|
Post by halftheworld on Mar 21, 2010 19:59:52 GMT -5
uh, i forgot. the latest justification for this war is that the iraqis were freed from this regime... yeah, it is pretty hard not to get confused, you know. iraq supported AQ at 9/11, iraq has wmds with nuclear power, iraq had the wheapons but took them to syria... Ok. He was wrong. But so was Al Gore and Clinton in the 90s when they used that rationale to send in cruise missiles. Everyone thought Saddam had WMD. They were wrong. This doesn't mean Bush lied. But a world without Saddam and a better Iraq not only helps to stabilize the middle east, but makes the world safter, too. And if you looked closer, Saddam had loose links with AQ (although he was not involved in 9/11). lol. so fucking what? a world with obamas health care bill would save more lives (don't forget the iraqis, dude!!!) than any of bushis war. and it's probably cheaper anyway. hey, why not try this way.
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Mar 21, 2010 20:07:14 GMT -5
And if you looked closer, Saddam had loose links with AQ (although he was not involved in 9/11). and sorry, we talked about this war way too much anyway. but if YOU looked closer, you'd see, that saddam had the same loose links to aq as the united states had.
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Mar 21, 2010 20:09:37 GMT -5
Ok. He was wrong. But so was Al Gore and Clinton in the 90s when they used that rationale to send in cruise missiles. Everyone thought Saddam had WMD. They were wrong. This doesn't mean Bush lied. But a world without Saddam and a better Iraq not only helps to stabilize the middle east, but makes the world safter, too. And if you looked closer, Saddam had loose links with AQ (although he was not involved in 9/11). lol. so fucking what? a world with obamas health care bill would save more lives (don't forget the iraqis, dude!!!) than any of bushis war. and it's probably cheaper anyway. hey, why not try this way. No it wouldnt. It would increase wait time and mediocre doctors. That would be worse
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Mar 21, 2010 20:13:15 GMT -5
This debate isn't about health care anyway. It's about government.
America is an idea, not just a nationality, it's the mot pro-human idea by man kind. Our founders got it right, our rights come from nature not government.
Is the role of the government to provide opportunities to better people's lives, or to equal's peoples lives?
We're reaching a point where more people depend on the government than on themselves. We have seen this movie before, and we know how it end. The European socialized governments is unsustainable. It's not what we are and it's not what we should become
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Mar 21, 2010 21:53:38 GMT -5
I don't ever want to hear about Bush's wars being unconstitutional or him lying. What the Democrats did with this health care bill goes far and beyond anything Bush may have done.
Nancy Pelosi called the angry protesters last summer "unamerican." She got it wrong. What's unamerican is this healthcare bill.
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Mar 22, 2010 0:32:29 GMT -5
I don't ever want to hear about Bush's wars being unconstitutional or him lying. What the Democrats did with this health care bill goes far and beyond anything Bush may have done. Nancy Pelosi called the angry protesters last summer "unamerican." She got it wrong. What's unamerican is this healthcare bill. you're wrong. you say this is about government. this is more about blindly opposing anything president obama and the democrats put forward. you know it, we know it, everybody knows it. you know, if you think this healthcare bill is "unamerican," you have no place in politics. it's flawed. oh, it's flawed, but what's more elitist than saying who can or cannot have healthcare in this country? it's despicable to think that some people think that this current system is the right one. meanwhile, the republicans were in office from 1995-2008 in congress and 2001-2009 in the white house and did absolutely nothing for changing healthcare. you want to call this country the greatest in the world? let's have a healthcare system that proves it. this bill immediately allows people like you and me, l4e, to stay on our parents' healthcare plan until our 27th birthdays. free preventative care for all also immediately takes place with the president's signature. it provides more much-needed oversight on one of the most corrupt industries in the world, the healthcare industry. a lot of people aren't as rich as you seemingly are and can't afford healthcare. if you truly have a problem with any of these things, you have no heart and are, quite simply, a coldhearted bastard. face it. you live in a semi-socialist country. you have a problem with it? move.
|
|
|
Post by globe on Mar 22, 2010 3:55:40 GMT -5
Furthermore, big government does not mean better government. Just look at England's NHS, it's a disaster. A disaster? A system that treats anybody, anytime no matter how much money you have in the bank with some of the best facilities and doctors in the world? Oh aye, that's a real disaster. It's a fucking brilliant system that's came to the aid of many of my family and friends over the years.
|
|
|
Post by supersonic1983 on Mar 22, 2010 7:40:24 GMT -5
Furthermore, big government does not mean better government. Just look at England's NHS, it's a disaster. A disaster? A system that treats anybody, anytime no matter how much money you have in the bank with some of the best facilities and doctors in the world? Oh aye, that's a real disaster. It's a fucking brilliant system that's came to the aid of many of my family and friends over the years. I agree completely, and I'm intrigued to know precisely which aspects of the NHS are apt to be described as disastrous, particularly in comparison with the American healthcare system.
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Mar 22, 2010 17:32:05 GMT -5
America is an idea, not just a nationality, it's the mot pro-human idea by man kind. Our founders got it right, our rights come from nature not government. what the hell is that about? about two years ago you told everyone around here that the founding fathers lived in a yesterday world and that times have changed. and what is the idea of america?
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Mar 22, 2010 17:44:42 GMT -5
good! so you should really understand why i am irritated why those stupid republicans say that obama is a socialist and that he wants to implement hitlers laws. Hitler's name has never once been uttered. ehm, rush limbaugh? only to name one.
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Mar 25, 2010 8:40:10 GMT -5
good! so you should really understand why i am irritated why those stupid republicans say that obama is a socialist and that he wants to implement hitlers laws. Hitler's name has never once been uttered. there's a lot more where that came from.
|
|
|
Post by Moorish on Mar 25, 2010 9:27:17 GMT -5
I personally think the whole situation is hilarious. These tea-party douches (shouting RACIST epithets at Civil Rights heroes? Wow, what great folks they are!) can eat shit and choke on it.
Also funny that the right wing twats like Fox news are blasting Obama for apparently going against The Will Of The People - yeah, the moronic fuckhead people - whilst when Bush was roundly fucking up the country, criticisng the President in any way during a time of war was "unpatriotic". Isn't that war still going on?
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Mar 25, 2010 20:40:39 GMT -5
to be completely honest, i think that debate is a necessity in a democracy. however, the discourse has gone over the line since obama took office, mostly from those from the right. what happened this past weekend was disgusting and inexcusable. if you have problems with the legislation, fine. spitting on others, calling people "nigger" and "faggot" are beyond despicable. shame on them, and for legislators like michelle bachmann and sarah palin for leading them on and allowing it to happen.
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Mar 25, 2010 21:12:12 GMT -5
to be completely honest, i think that debate is a necessity in a democracy. however, the discourse has gone over the line since obama took office, mostly from those from the right. what happened this past weekend was disgusting and inexcusable. if you have problems with the legislation, fine. spitting on others, calling people "nigger" and "faggot" are beyond despicable. shame on them, and for legislators like michelle bachmann and sarah palin for leading them on and allowing it to happen. I'm not excusing that. But to pick on one party is poor for two reasons: 1. It's not the party, it's a few loons. 2. Both parties have their loons. How many times did Bush have to put up with like minded idiotic protests and being called a terrorist, etc? It's no different. As for the above picture, I meant that the mainstream media never called him Hitler. And anyone who does needs to understand the dictators better. Whether or not this health care reform was good for the nation as a whole will only be known years from now. However, by going against public opinion, Democrats are more than screwed in November.
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Mar 25, 2010 21:30:32 GMT -5
to be completely honest, i think that debate is a necessity in a democracy. however, the discourse has gone over the line since obama took office, mostly from those from the right. what happened this past weekend was disgusting and inexcusable. if you have problems with the legislation, fine. spitting on others, calling people "nigger" and "faggot" are beyond despicable. shame on them, and for legislators like michelle bachmann and sarah palin for leading them on and allowing it to happen. I'm not excusing that. But to pick on one party is poor for two reasons: 1. It's not the party, it's a few loons. 2. Both parties have their loons. How many times did Bush have to put up with like minded idiotic protests and being called a terrorist, etc? It's no different. As for the above picture, I meant that the mainstream media never called him Hitler. And anyone who does needs to understand the dictators better. Whether or not this health care reform was good for the nation as a whole will only be known years from now. However, by going against public opinion, Democrats are more than screwed in November. i have to ask what you mean by the mainstream media. it seems that each person has a different definition. i completely agree that there are plenty of crazy people out there. it may be just me, but what i'm seeing is that the tea partiers are taking over the republican party--and if not taking over the party, then certainly the conversation. l4e, as soon as i see major threats and acts of violence from those on the left, i will be with you as the first to decry those responsible. bush certainly had his protesters. however, i don't remember as many threats and acts of violence against members of congress during his eight years. that may be due to ignorance or lack of memory, but while the left had plenty to complain about, any protester would be "siding with the terrorists" and "anti-american." they'd be sent to first amendment zones and silenced. (look at what happened to the dixie chicks.) you know me, i'm all or nothing. criticisms are fine. that's what makes the united states such a great country. however, the current discourse has been nothing but deplorable.
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Mar 26, 2010 11:42:15 GMT -5
back to the topic. l4e, we all know that in any government system, there are going to be major flaws. nothing's perfect, especially when there's a bureaucracy. however, i think it's better than the system we had up until yesterday. so let us ask all our canadian, british and european friends who use government healthcare what they think about their systems. how are your systems, guys?
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Mar 28, 2010 10:47:16 GMT -5
[ Whether or not this health care reform was good for the nation as a whole will only be known years from now. However, by going against public opinion, Democrats are more than screwed in November. and that is alright. the democrats shouldn't so much think about november. they should govern NOW! the health care reform was one of the major topics in obamas rally to presidency! everyone who voted for him also voted for this part and he got the majority for his program! to say that he governs against the majority of the people is stupid just because some polls speak against him is stupid! only thinking about the election in november simply blocks the whole legislation cause the debate is always dominated by the extremes. and sorry, it were the republicans who told people stupid crap like "the government will decide wether old people are allowed to live". that is just utter bullshit but of course everyone of this tea party movement bought it and multiplied it on the media. but that's the way it goes. agitation works - everywhere. and it is a legitimite part of a democracy! so the democrats should GOVERN as long as they have the majority!
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Mar 28, 2010 10:56:54 GMT -5
[ Whether or not this health care reform was good for the nation as a whole will only be known years from now. However, by going against public opinion, Democrats are more than screwed in November. and that is alright. the democrats shouldn't so much think about november. they should govern NOW! the health care reform was one of the major topics in obamas rally to presidency! everyone who voted for him also voted for this part and he got the majority for his program! to say that he governs against the majority of the people is stupid just because some polls speak against him is stupid! only thinking about the election in november simply blocks the whole legislation cause the debate is always dominated by the extremes. and sorry, it were the republicans who told people stupid crap like "the government will decide wether old people are allowed to live". that is just utter bullshit but of course everyone of this tea party movement bought it and multiplied it on the media. but that's the way it goes. agitation works - everywhere. and it is a legitimite part of a democracy! so the democrats should GOVERN as long as they have the majority! In an ideal world, you're right. But the first goal of any politician is to be re-elected. This goes for both parties, as sad as it is.
|
|
|
Post by bwilder on Mar 28, 2010 16:40:01 GMT -5
Watch and learn.
|
|
|
Post by lionsden® on Mar 28, 2010 16:58:18 GMT -5
Furthermore, big government does not mean better government. Just look at England's NHS, it's a disaster. A disaster? A system that treats anybody, anytime no matter how much money you have in the bank with some of the best facilities and doctors in the world? Oh aye, that's a real disaster. It's a fucking brilliant system that's came to the aid of many of my family and friends over the years. I wouldn't go as far as to call it a disaster, but it is going to cost a shitload of money that we do not have. Yeah its a great concept in theory, but it still needs to be paid for. Our Social Security System is going bankrupt and we are trillions of dollars in debt but we can spend a trillion dollars+ more on this...Yeah makes sense. Some people work as little as possible to get by in life, and this is their choice. If they don't have healthcare, and I have to pay for them...Well that bothers me. Also I don't feel that it is fair if I have to pay for a liver transplant for a 38 old alcoholic that is destroying his own body, a drug abuser, or the guy who eats hamburgers everyday, and needs a triple bypass before he turns 40.
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Mar 28, 2010 17:12:19 GMT -5
But the first goal of any politician is to be re-elected. This goes for both parties, as sad as it is. absolutely true. yet on the other hand it is good that politicians fear the voters cross on election day. it's this good thing about democracy (and with two houses like the senate and the congress or here in germany the bundestag and the bundesrat), that there's hardly any space for too radical changes. that's why you don't have to worry: your country won't go bancrupt with this health care bill (at least not more than george bush left it after two wars). and you won't go bancrupt either. it's just a slight change to another direction, and that's alright - cause the majority voted for it! and remember: social politics will not always lead to a gdr.
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Mar 28, 2010 17:23:49 GMT -5
Some people work as little as possible to get by in life, and this is their choice. If they don't have healthcare, and I have to pay for them...Well that bothers me. Also I don't feel that it is fair if I have to pay for a liver transplant for a 38 old alcoholic that is destroying his own body, a drug abuser, or the guy who eats hamburgers everyday, and needs a triple bypass before he turns 40. oh lions, but you are aware that there are also the other extremes that totally support the health care? what about those people who don't have time for their families cause they have 3 jobs and still can't afford health care? and what about the kid with leukemia whose parents just can't afford a medical treatment?
|
|
|
Post by lionsden® on Mar 28, 2010 17:31:08 GMT -5
Some people work as little as possible to get by in life, and this is their choice. If they don't have healthcare, and I have to pay for them...Well that bothers me. Also I don't feel that it is fair if I have to pay for a liver transplant for a 38 old alcoholic that is destroying his own body, a drug abuser, or the guy who eats hamburgers everyday, and needs a triple bypass before he turns 40. oh lions, but you are aware that there are also the other extremes that totally support the health care? what about those people who don't have time for their families cause they have 3 jobs and still can't afford health care? and what about the kid with leukemia whose parents just can't afford a medical treatment? Oh lions what? I never said that I wouldn't be glad that someone like you mentioned above would be cared for, but you always have the dirtball that milks the system. And as I said above there is the financial part of it as well...
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Mar 28, 2010 17:46:41 GMT -5
but you always have the dirtball that milks the system. of course there is. it is becuase there is no perfect health care system. And as I said above there is the financial part of it as well... true. but from a foreign point of view it is pretty odd that the conservative didn't have a problem with the financial aspect of the two wars in those days. if you forgot: you pay for iraq with your money, if you want or not! the question is: what is the topic you want to spend your money on. security from terrorists and revenge for 9/11 or a health care system that might support many people who abuse it, but helps so many more people who really need it. hey, in the end it's always a question what philosophy you prefer.
|
|
|
Post by lionsden® on Mar 28, 2010 18:07:32 GMT -5
but you always have the dirtball that milks the system. of course there is. it is becuase there is no perfect health care system. And as I said above there is the financial part of it as well... true. but from a foreign point of view it is pretty odd that the conservative didn't have a problem with the financial aspect of the two wars in those days. if you forgot: you pay for iraq with your money, if you want or not! the question is: what is the topic you want to spend your money on. security from terrorists and revenge for 9/11 or a health care system that might support many people who abuse it, but helps so many more people who really need it. hey, in the end it's always a question what philosophy you prefer. That is a hypothetical question. Of course you have to bring up the wars. How about we focus on the topic at hand. Fact is the way our system is right now people get health care even if they do not have insurance or can't pay for the hospital bill. So lets say that 10% of our population does not have health insurance. You are telling me that the majority of them are the ones who "really need it"? My philosophy is we can't afford this bill, and it shouldn't have been rushed through. It must be a good thing when more than half of the states have or may file lawsuits in regards to this.
|
|