How Many Times Must We Defeat The Healthcare Bill?

It’s almost like those Halloween movies where you keep thinking that Michael is dead, but he keeps coming back and killing more people.  I keep thinking that this terrible Healthcare bill is dead and then it makes a grisly comeback!   Now we hear the rumblings of reconciliation once again.  Here are some undeniable facts:

  • The American people do NOT want this bill
  • I haven’t heard one person say, “This is a fabulous bill!”  They (and I’m talking about the Dems who are pushing the bill) will say something like, “Well, it’s not a very good bill, but sometimes you have to look the other way and just vote.” 

I don’t want that kind of bill!  I want a bill that causes a legislator to come out and say, “This is absolutely a great bill.  It must be passed!”  That’s the kind of bill we must have if 1/6 of the economy is going to be effected. 

Is it a pride issue?  Is the President really willing to throw his party under the bus in order to get a bad healthcare bill passed just so that he can say he got something passed?  In his closing remarks he mentioned the upcoming elections as a barometer of who is right in this issue.  He’s right.  November 2010 will be high noon and if the Dems insist on pushing this atrocious legislation down the throat of the American people, they will face an electorate that will not only be going to cast a vote:  they will be going to settle a score.

About these ads

33 Comments

Filed under Health Care Reform, Politics, Uncategorized

33 responses to “How Many Times Must We Defeat The Healthcare Bill?

  1. Actually, the American people DO want the provisions in the bill. Do a little research.

    • crosssection

      Leisure Guy:

      Here’s your research:

      Poll Date Sample For/Favor Against/Oppose Spread
      RCP Average 2/2 – 2/23 — 40.3 51.3 Against/Oppose +11.0
      USA Today/Gallup 2/23 – 2/23 1009 A 42 49 Against/Oppose +7
      Rasmussen Reports 2/21 – 2/22 1000 LV 41 56 Against/Oppose +15
      POS (R) 2/17 – 2/18 900 RV 40 52 Against/Oppose +12
      Newsweek 2/17 – 2/18 1009 A 40 49 Against/Oppose +9
      Pew Research 2/3 – 2/9 1383 A 38 50 Against/Oppose +12
      ABC News/Wash Post 2/4 – 2/8 1004 A 46 49 Against/Oppose +3
      Quinnipiac 2/2 – 2/8 2617 RV 35 54 Against/Oppose +19

      Not seeing any real support in there….where’s your research…just the facts please sir!

    • jcrue

      but don’t ask you to prove it, right?

  2. neilmckentyweblog2

    If you ask the American people about individual parts of the bill, they are sgtrongly supportive of all the main features. The bill will soon become law by reconciliation.

    • crosssection

      Not seeing any facts in there :( That may be your opinion…but the polling data from numerous sources that was previously listed does not uphold the belief that the American people want this bill. Wouldn’t be having that reconciliation passage celebration too quickly….Democrats up for re-election (I.E. Blanche Lincoln) are having cold feet as well they should.

  3. jcrue

    yes, let’s use a budgetary process to push unpopular legislation that will further bankrupt our nation!

    yes we can!

    everytime, reconciliation has been used in the past it was for budgetary reasons, this is not what the thugs want to use it for now.

  4. You hit the nail right on the head. I haven’t seen anyone throw a big party, dance & sing “Happy Days are Here Again?” Remember it all boils down to the Insanity “Claws” of Obama!

  5. thomasjeffersonclubblog

    Actually, I think President Obama was referring to the past election when he said “that’s what elections are for.” He, I think, meant that the past election is giving him a mandate to pass this bill at all costs. Fortunately we’ll soon have another election, and that one will show him how wrong he was.

  6. Great post, nice site, we are on the exact same page. The summit was a non event. The positive side is that Americans for the first time see how reasonable republicans are, how prepared they were, and the whole damn thing was nothing but the as advertised dog and pony show. My take, Obama blew this big times, people are not stupid, people on the far left are, people on all sides clearly were able to see the Republican party is a party of ideas, and not the party of no, well o.k. no bullshit on their watch. I’m Jim. Thanks for stopping by my site. enjoyed your comment.

  7. Americans Oppose Reconciliation, Pro-Abortion Health Care Bill as Summit Begins

    A new USA Today/Gallup poll shows Americans oppose the use of the controversial reconciliation process to ramrod the pro-abortion health care bill through Congress on a 52-39 percent margin.

    n a new CNN poll released today, just 25 percent of Americans say Congress should pass the Senate health care bill that contains massive abortion funding and other pro-abortion problems.

    Among independents, 52 percent want a new bill, 27 percent say stop health care consideration, and just 18 percent favor the pro-abortion bill.

    Another 48 percent say Congress should start over on an entirely new bill while another 25 percent say Congress should stop working on the issue of health care altogether.

    The poll also found Americans, by a 49% to 42% margin, oppose rather than favor Congress passing a health care bill similar to the one Obama and Democrats have proposed — and those “strongly” opposed outnumber those “strongly” in favor by 23% to 11%.

  8. giovanniworld

    I say let them ram it through now. That way we would have at least 80% of the Dems looking for a job after Nov. Then we can start to work on the 25% of the GOP that are RINO/Liberals. Ok, that’s my fighting side.

    My thinking side wants to know how much of this gawdawful bill is Constitutional. And I don’t mean the bill as a whole, I’m talking about the parts and pieces of the bill. I’m betting there are over 100.

    Gio-

    • Gio.. I kind of like that fighting side :)

      And yes this bill is unconstitutional……all of it. I’ve studied the Constitution a lot and I haven’t found “health care” to be one of the 21 enumerated powers given to the federal government by the states at the time of the Constitution.

      If anyone wants to learn more about the Constitution and what the founding father’s original intent was. Even if you think you know I implore you to check out this website of a new friend of mine. She is a retired Constitutional Lawyer from Tennessee. Her website is full of all kinds of information you won’t see hardly anywhere else, including ~ is health care constitutional. She will answer your questions in the comment section and tell her I suggested her site to you. ….. Here’s her site:

      Understanding the Constitution

  9. Just out of curiosity, you say the American people don’t support “THIS” bill. The you question how many time “it” keeps coming back. Since Obama has been president for 1 year, I’m curious how many times “this” particular bill has come back?

    The second question is, if we don’t reform health care with THIS bill, then how DO we reform it? What do we do for the 30-40 million people who want it but don’t have it?

    Question 3. John Boehner proposed a bill that covers 3 million more people but imposes no mandates on insurance companies. How does it help the situation if you can still be kicked out if you get sick?

    Question 4. Do you propose any restrictions on the insurance industry at all?

    • Pretend you have a medical problem and there is no medicine without serious side effects. There are promising new medicines, with milder side effects, which will be available within a year. ‘Your medical problem is not going to kill you in the near future. Would you take the bad medication today, or would you wait until the safer medications have been approved?

    • John~a good example of people not supporting the bill is that fact that it keeps having to coming back. The Democrats had a majority in the House & Senate all year, they didn’t need one Republican vote in either house. Obama & company was having trouble with it’s own party supporting the bill, hence the back room deals or buying the votes if you will to get the bill passed finally. Now they’re still having trouble mostly with their own party, simply because even tho Obama doesn’t admit it publicly, he knows and Nancy Pelosi along with Harry Reid know the general public don’t want it. Now to bypass having to have a super majority in the Senate (which they don’t have anymore) they’re considering “reconciliation” that only requires a simple majority of 51%, but actually “reconciliation” is only supposed to be used for bills connected with the budget, like Bush did with “tax cuts.”, not something like the health care bill that effects 17% of our economy. Did you know that if this bill passes our government will control 50% of our economy, not to mention the businesses that they have taken over since Obama took the office, i.e. GM ? Now, that is not a free market economy, it is approaching a “fascist economy.”

      • As you probably know Mike, the government already controls over 50% of all health care in the country. I myself am retired military. I have 100% free health care on your dime TODAY. My children are fully covered with medical and dental until they graduate from college. I have NOTHING TO GAIN by the passage of HCR. The difference between me and you (forgive me for judging but I call it as I see it) is that I have compassion for families who lose everything because they have a sick child.

        One of my old supervisors in the Air Force had a son with disabilities. One day Sprint sent an employee to recruit some us (we worked telecommunications) to come work for them. This super. told me, “I ain’t goin’ no where. The Air Force pays for my son. If I get out, I have no idea if the market will change or what. If I lose my coverage I’m screwed.” So he stayed in. Four years ago, he was killed in Iraq. That is what you defend. A patriot; a public servant, makes a life-altering choice for fear of losing his health care, and now his child grows up with no father. I’m amazed at how lightly you guys take this issue. Asked your evangelicals what has happened to their compassion.

      • crosssection

        I have a hard time grasping your “compassion” when you use organizing for America tactics of attacking “evangelicals”. My father was military and I know it was very difficult to find physicians to take our insurance because the government was such slow pay and wanted to cut payments on treatments. While the story you tell of the veteran that died in Iraq is heartbreaking….I became aware of a disabled veteran that was in the last stages of cancer and needed some expensive medication and the VA refused him due to he didn’t have long enough to live to justify the medication. This is EXACTLY why we don’t want the government making decisions in regards to our healthcare. It will greatly diminish the quality and restrict the amount we can receive. We can swap “dead sister denture” stories all day but that doesn’t solve the problem….and that’s all we heard from the Democrats at the health care summitt….no solutions there!

      • Don’t be so emotional. I did not “attack” evangelicals. I asked where there compassion is? It was a question. As usual, not a single answer.

      • crosssection

        The answer I gave is ….we don’t want the government running our healthcare. Just because you think the Democrats MAY have a plan…it’s a bad one. The idea of …hey, we have a plan, it’s a bad one, but it’s a plan…..is ridiculous. The solution offered is scrap this plan and begin to work on another one from scratch. This is what more than a majority of the American people want, as is indicated from every major poll. Your comments that this is coming from Evangelicals and Republicans is unfounded and a complete talking point. I would recommend putting down the glass of kool aid and start doing some research.

  10. Pingback: How Many Times Must We Defeat The Healthcare Bill? – Cross Section « HOME – Other Right Links and Posts

  11. “…effects 17% of our economy” is a Fox News talking point. In 1960 it was only 5%. It has gone up steadily since then. You can’t ignore a problem so that it spirals out of control, then use the argument that we can’t fix it now because it’s too big. That is idiotic.

    The fact that the constitution doesn’t deal with health care is equally ridiculous. The constitution doesn’t create a body to censor and control the airwaves, but we have the FCC don’t we? Why don’t you focus an equal amount of attention to abolish that? How about the FDA? Why do you accept federal law setting speed limits? You think the framers had cars? Yea, I picture Thomas Jefferson driving a Lexus. These are all nonsensical objections.

    Why did you ignore my question as to how we DO deal with this? Don’t just obstruct. Be constructive. Conservatives fought against Medicare and Social Security as well and now ‘claim’ to be its most ardent defenders. Why do you guys love all the socialist measures after you get used to them but fight them tooth and nail when they are proposed?

    • “The fact that the constitution doesn’t deal with health care is equally ridiculous.”

      And why is that? If you understand what the founders meant, it’s not. The States created the federal government with “limited powers.” (Read The Federalist Papers #45), by James Madison,”The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. ” The federal gov’t didn’t create the states. This is the “United States” of America. The States gave a little of their power to the federal gov’t, not all of it, as referenced by the 10th amendment.

      There are things like FCC,FDA, NEA, etc. that just have to be left alone, they’re already here. Federal speed limits on interstates, yes, that is federal property. Federal limits on state roads, no that isn’t Constitutional and that’s why the federal gov’t always used the threat of cutting off funds if the states didn’t do it, they knew they didn’t have the Constitutional authority to do so. It was always voluntary, but if the state didn’t do it, they lost federal funds.

      The formation of Medicare and SS was before my time. The founders formed a small limited federal government, not a centralized socialized form of government. As I said, most people today don’t know what the founders created, because it has morphed so much from the original especially in the early 20th century.

      “Why did you ignore my question as to how we DO deal with this? “

      I didn’t ignore it, just had so much typed already. I don’t think the problem is as big as it’s made out to be. The gov’t exaggerates the problem in order to take it over. But tort reform is one thing, being able to buy insurance across state lines is another. With less than 10% of Americans uninsured (probably more like 5% when you don’t count illegals), changing the system over to a socialist one doesn’t make sense, unless your wanting the control over it. One thing is sure, gov’t taking it over isn’t the answer and the founders would agree I assure you. They would have stopped many things years ago that we, our parents,grandparents and great grandparents have let be set up. Their intentions were for a limited gov’t, not unlimited as we’re seeing today. We are moving into a compete socialist or worse government system and most people don’t seem to care, because they don’t understand what we have and are moving toward.

  12. “That is what you defend. A patriot; a public servant, makes a life-altering choice for fear of losing his health care, and now his child grows up with no father. I’m amazed at how lightly you guys take this issue. Asked your evangelicals what has happened to their compassion.”

    John that is a story that I think would touch anybody’s heart and a sad one. That guy was a brave man and a patriot as you said. No one takes this lightly I assure you. We all have compassion for this man and family and we are thankful for everyone’s service for our country.

  13. Okay, that is 5 replies now since I asked for an alternative to the current proposal and all I get back is static discharge tap dancing around the question.

    You said, “With less than 10% of Americans uninsured…” which indicates that you don’t think 10% is significant. One reason why conservatives feel that way is that you think of it in ‘welfare’ terms like we are talking about people who want something for nothing. Think of a basketball game with 10 guys and one of them is ALWAYS uninsured. In every game, anytime, anywhere, but I digress. It would be fine if the 10% chose to take the risk of not being covered AND if emergency rooms could tell THOSE people to F-Off when they showed up for care. In this case, I would agree with you. These people SHOULD be out of luck. But where is your compassion for those who lost their care through no fault of their own? Personally, I could give a f#@k about people who don’t have coverage because they are idiots. But something SHOULD be done for everyone else. Also, the fact is that emergency rooms are mandated by law to render assistance and who do you think is paying for that today?

    In California, people are forced to buy car insurance and most policies carry “uninsured motorist” to insure against uninsured people who hit you. Why does everyone accept a mandate to buy car insurance?

    I won’t address the constitutional question again because I would begin to repeat myself since I already addressed that and have got no logical response to what I already said. All I got was more talking points and rhetoric.

    One last thing: We are coming off the worst recession in decades. There are thousands of people—Republican people—who were laid off or fired who have pre-existing conditions today but have never (before now) been uninsured. Many of these people are probably arguing alongside you even as we speak. How much do you bet these poor saps will be Democrats by November? When they are finally offered a job after the recovery is in full swing and they find that they are not eligible to be covered under their new employer’s group plan. You have no idea how I would like to be there to see their faces when they get the news that they are f*#ked. When they have the look of betrayal at having believed the Boehner/Cantor/McConnell talking points all this time. Ooooooh how sweet that would be……

    • John this is going nowhere, because when I answer you all you do is accuse me of using talking points or not answering at all. I am answering you straight off the top of my head with the facts……not talking points. You sound just like the president, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, maybe your answering with their talking points.

      [i]I won’t address the constitutional question again because I would begin to repeat myself since I already addressed that and have got no logical response to what I already said. All I got was more talking points and rhetoric.[/i]

      No logical response or just not the response you wanted? I told you about the Constitutionality of this health care bill, but it wasn’t what you wanted to hear. Have a good day my friend.

  14. If you get a chance, correct “there” with “their” in my last comment and delete this please.

  15. One more thing. I have a colleague at work who is active duty Army. He and his wife are active evangelicals and very conservative. We have some very “spirited” discussions. A short time ago, a German colleague who was eavesdropping mentioned to me how shocked he is at the positions I take now given that he has known me for about 10 years. I was once about as conservative as Clarence Thomas if you can believe that. My Army friend asked how I could possibly change so much in such a short time. I would be interested in your view of an article I wrote in response to that question:

    http://wuzhatnin.com/2010/02/05/journey-of-a-true-conservative/

  16. crosssection

    Here are the alternatives to the current bill that you asked for earlier: (BTW, these have already been put into bill form by Republicans on both the house and senate sides.)
    1. Tort reform! Doctors are leaving states that have not put tort reform into place because their liability insurance is so expensive. This does not mean that someone could not get pain and suffering damages, it only means that these types of punitive damages are limited whereas actual damages such as loss of income are not.
    2. Allow people to form groups so that the risk pools are enlarged and they will be able to get insurance at a lower price.
    3. Allow kids to stay on their parents insurance for a few extra years until they can get on their feet.
    4. Give tax credits to low income people so that they can purchase their own health insurance.
    5. Create health savings accounts. When you are taking money out of your own account to pay the bill you are much more likely to shop around, and to examine the bill which will cut down on fraud.
    6. Stricter rules regarding pre-existing conditions.
    These are solutions that will get a lot more people covered. No, it wouldn’t get everybody covered, but it would allow just about everybody to get covered if they so choose.

  17. crosssection

    My Account

    Global DashboardStatsBlog SurferTag SurferMy CommentsMy BlogsEdit ProfileSupportWordPress.comLog OutMy DashboardNew PostEdit PostBlog Info

    Random PostFollow this BlogAdd to BlogrollGet ShortlinkReport as spamReport as matureSearchCross Section
    HomeWelcome to Cross SectionWhat the Cross Section thinks Obama should write on his hand!Gallup Confirms It-Dems Choose Reconciliation At Their Own PerilFebruary 26, 2010…1:55 pm
    How Many Times Must We Defeat The Healthcare Bill?
    Jump to Comments

    It’s almost like those Halloween movies where you keep thinking that Michael is dead, but he keeps coming back and killing more people. I keep thinking that this terrible Healthcare bill is dead and then it makes a grisly comeback! Now we hear the rumblings of reconciliation once again. Here are some undeniable facts:

    ■The American people do NOT want this bill
    ■I haven’t heard one person say, “This is a fabulous bill!” They (and I’m talking about the Dems who are pushing the bill) will say something like, “Well, it’s not a very good bill, but sometimes you have to look the other way and just vote.”
    I don’t want that kind of bill! I want a bill that causes a legislator to come out and say, “This is absolutely a great bill. It must be passed!” That’s the kind of bill we must have if 1/6 of the economy is going to be effected.

    Is it a pride issue? Is the President really willing to throw his party under the bus in order to get a bad healthcare bill passed just so that he can say he got something passed? In his closing remarks he mentioned the upcoming elections as a barometer of who is right in this issue. He’s right. November 2010 will be high noon and if the Dems insist on pushing this atrocious legislation down the throat of the American people, they will face an electorate that will not only be going to cast a vote: they will be going to settle a score.

    ——————————————————————————–

    Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

    ■Harry Reid to Senate: Let The Bribary Begin!
    ■Top 10 Signs That The Healthcare Bill Might Not Be Good For America
    ■Biting Off More Than We Can Chew
    ■How Many Times Must We Defeat The Healthcare Bill? Thanks crosssection
    28 Comments
    Filed under Health Care Reform, Politics, Uncategorized
    Tags: Healthcare Summit, President Obama, Reconciliation

    28 Comments

    LeisureGuy
    February 26, 2010 at 5:45 pm · Edit Actually, the American people DO want the provisions in the bill. Do a little research.

    Reply

    crosssection
    February 26, 2010 at 5:49 pm · Edit Leisure Guy:

    Here’s your research:

    Poll Date Sample For/Favor Against/Oppose Spread
    RCP Average 2/2 – 2/23 — 40.3 51.3 Against/Oppose +11.0
    USA Today/Gallup 2/23 – 2/23 1009 A 42 49 Against/Oppose +7
    Rasmussen Reports 2/21 – 2/22 1000 LV 41 56 Against/Oppose +15
    POS (R) 2/17 – 2/18 900 RV 40 52 Against/Oppose +12
    Newsweek 2/17 – 2/18 1009 A 40 49 Against/Oppose +9
    Pew Research 2/3 – 2/9 1383 A 38 50 Against/Oppose +12
    ABC News/Wash Post 2/4 – 2/8 1004 A 46 49 Against/Oppose +3
    Quinnipiac 2/2 – 2/8 2617 RV 35 54 Against/Oppose +19

    Not seeing any real support in there….where’s your research…just the facts please sir!

    Reply

    jcrue
    February 26, 2010 at 7:06 pm · Edit but don’t ask you to prove it, right?

    Reply

    neilmckentyweblog2
    February 26, 2010 at 5:57 pm · Edit If you ask the American people about individual parts of the bill, they are sgtrongly supportive of all the main features. The bill will soon become law by reconciliation.

    Reply

    crosssection
    February 26, 2010 at 6:01 pm · Edit Not seeing any facts in there That may be your opinion…but the polling data from numerous sources that was previously listed does not uphold the belief that the American people want this bill. Wouldn’t be having that reconciliation passage celebration too quickly….Democrats up for re-election (I.E. Blanche Lincoln) are having cold feet as well they should.

    Reply

    jcrue
    February 26, 2010 at 7:07 pm · Edit yes, let’s use a budgetary process to push unpopular legislation that will further bankrupt our nation!

    yes we can!

    everytime, reconciliation has been used in the past it was for budgetary reasons, this is not what the thugs want to use it for now.

    Reply

    bobbi85710
    February 26, 2010 at 9:14 pm · Edit You hit the nail right on the head. I haven’t seen anyone throw a big party, dance & sing “Happy Days are Here Again?” Remember it all boils down to the Insanity “Claws” of Obama!

    Reply

    thomasjeffersonclubblog
    February 26, 2010 at 9:51 pm · Edit Actually, I think President Obama was referring to the past election when he said “that’s what elections are for.” He, I think, meant that the past election is giving him a mandate to pass this bill at all costs. Fortunately we’ll soon have another election, and that one will show him how wrong he was.

    Reply

    Mike
    February 26, 2010 at 11:07 pm · Edit Americans Oppose Reconciliation, Pro-Abortion Health Care Bill as Summit Begins

    A new USA Today/Gallup poll shows Americans oppose the use of the controversial reconciliation process to ramrod the pro-abortion health care bill through Congress on a 52-39 percent margin.

    n a new CNN poll released today, just 25 percent of Americans say Congress should pass the Senate health care bill that contains massive abortion funding and other pro-abortion problems.

    Among independents, 52 percent want a new bill, 27 percent say stop health care consideration, and just 18 percent favor the pro-abortion bill.

    Another 48 percent say Congress should start over on an entirely new bill while another 25 percent say Congress should stop working on the issue of health care altogether.

    The poll also found Americans, by a 49% to 42% margin, oppose rather than favor Congress passing a health care bill similar to the one Obama and Democrats have proposed — and those “strongly” opposed outnumber those “strongly” in favor by 23% to 11%.

    Reply

    giovanniworld
    February 26, 2010 at 11:50 pm · Edit I say let them ram it through now. That way we would have at least 80% of the Dems looking for a job after Nov. Then we can start to work on the 25% of the GOP that are RINO/Liberals. Ok, that’s my fighting side.

    My thinking side wants to know how much of this gawdawful bill is Constitutional. And I don’t mean the bill as a whole, I’m talking about the parts and pieces of the bill. I’m betting there are over 100.

    Gio-

    Reply

    Mike
    February 27, 2010 at 2:59 am · Edit Gio.. I kind of like that fighting side

    And yes this bill is unconstitutional……all of it. I’ve studied the Constitution a lot and I haven’t found “health care” to be one of the 21 enumerated powers given to the federal government by the states at the time of the Constitution.

    If anyone wants to learn more about the Constitution and what the founding father’s original intent was. Even if you think you know I implore you to check out this website of a new friend of mine. She is a retired Constitutional Lawyer from Tennessee. Her website is full of all kinds of information you won’t see hardly anywhere else, including ~ is health care constitutional. She will answer your questions in the comment section and tell her I suggested her site to you. ….. Here’s her site:

    Understanding the Constitution

    Reply

    John
    February 27, 2010 at 12:39 am · Edit Just out of curiosity, you say the American people don’t support “THIS” bill. The you question how many time “it” keeps coming back. Since Obama has been president for 1 year, I’m curious how many times “this” particular bill has come back?

    The second question is, if we don’t reform health care with THIS bill, then how DO we reform it? What do we do for the 30-40 million people who want it but don’t have it?

    Question 3. John Boehner proposed a bill that covers 3 million more people but imposes no mandates on insurance companies. How does it help the situation if you can still be kicked out if you get sick?

    Question 4. Do you propose any restrictions on the insurance industry at all?

    Reply

    newsbird
    February 27, 2010 at 1:56 am · Edit Pretend you have a medical problem and there is no medicine without serious side effects. There are promising new medicines, with milder side effects, which will be available within a year. ‘Your medical problem is not going to kill you in the near future. Would you take the bad medication today, or would you wait until the safer medications have been approved?

    Reply

    John
    February 27, 2010 at 12:02 pm · Edit Has no one ever told you that it is bad form to answer a question with another question?

    Mike
    February 27, 2010 at 2:48 am · Edit John~a good example of people not supporting the bill is that fact that it keeps having to coming back. The Democrats had a majority in the House & Senate all year, they didn’t need one Republican vote in either house. Obama & company was having trouble with it’s own party supporting the bill, hence the back room deals or buying the votes if you will to get the bill passed finally. Now they’re still having trouble mostly with their own party, simply because even tho Obama doesn’t admit it publicly, he knows and Nancy Pelosi along with Harry Reid know the general public don’t want it. Now to bypass having to have a super majority in the Senate (which they don’t have anymore) they’re considering “reconciliation” that only requires a simple majority of 51%, but actually “reconciliation” is only supposed to be used for bills connected with the budget, like Bush did with “tax cuts.”, not something like the health care bill that effects 17% of our economy. Did you know that if this bill passes our government will control 50% of our economy, not to mention the businesses that they have taken over since Obama took the office, i.e. GM ? Now, that is not a free market economy, it is approaching a “fascist economy.”

    Reply

    John
    February 27, 2010 at 11:42 am · Edit As you probably know Mike, the government already controls over 50% of all health care in the country. I myself am retired military. I have 100% free health care on your dime TODAY. My children are fully covered with medical and dental until they graduate from college. I have NOTHING TO GAIN by the passage of HCR. The difference between me and you (forgive me for judging but I call it as I see it) is that I have compassion for families who lose everything because they have a sick child.

    One of my old supervisors in the Air Force had a son with disabilities. One day Sprint sent an employee to recruit some us (we worked telecommunications) to come work for them. This super. told me, “I ain’t goin’ no where. The Air Force pays for my son. If I get out, I have no idea if the market will change or what. If I lose my coverage I’m screwed.” So he stayed in. Four years ago, he was killed in Iraq. That is what you defend. A patriot; a public servant, makes a life-altering choice for fear of losing his health care, and now his child grows up with no father. I’m amazed at how lightly you guys take this issue. Asked your evangelicals what has happened to their compassion.

    How Many Times Must We Defeat The Healthcare Bill? – Cross Section « HOME – Other Right Links and Posts
    February 27, 2010 at 2:42 am · Edit [...] Click here to read more… [...]

    Reply

    John
    February 27, 2010 at 11:31 am · Edit “…effects 17% of our economy” is a Fox News talking point. In 1960 it was only 5%. It has gone up steadily since then. You can’t ignore a problem so that it spirals out of control, then use the argument that we can’t fix it now because it’s too big. That is idiotic.

    The fact that the constitution doesn’t deal with health care is equally ridiculous. The constitution doesn’t create a body to censor and control the airwaves, but we have the FCC don’t we? Why don’t you focus an equal amount of attention to abolish that? How about the FDA? Why do you accept federal law setting speed limits? You think the framers had cars? Yea, I picture Thomas Jefferson driving a Lexus. These are all nonsensical objections.

    Why did you ignore my question as to how we DO deal with this? Don’t just obstruct. Be constructive. Conservatives fought against Medicare and Social Security as well and now ‘claim’ to be its most ardent defenders. Why do you guys love all the socialist measures after you get used to them but fight them tooth and nail when they are proposed?

    Reply

    Mike
    February 27, 2010 at 4:32 pm · Edit “The fact that the constitution doesn’t deal with health care is equally ridiculous.”

    And why is that? If you understand what the founders meant, it’s not. The States created the federal government with “limited powers.” (Read The Federalist Papers #45), by James Madison,”The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. ” The federal gov’t didn’t create the states. This is the “United States” of America. The States gave a little of their power to the federal gov’t, not all of it, as referenced by the 10th amendment.

    There are things like FCC,FDA, NEA, etc. that just have to be left alone, they’re already here. Federal speed limits on interstates, yes, that is federal property. Federal limits on state roads, no that isn’t Constitutional and that’s why the federal gov’t always used the threat of cutting off funds if the states didn’t do it, they knew they didn’t have the Constitutional authority to do so. It was always voluntary, but if the state didn’t do it, they lost federal funds.

    The formation of Medicare and SS was before my time. The founders formed a small limited federal government, not a centralized socialized form of government. As I said, most people today don’t know what the founders created, because it has morphed so much from the original especially in the early 20th century.

    “Why did you ignore my question as to how we DO deal with this? “

    I didn’t ignore it, just had so much typed already. I don’t think the problem is as big as it’s made out to be. The gov’t exaggerates the problem in order to take it over. But tort reform is one thing, being able to buy insurance across state lines is another. With less than 10% of Americans uninsured (probably more like 5% when you don’t count illegals), changing the system over to a socialist one doesn’t make sense, unless your wanting the control over it. One thing is sure, gov’t taking it over isn’t the answer and the founders would agree I assure you. They would have stopped many things years ago that we, our parents,grandparents and great grandparents have let be set up. Their intentions were for a limited gov’t, not unlimited as we’re seeing today. We are moving into a compete socialist or worse government system and most people don’t seem to care, because they don’t understand what we have and are moving toward.

    Reply

    Mike
    February 27, 2010 at 4:37 pm · Edit “That is what you defend. A patriot; a public servant, makes a life-altering choice for fear of losing his health care, and now his child grows up with no father. I’m amazed at how lightly you guys take this issue. Asked your evangelicals what has happened to their compassion.”

    John that is a story that I think would touch anybody’s heart and a sad one. That guy was a brave man and a patriot as you said. No one takes this lightly I assure you. We all have compassion for this man and family and we are thankful for everyone’s service for our country.

    Reply

    John
    February 27, 2010 at 7:50 pm · Edit Okay, that is 5 replies now since I asked for an alternative to the current proposal and all I get back is static discharge tap dancing around the question.

    You said, “With less than 10% of Americans uninsured…” which indicates that you don’t think 10% is significant. One reason why conservatives feel that way is that you think of it in ‘welfare’ terms like we are talking about people who want something for nothing. Think of a basketball game with 10 guys and one of them is ALWAYS uninsured. In every game, anytime, anywhere, but I digress. It would be fine if the 10% chose to take the risk of not being covered AND if emergency rooms could tell THOSE people to F-Off when they showed up for care. In this case, I would agree with you. These people SHOULD be out of luck. But where is your compassion for those who lost their care through no fault of their own? Personally, I could give a f#@k about people who don’t have coverage because they are idiots. But something SHOULD be done for everyone else. Also, the fact is that emergency rooms are mandated by law to render assistance and who do you think is paying for that today?

    In California, people are forced to buy car insurance and most policies carry “uninsured motorist” to insure against uninsured people who hit you. Why does everyone accept a mandate to buy car insurance?

    I won’t address the constitutional question again because I would begin to repeat myself since I already addressed that and have got no logical response to what I already said. All I got was more talking points and rhetoric.

    One last thing: We are coming off the worst recession in decades. There are thousands of people—Republican people—who were laid off or fired who have pre-existing conditions today but have never (before now) been uninsured. Many of these people are probably arguing alongside you even as we speak. How much do you bet these poor saps will be Democrats by November? When they are finally offered a job after the recovery is in full swing and they find that they are not eligible to be covered under their new employer’s group plan. You have no idea how I would like to be there to see their faces when they get the news that they are f*#ked. When they have the look of betrayal at having believed the Boehner/Cantor/McConnell talking points all this time. Ooooooh how sweet that would be……

    Reply

    Mike
    February 27, 2010 at 10:11 pm · Edit John this is going nowhere, because when I answer you all you do is accuse me of using talking points or not answering at all. I am answering you straight off the top of my head with the facts……not talking points. You sound just like the president, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, maybe your answering with their talking points.

    [i]I won’t address the constitutional question again because I would begin to repeat myself since I already addressed that and have got no logical response to what I already said. All I got was more talking points and rhetoric.[/i]

    No logical response or just not the response you wanted? I told you about the Constitutionality of this health care bill, but it wasn’t what you wanted to hear. Have a good day my friend.

    Reply

    John
    February 27, 2010 at 7:55 pm · Edit If you get a chance, correct “there” with “their” in my last comment and delete this please.

    Reply

    John
    February 27, 2010 at 8:07 pm · Edit One more thing. I have a colleague at work who is active duty Army. He and his wife are active evangelicals and very conservative. We have some very “spirited” discussions. A short time ago, a German colleague who was eavesdropping mentioned to me how shocked he is at the positions I take now given that he has known me for about 10 years. I was once about as conservative as Clarence Thomas if you can believe that. My Army friend asked how I could possibly change so much in such a short time. I would be interested in your view of an article I wrote in response to that question:

    http://wuzhatnin.com/2010/02/05/journey-of-a-true-conservative/

    Reply

    crosssection
    March 1, 2010 at 3:01 am · Edit Here are the alternatives to the current bill that you asked for earlier: (BTW, these have already been put into bill form by Republicans on both the house and senate sides.)
    1. Tort reform! Doctors are leaving states that have not put tort reform into place because their liability insurance is so expensive. This does not mean that someone could not get pain and suffering damages, it only means that these types of punitive damages are limited whereas actual damages such as loss of income are not.
    2. Allow people to form groups so that the risk pools are enlarged and they will be able to get insurance at a lower price.
    3. Allow kids to stay on their parents insurance for a few extra years until they can get on their feet.
    4. Give tax credits to low income people so that they can purchase their own health insurance.
    5. Create health savings accounts. When you are taking money out of your own account to pay the bill you are much more likely to shop around, and to examine the bill which will cut down on fraud.
    6. Stricter rules regarding pre-existing conditions.
    These are solutions that will get a lot more people covered. No, it wouldn’t get everybody covered, but it would allow just about everybody to get covered if they so choose.

  18. The Health Care system in America is fine. There’s no need to do anything at all to it, much less destroy America as we know it.
    The main problem is that the two sides have a fundamental philosophical difference. The left thinks that it is acceptable for government to try to help its citizens, and the right knows that the world is us-vs-them and every-man-for-himself, and that helping the citizens only makes them weaker.

    • “The left thinks that it is acceptable for government to try to help its citizens”

      I think it’s more than just trying to “help” it’s citizens…it’s more like controlling them and telling them what they’re going to do like it or not. And we do have that pesky thing called the “Constitution” that the left especially doesn’t like either.

  19. I am not new to blogging and truly appreciate your site. There is much prime content that peaks my interest. I am going to bookmark your web site and keep checking you out.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s