restrictions off of buying insurance across state lines. But when both of these issues fall on mostly deaf ears it becomes pointless...you might as well try and get a bill started on creating federal funding for time travel.
-
I agree, my point is more along the lines of hey the reps have said they want reform just not this reform so scale it down a tad and if the reps still dont support it guess what you have them by the balls in november...
to me it seems like this is a hodge podge of lets get this through and worry about it later cluster fuck...I think more honest debate and evaluation is needed before we act, not some blanket huge ass bill thats my point.
Fair enough, I think we can both agree on that!