Articles
   
       
       
Pics/Video
   
       
       
Shop
Search
 
 
 
 
 
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WAKE WORLD HOME
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Non-Wakeboarding Discussion

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old    Dennis (dennish)      Join Date: May 2005       03-22-2010, 7:50 AM Reply   
If you read my first post a "right" cannot require someone else pay for it for you.
Old    Mike (ponyh8r)      Join Date: Dec 2004       03-22-2010, 8:06 AM Reply   
Manzo,

I can't afford a gun because i have not made myself marketable in the free market. Please send me a check so i can have RIGHTFUL gun. Thanks.
Old    John Anderson (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       03-22-2010, 9:08 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by dennish View Post
Jeremy,
So why do doctors and hospitals charge for their services? Should be free. If it is a "right" then it would have to be free for all.
If you can't afford it the emergency room is required to treat you anyway. Where's the outrage over the govt forcing hospitals to treat indigent people for free? Seems like the only requirement should be to remove the dead bodies from the streets, just like other 3rd world countries.
Old    Dizzy Jenkins (dizzyj)      Join Date: Jul 2003       03-22-2010, 10:24 PM Reply   
so, I really dont care about the politics, so I've keep my head down about the whole thing.

but can somone in 5 bullet points or less, with no rhetoric, explain what this bill does? I saw a line that you have to have health insurance, or pay a fine. how does that work?
Old    Jim Zarin (jimmy_z)      Join Date: Jun 2009       03-22-2010, 10:31 PM Reply   
Wait for amnesty for illegal aliens to be the next big push from Obama.

Its the only way he is going to get a vote in the next election.
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-22-2010, 10:46 PM Reply   
"Jeremy,
So why do doctors and hospitals charge for their services? Should be free. If it is a "right" then it would have to be free for all. I need a car to get to the free doctors office."

What amazes me about most of you guys is that you don't think that us with insurance aren't already footing the bill for those that don't have insurance. Where do you think the costs go for the people that don't pay their medical bill? It's recouped from all of us with insurance.

AMO... "It makes more sense to me to do responsible and common sense financial reform first, then tackle healthcare in a bi-partisan fashion. This hasn't just divided congress, this has divided a country."

Have been in a coma for the past 25 years, do you honestly think that our partisan lawmakers are ever going to tackle financial reform? The hope for there to ever be any healthcare bipartisanship is gone, it died about 16 years ago when Clinton was in office. P.S. This country was divided way before Obama took office.
And one more thing, No I am not on scholarship from my parents. I served 4 years in the Navy (Active Duty) and attend college on the GI Bill and Navy College Fund. Yes, I have earned a living for myself, No I have not owned my own business, but my brother does. Any more questions to make you feel "I can demean some stupid college kid"? I mean, Christ, you are so smart, why are you posting all of your thoughts on WW? Why aren't you in/running for office? We could really use a "know-it-all" like you.
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-22-2010, 11:23 PM Reply   
Jeremy, I would not lecture. You don't even realize that Obama was the candidate for president and Palin was the candidate for VP and he still had less qualifications.

Why does the federal government have 25% of the people already on the medical dole but pay 50% of all health care payments private and government. Such an efficient organization.

I love all the emotional crap. People dying in the streets without healthcare. How about people without it join the military or get an education or take their beer money and go buy some. There are many ways to get insurance. It is just not a priority for a majority of those without but could have it.

Ever look at the amount of the federal government that goes for social programs? It already is most of it.

Name:  GraphTest.jpg
Views: 207
Size:  48.1 KB

Last edited by wakeworld; 03-23-2010 at 12:38 AM.
Old    Scott (magicr)      Join Date: May 2004       03-23-2010, 12:03 AM Reply   
Great post Jeremy!!

When is Palins 15 minutes of fame going to end, what a doltz. You betcha!!

Thank goodness the un-emotional fact machine (delta) sets us straight again.
Old    David Williams (wakeworld)      Join Date: Jan 1997       03-23-2010, 12:32 AM Reply   
Jeremy and other health care supporters, doesn't is bother you that the last two government run insurance "programs" are currently short $107 trillion that needs to be in the bank right now earning interest to pay off future obligations? You can argue all day that health care is necessary or a moral obligation or whatever, but don't you think that if you we can't afford it, we shouldn't be doing it? And please don't tell me that we're giving 32 million people insurance and it's going to "save" us money. Please explain how this will not financially ruin our country.

I think the best argument for health care is that we're already screwed financially because of the failure of social security and medicare, so why not go for broke. Don't worry though, I'm sure this new government insurance program will be much better than the last two. Third time's a charm!
Old    AMO (amo)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-23-2010, 7:13 AM Reply   
Jeremy , thank you for your service to this country. We will all have to wait and see since none of this stuff takes effect for a few years. I don't feel you have taken a good look at both sides for whatever reason. I implore you to do so. I think there are good parts of this bill, but it's hard to put aside the left wing ideologue that rammed this bill through. Irresponsible partisan legislation at this time in history, or any time for that matter, is not what we need. Just like we didn't need to go charging into Iraq and spending all the money we spent for that.

We are seeing a nice run up in the Dow for now, but when the taxes kick in and the stimulus runs out some time mid next year we could be in for some surprises. I'm sure that this President will just spend more money for another stimulus, putting your kids and my kids in greater debt. If that's the country you fought for, so be it. My grandfather is a pearl harbor survivor, one of the last still alive, and I know this isn't what he fought for.
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-23-2010, 7:47 AM Reply   
How do we pay for it Scott and Jeremy? Who are they going to attempt to make pay for it? Do you even know what is in the bill? I thought the 4% that we are paying for the war was making us broke and put us in the financial bind we are in? That is a small amount compared to healthcare and it ends. The Health care does not. You still have not answered why 25% of the people are covered by the federal government but make up 50% of the total costs of medical paid out. Why is Social Services already over half the US budget.

Well I know I won't get any answers because you don't have any. Typical of the old union mindset. Keep getting yours and screw the health of the company. Don't worry I am sure you can keep saying people are dying in the street and some grandmother or little kid will believe you. Funny though, for a place where people are supposedly dying in the street, we sure have a crap load of people trying to get in the country (even illegally).
Old    Manzo (zo1)      Join Date: Aug 2002       03-23-2010, 7:56 AM Reply   
Quote:
Wait for amnesty for illegal aliens to be the next big push from Obama.
This is the ONLY solution to immigration. We cannot secure our borders. This is a physical impossibility and putting $$ towards it is a COMPLETE waste. We need to get to the federal sales tax so that anyone coming here is paying their part into the system.

This would help to alleviate the pain of healthcare as well since we would actually have $$ coming in for all of those ER visits.
Old    Paul (psudy)      Join Date: Dec 2003       03-23-2010, 8:01 AM Reply   
Dizzy, Go here;

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35986235...h-health_care/
Old    Dennis (dennish)      Join Date: May 2005       03-23-2010, 8:16 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by zo1 View Post
This is the ONLY solution to immigration. We cannot secure our borders. This is a physical impossibility and putting $$ towards it is a COMPLETE waste. We need to get to the federal sales tax so that anyone coming here is paying their part into the system.

This would help to alleviate the pain of healthcare as well since we would actually have $$ coming in for all of those ER visits.
So how did the Amnesty Act of 1986 stop the flow of illegals in to this country? I did not do anything except increase the problem. Stopping employers from hiring illegals would pretty much solve the problem. There needs to be a system where employers are required to check on status prior to employment. This system needs to have real teeth in it. No jobs they will go home. Rewarding them for their illegal activity is not the answer.
Old    Manzo (zo1)      Join Date: Aug 2002       03-23-2010, 8:37 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by dennish View Post
So how did the Amnesty Act of 1986 stop the flow of illegals in to this country? I did not do anything except increase the problem. Stopping employers from hiring illegals would pretty much solve the problem. There needs to be a system where employers are required to check on status prior to employment. This system needs to have real teeth in it. No jobs they will go home. Rewarding them for their illegal activity is not the answer.
Dennis, what is easier, more effective less effective, cheaper and actually revenue generating?

Try to keep people out, try to check up on every little business that hires people with cash on a daily basis

OR

Let those companies hire those folks (like they are today and will continue to do regardless) but actually collect revenue in the form of taxes from those people?

I just think that it is time to be realistic with this. There is NO POSSIBLE way to thwart this immigration problem so how do you approach it? Keep trying to fight the losing battle? Think the massive success that the drug war has been.
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-23-2010, 8:59 AM Reply   
Well. Found this on the Progressive Democracticunderground no less. Beware what you asked for. The bill has done nothing to curb costs.

Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-23-2010, 9:04 AM Reply   
for some reason it only posted the first five with the link.

here is the link and you can read the rest of them.

http://static1.firedoglake.com/1/fil...factshcr-2.pdf
Old    Dennis (dennish)      Join Date: May 2005       03-23-2010, 9:17 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by zo1 View Post
Dennis, what is easier, more effective less effective, cheaper and actually revenue generating?

Try to keep people out, try to check up on every little business that hires people with cash on a daily basis

OR

Let those companies hire those folks (like they are today and will continue to do regardless) but actually collect revenue in the form of taxes from those people?

I just think that it is time to be realistic with this. There is NO POSSIBLE way to thwart this immigration problem so how do you approach it? Keep trying to fight the losing battle? Think the massive success that the drug war has been.
I don't see how giving the Federal Government any more of our money thru a VAT or Federal Sales Tax without repealing the Income Tax would do any good for the legal citizens. We are already paying to great a percentage of our income to taxes right now. I am "sure " the money collected on the first 4 years of the Health Care Bill will be put in a "lockbox" for payment in the next 6 years. Fat chance of that happening in this tax and spend culture we have now.
Old    Austin (backflop)      Join Date: Aug 2009       03-23-2010, 9:19 AM Reply   
Heres my 2 cents.
Everyone is entitled to (and has) thier own opinion when it comes to politics / gov't spending. No matter how much internet ranting goes on, it is not going to sway very many opinions, but will start numerous arguments on the topic. Who is right/wrong depends on your view point. You are also never going to please everybody. You can only please the majority.


I've watched a few videos on the white house youtube channel on the subject, so I feel that I am more informed on the health care reform than most of the people I talk to. Most of what I hear is just rumor that people are to stubborn to research and find out what is really going on. However, I also know that watching a few videos does not qualify me to be an expert on the subject. I want to be able to cut through all the malarky and set people straight, and personally I don't know if I can trust any news organization to be unbiased. (or even try to be unbiased) Does anybody know where we could find a copy of the bill to read?
Old    Manzo (zo1)      Join Date: Aug 2002       03-23-2010, 9:19 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by dennish View Post
I don't see how giving the Federal Government any more of our money thru a VAT or Federal Sales Tax without repealing the Income Tax would do any good for the legal citizens. We are already paying to great a percentage of our income to taxes right now. I am "sure " the money collected on the first 4 years of the Health Care Bill will be put in a "lockbox" for payment in the next 6 years. Fat chance of that happening in this tax and spend culture we have now.
Sorry I thought that it was a given the by going to a fed sales tax that the income tax would go bye bye. That is what I was referring to doing...
Old    Dennis (dennish)      Join Date: May 2005       03-23-2010, 9:19 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by zo1 View Post
Dennis, what is easier, more effective less effective, cheaper and actually revenue generating?

Try to keep people out, try to check up on every little business that hires people with cash on a daily basis

OR

Let those companies hire those folks (like they are today and will continue to do regardless) but actually collect revenue in the form of taxes from those people?

I just think that it is time to be realistic with this. There is NO POSSIBLE way to thwart this immigration problem so how do you approach it? Keep trying to fight the losing battle? Think the massive success that the drug war has been.
Maybe the 18,000 new IRS agents they plan on hiring to make sure that everyone buys Health Insurance can add checking on Status as well.
Old    David Williams (wakeworld)      Join Date: Jan 1997       03-23-2010, 10:08 AM Reply   
Hmmm, no funding for those agents were included in the bill. I guess they went with the same approach as the doctor fix measure. If it costs money, move it to a different bill on down the road and that way the CBO score will look peachy!
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-23-2010, 10:30 AM Reply   
"Jeremy, I would not lecture. You don't even realize that Obama was the candidate for president and Palin was the candidate for VP and he still had less qualifications."

I'm still waiting on your reasoning or "FACTS" of how Palin was more qualified than Obama. I mean, is it education, being a better speaker, looks, being a hockey mom; I would really like to hear your take on this.



What I think is interesting is that when we went to war in Iraq going on 7 years ago, I guarantee all of you guys griping about the cost of the healthcare bill, not one time questioned how long and how much money was going to be sunk into the quagmire in the Middle East, and not to mention the number of lives that were going to be lost. And what exactly have we accomplished in Iraq? Saddam is gone, yes, but is that all we have to hang our hats on? He's been dead for years and still most of Baghdad is without utilities. They can't have a legit election and this leaves them not stable enough to self-substain. Was this worth the money, resources, and lives invested into this "Mission"? How many of you Conservatives were up in arms when we had the Patriot Act dropped on us?

I think what irks most of you dissenters is the fact that it is a Democrat-sponsored plan. You still cannot handle the fact that Obama won the election, so you label all of us that supported him as "misinformed" or "dupes". Do you honestly think that Democrats are any less informed than Republicans? If so, is this because we don't watch Fox News or hold onto every word from Rush as the gospel. Do you think that we do not have the mental capacity to think for ourselves? Or is it you just cannot stand that someone may think differently than you, Glenn Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, etc.?

The Republican lawmakers have just as much responsibility as the Democrats in this bill passing. If the GOP would have been ready to willingly work on a plan, it would have happened. I actually applaud Congress for finally getting something done. Only time will tell if this will be beneficial or a disaster. Any data at the moment is pure speculation so I will wait and see what happens. If I was wrong, I will openly admit it. If Republicans are wrong, will they admit it, don't hold your breath. So until we see the plan in action, why not be optimistic?
Old    Mike (ponyh8r)      Join Date: Dec 2004       03-23-2010, 11:10 AM Reply   
Jeremy, really?

I currently live in Baghdad and travel throughout the city on a regular basis. MOST of Baghdad has utilities. I am not really sure what evidence you have of this, but the city of Baghdad by and large has power and water. Power was really bad in 06/07 but has improved significantly since then. It is at or near prewar levels currently and will only get better. Plus I am not sure what you are getting at with a "legit" election. The US embassy, UN and other international organizations have validated that the election took place in a fair manner. Not to mention, the percentage of those who voted puts US numbers to shame. The elections have been contested, but a recount is not a forgone conclusion, nor does it signal corruption.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/...8331268331644/

And as far as the Republicans have something to do with this bill passing, I am guessing you missed the part where not a single one voted for it.

Will you admit that this bill was passed although it was opposed by a MAJORITY of the citizens of the US?

Will you admit that this bill was passed when not a single person FULLY had read or understood what was in the bill?

Will you admit that Obama ran on a platform of Transparency and Openness and this bill is not open or transparent?

Has Obama kept other campaign promises such as lobby reform, ending the war in Iraq and Afghanistan? Oh, that is right.....i think he just sent more troops to Afghanistan.

If this bill is so well received, then why have 13 states already began litigation process to sue the federal government and up to 36 express the possibility of doing the same?
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-23-2010, 11:34 AM Reply   
First, Palin was not running against Obama. McCain was. That is why I love you guys. Always trying intellectually dishonest arguments. I can continue to play. Palin actually had executive experience. Obama had zero. He was a community organizer and a state senator from the crookedest state in the United States. If you look at history of the President. Senators never get elected to President when running against State Governors. Then add that the President is the head of the military and Obama had zero experience there either. All things being equal, Obama was way less experienced than McCain for who he was running against and arguably less qualified than the VP candidate who was Palin.

On your Iraq take. Wars end. Social programs don't. Both wars are around 4% of our GDP and will end. (Didn't the democrats get elected to get us out of the War's in 2006? More lies.) Right now, social programs are over 50% of the federal budget and are considerable amount of states budgets. All the social programs are listed as not substainable at this point so we are going to add more. Earlier proposals of healthcare were around 15% of GDP on a continuing bases with no price controls.

Patriot act again huh. Have you looked into the fact your boy Obama has left the patriot act pretty much untouched. I don't think you democrats understand your own party. Democrats are for big government. That means centralized government. They are not going to give up that kind of tool. Who the heck are you fooling. Did you not pay attention that the white house was actually tracking all email traffic coming into the white house front desk so they could keep track of all the individual people who were against the presidents plans?

I label people who want to consolidate power to the federal government as dupes and misinformed. I love it, you argue that people label you but all you democrats as soon as your pinned down go tot the "you just do what Rush or Glenn Beck or name the person tells you to do" card. I don't know how many times I heard that crap on here and other sites. How about we have the ability to think for our selves and majority of the time you guys go to that card, no one even listens to those shows.

The people I see who are the majority of the voters for Obama are the one's with their hand out or they are the ones who are the ultra rich that would love nothing more than to consolidate power under their wing. Nothing like a ruling elite with a permanent slave class. At the end of the day, nothing is for free. If you want the "people" to pay for it, that means the working man. The rich do not have income, they have wealth and power. They are immune from these tax based programs. The people who have their hand out are mostly immune too can't get blood from the turnip. That leaves the middle class to pay the bill.

I label people as a non thinker when they keep repeating all the BS from the last 8 years but are not smart enough to look at the facts that their party voted for the same thing. Then with evidence that their party voted for the same thing, they continue to stick by their same story. That is a non thinker.

On your bit about republicans being responsible for this mem. Hate to explain this too you. Not a single Republican voted for it. Matter of fact, we had Democrats voting with the Republicans. You had other democrats being bribed and bullied to change their votes to get this passed. If you look at it, the Republican vantage point actually had the true bi-partisan effort. I think for the people who actually worry about the financial portions of life understand that moving who pays for this, understand that we have not done anything to keep the actual costs down. Those items were not being addressed because the democrat party is the party of trial lawyers and actually going after the real cost of healthcare does not help them and does not help the main goal of centralized political power.
Old    Dennis (dennish)      Join Date: May 2005       03-23-2010, 11:43 AM Reply   
There is no way that anyone in Congress will give up the power to tax. They want the power to social engineer the tax code to punish whoever they want to demonize now( the rich, insurance companies,doctors,name your group). The Health Care bill was not about health care as much as it is about Power and control.
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-23-2010, 11:45 AM Reply   
"And as far as the Republicans have something to do with this bill passing, I am guessing you missed the part where not a single one voted for it."

1. Dude, reread my post, do you see anything where I said there was even ONE Republican to cast a vote in favor of the Bill?

2. Your Link is from a clearly biased source, why not find a neutral source?

3. If Congress mailed every US citizen a full copy of the Healthcare bill (over 1,000 pages) what percentage do you estimate would read it in its entirety and fully understand what it all entailed?

4. Aren't we in the process of ending the campaign in Iraq? Obama's refocus on Afghanistan comes from recommendations from Robert Gates and General McCrystal.

5. A legit election? Compare voting turnout from Mar 2010 and 2005.

6. About the 13 states "beginning litigation":

"Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum is taking the lead and is joined by attorneys general from South Carolina, Nebraska, Texas, Michigan, Utah, Pennsylvania, Alabama, South Dakota, Idaho, Washington, Colorado and Louisiana. All are Republicans except James “Buddy” Caldwell of Louisiana, who is a Democrat."

But let me guess, politics have no part in the litigation.


From reliefweb.int

"Shortages of water supply and sanitation services are acutely felt in urban centers where the majority of Iraqis now live. Outside Baghdad, potable water service coverage averages below 70% and is as low as 48% in rural areas. In Baghdad, 25% of residents remain disconnected from the water supply network and rely on expensive alternative sources of drinking water.

Wastewater collection and treatment rates are even lower than those of potable water, with less than 8% of the population outside of Baghdad connected to sewerage systems. Immediate intervention to provide safe drinking water, adequate sewage collection and treatment services are therefore immediate priorities to safeguard public health, raise living standards and protect the environment."
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-23-2010, 11:57 AM Reply   
You mean a neutral source like the guy your are arguing with who actually lives their and is in the city daily?
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-23-2010, 12:11 PM Reply   
"First, Palin was not running against Obama. McCain was. That is why I love you guys. Always trying intellectually dishonest arguments. I can continue to play."

Whoa, YOU were the first one to mention Palin was more qualified than Obama. In case you have trouble remembering, or anyone else wants the proof here is your post and I welcome you to find where above this post I made any mention of Palin, other than the lack of mentioning her middle name during the election (I also mention McCain and Biden).

WITHOUT FURTHER ADO, Deltahoosier's post:

"You like to dodge the amount government health care is costing about 1/4 of the population over 50% of the money spent on healthcare (government ran), but I will play along.

You just posted exactly what I said. If not for Ross Perot, Bush would have crushed clinton. Don't tell me that Democrats voted for Perot bud. He pulled those 19 million votes from Bush. It would have been over 56% to 43% and the electoral votes would have swung way the other way. I don't know where you get your math or understanding of issues. Because of Perot, Clinton actually won the vote with 7% less than a majority.

You in a couple of posts ago tried to tie people using Osama and Obama and now it is the whole name. Which is it? You may not have thought it was cool. Many kids did. Why do you think that blacks and the youth actually came out and voted in mass for the first time in a very long time? Obama's qualifications were the worst for any candidate probably in the history of the position. Everyone loved to bag on Palin (VP candidate only) and Obama had even less qualifications. That can never be disputed."

Who is the one engaging in "dishonest arguments"?


"On your bit about republicans being responsible for this mem. Hate to explain this too you. Not a single Republican voted for it."

You and Mike need a refresher course in reading comprehension. My post which you two both mention:

"The Republican lawmakers have just as much responsibility as the Democrats in this bill passing. If the GOP would have been ready to willingly work on a plan, it would have happened. I actually applaud Congress for finally getting something done. Only time will tell if this will be beneficial or a disaster. Any data at the moment is pure speculation so I will wait and see what happens. If I was wrong, I will openly admit it. If Republicans are wrong, will they admit it, don't hold your breath. So until we see the plan in action, why not be optimistic?"

Now, I challenge you to point out where I make any mention of a Republican voting for the bill. It's not in there, and the message has not been edited.

Finally, your mention of Palin's qualifications are laughable, and notice now how you invoke the word "arguably". Nice, very nice.
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-23-2010, 12:12 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
You mean a neutral source like the guy your are arguing with who actually lives their and is in the city daily?
My Brother-in-law is there also with the US Army. He doesn't paint as pretty a picture as Mike, and he is a die-hard conservative.
Old    Mike (ponyh8r)      Join Date: Dec 2004       03-23-2010, 12:25 PM Reply   
You still really haven't answered any questions here. What makes the election not legit?

Point 1: you said, "The Republican lawmakers have just as much responsibility as the Democrats in this bill passing." In my opinion it is pretty hard to place blame them when not one voted for the bill to pass. See my point. They can't really be to blame for the bill passing, if they ALL voted NOT to pass the bill.

Point 2: See below.

Your point 3: it is the JOB of our CONGRESS to read the bill before voting on it.

Point 4: Yes we are in the process of ending the campaign in Iraq, but we will leave at least 50,000 troops behind. We are ending COMBAT Operations in Iraq. Big difference. Intelligence personnel, security forces and training teams will remain behind. 50,000 personnel is more than we have in Korea by the way. As far as Afghanistan goes...EVERY general, especially one with a diminishing security situation like McCrystal's is going to ask for more troops. But after all, keeping his campaign promises don't seem to be at the forefront of his agenda anyhow.

Point 5. Not really sure what voter turn out has to do with a legit election. How is this for a fair source? http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/08...ons-a-success/

Point 6. As far as litigation goes, I don't see your point. I didn't claim they were not Red states. I used it as a way to show the frustration with the process and how it flew in the face of the American people's will.

As far as your link goes. Great source. Anyway. The numbers for Baghdad may be around 70% or a little lower, but what where they before the war? This is not Europe or America. This is Iraq. There is hardly any solid water sources and electricity has always been an issue. Things are not that bad. Geez. Nearly everywhere we stop or pass by we see people sitting with their lights on at night and ceiling fans turning. The highways are lit up, coke machines lit up, stores open at night. I really don't know what else to tell you except i have been all over this place...I am in an EOD unit, and power is on and working.
Old    Mike (ponyh8r)      Join Date: Dec 2004       03-23-2010, 12:35 PM Reply   
"If the GOP would have been ready to willingly work on a plan, it would have happened"

I guess this is the sentence you are using for your escape from stating you gave equal blame to the Republicans. Either way, there is no way to prove that if they would have "willingly worked" on a plan that the Dems would have worked with them. We can however look at the voting records as proof that they did not support THIS bill.

We are still talking about THIS bill right? Or are we talking about the fictitious, imaginary, could have been bill that never happened but could have been the new healthcare bill that he republicans could have worked on but didn't, that the Dems would have be bi-partisen on and passed....bill? but didn't.

Either way, NO BLAME for THIS bill can be placed with the Republicans.
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-23-2010, 12:54 PM Reply   
Jeremy. You still don't get it. I was referring how democrats loved to bag on Palin during the campaign as a case of how they would bag on people while ignoring the exact same thing staring them in the face. You know your continued truth issue. And that was rapped in the discussion of how many people voted for obama because it was the cool thing to do and you disputed that. THe reason I even mentioned Palin is you guys bagged on her for not being qualified but still voted for Obama even though he had less qualifications than Republican VP candidate. (you forget your election history already?) Point is, Obama certainly was not elected due to qualifications so I must have been either blind party alegence, Electing the first black man (explains the higher youth and black turn out since they are usually not that political motivated to actually vote) or tired of Bush (which explains independents voting pattern) The part you quoted has nothing that disputes what I was saying.

At the end of the day Palin is more qualified than Obama is you had to look at them for the same job. And regardless of the qualificaiton issue, you are trying to get traction on a side issue by trying to misrepresent what I was even talking about. You were the first to ask the question of how that was.

Obama had less experience? Obama's qualifications were the worst? How was Palin more qualified than Obama?

Sometimes your arrogance makes you blind to your ignorance.


If you are going to argue, at least remember what it was about.

Now lets get a little closer to the reason for the discussion.

Remember this little gem?

The Republican lawmakers have just as much responsibility as the Democrats in this bill passing.

Now you may have had some other context for this, but when I read that and that means votes when we are talking about a healthcare bill just being passed. WIth that, not a single republican is responsible for the healthcare vote. Like I explained, there is nothing to work with on formulating a package. The democrats are not interested in looking at the real costs of healthcare and it seems that there are some democrats that agree with the republicans. That is the only bipartisan vote and that vote was NO.


You are a typical democrat aren't you. You have spent quite a bit arguing about side issues. How about the facts of how much money is going out in healthcare from the federal government. How about the cancer survivor rate in the US vs Europe that I posted. How about how the Mass. healthcare system is in trouble that I posted. How about the posts about how Europe make people pay a large portion of their bills as well as the tax for the healthcare? How about the partial table and complete table in the link that talks about the current healthcare bill (that was posted on a progressive website) that details how this is going to actually hurt the middleclass?

That's right, we'll ignore that part of it. I love it. Don't want to be associated as a dupe but use the thinking mans version of the argument (sarcasm) "as long as someone finally did something it is fine with me" point of view.
Old    Jim Zarin (jimmy_z)      Join Date: Jun 2009       03-23-2010, 1:54 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by zo1 View Post
This is the ONLY solution to immigration. We cannot secure our borders. This is a physical impossibility and putting $$ towards it is a COMPLETE waste. We need to get to the federal sales tax so that anyone coming here is paying their part into the system.

This would help to alleviate the pain of healthcare as well since we would actually have $$ coming in for all of those ER visits.
That is the WORST solution.

The most simple solution is to put employers who employ illegal aliens in JAIL!!!!!!!!

The illegals will go home when they cannot find a job. They already have left in huge numbers due to this economy.
Old    Paul (psudy)      Join Date: Dec 2003       03-23-2010, 1:59 PM Reply   
"They already have left in huge numbers due to this economy"

I wonder if they would be as nice to us if we started jumping the border when things get rough here? I imagine the cartells are hiring!
Old    Dennis (dennish)      Join Date: May 2005       03-23-2010, 2:07 PM Reply   
Now that would have teeth and get results from employers. They don't mind making money but would not go to jail over it.
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-23-2010, 3:01 PM Reply   
What does us jumping the boarder have to do with sound economic policy?
Old    Brett (bmcgee)      Join Date: Nov 2007       03-23-2010, 4:21 PM Reply   
^^^ Its just less people needing health insurance in America. Sounds like a good plan to me. Anyone want to volunteer to move to Mexico?
Old    John Anderson (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       03-23-2010, 4:30 PM Reply   
"Qualified" means "Agrees with your personal philosophy". Virtually no one in Congress is qualified. They are all elected and have very little knowledge about what they vote on. Other than campaign contributions, that's another reason why lobbyists have so much influence. Because the politicians need expert opinion and the easiest place to get it is from lobbyists.

Republicans need to vote in some people who aren't cowards. All the objections I heard after the vote was over was objections to the bill over abortion. They weren't voicing the demands of their constituents. I.E. "Healthcare isn't a right", "If you want healthcare, get a job", "if you can't afford it, go get your healthcare at the emergency room". Why weren't the House Republicans saying that if it's such a popular majority message?

The GOP better hope this healthcare bill is unpopular because they come off as patriots of the GOP with a 100% party line vote. Their abortion objections come off as hollow and self serving.
Old    Manzo (zo1)      Join Date: Aug 2002       03-23-2010, 4:41 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmy_z View Post
That is the WORST solution.

The most simple solution is to put employers who employ illegal aliens in JAIL!!!!!!!!

The illegals will go home when they cannot find a job. They already have left in huge numbers due to this economy.
Sorry Jim but you seriously think that is a feasible solution? We can't even catch business who cook the books, cheat on their taxes, defraud investors et al and you think we would be successful at nabbing small businesses in every corner of this country using illegals as workers? not a chance...

I am being realistic and rather than avoiding the inevitable and handling problems like we typically do in America, by waiting till they boil over and then reacting on them, lets be proactive, realize that there is nothing that we can do to stop them from coming in and being employed, so lets make sure they pay in just like everyone else.

I did not even touch on the fact that your solution has us potentially sending employers inot prisons that are already overcrowded. then what happens? You take an independent revenue producing member of the business world out of the mix and put them into prison where the government is now responsible for paying for them.

You can;t come on here complaining about the national debt, deficit et al and then offer a solution that costs the country more money...
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-23-2010, 4:49 PM Reply   
"Point 5. Not really sure what voter turn out has to do with a legit election. How is this for a fair source?"

What do you mean what does voter turn out have to do with a legit election? It has everything to do with a legit election. Especially the significant percentage drop from 2005 to 2010's election.


"Obama had less experience? Obama's qualifications were the worst? How was Palin more qualified than Obama?

Sometimes your arrogance makes you blind to your ignorance.

If you are going to argue, at least remember what it was about.

Now lets get a little closer to the reason for the discussion.

Remember this little gem?"

Of course, but like I said, you were the one first comparing Palin's qualifications to Obama's.

"At the end of the day Palin is more qualified than Obama is you had to look at them for the same job"

You have still yet to prove this other than by saying Palin was a governor and Obama was a senator. (I think this is a poor justification, but oh well). You also left out a big group that elected Obama. Those of us that looked at the alternative, and decided Obama was better for the job. There is nothing substantiated by your governor vs. senator argument (isn't McCain a senator?). I can name three of the last four US presidents that were govs and I strongly doubt that you would give them high marks. (Bush Jr., Clinton, and Carter [I know you think highly of Reagan]), so that gives you argument little substance.

"Don't want to be associated as a dupe but use the thinking mans version of the argument (sarcasm) "as long as someone finally did something it is fine with me" point of view."

That's fine. Everyone should share your opinion. We should elect these guys and gals to make laws for us, but instead of working together, they should just fight each other and accomplish nothing, so at the end of their respective terms, we can say you did a great job of doing diddly squat and we are going to reward you with another term. Is that what you elect your lawmakers to do?

"WIth that, not a single republican is responsible for the healthcare vote."

In many cases, inaction can be just as bad as action. The GOP were not willing to iron out details of the plan, they wanted to scrap the plan and "establish their own", one to appease the insurance companies.
Old    Chad (dcwillette)      Join Date: Sep 2005       03-23-2010, 5:22 PM Reply   
There are current;ly about 12 million illegal aliens in this country. We can't afford to deport them all and we can't grant them all amnesty. We can't afford the logistics of deporting them all or the effects it would have on our economy. If the U.S. government really wanted to stop illegal immigration into this country, we could do a much better job than we are doing today but the truth is that we don't want to. Why? Because it's not in the best interest of the private sector. We turn a blind eye to it because companies and small businesses need this cheap labor force to keep prices on goods and services down and profits up. Deport the cheap labor market and you'll have significant inflation in addition to the expansion of government to enforce it.

If you're talking about the working class aliens from Mexico, they are not taking many jobs away from native-born Americans because they tend to do work that we don't want to do anyway. They also furnish a service that many of us would otherwise not afford. I wouldn't have a landscaper at all if I had to pay some white guy $75 to 100 a week to do it but I'll pay a Mexican $20 cash so I can go go wakeboarding or golfing instead of mowing the lawn and pulling weeds. The minimum wage laws and expectations of native-born Americans drive labor costs up to the point that if not for the cheap labor provided by illegals, we would do without.

Keep in mind that going about citizenship legally can take up to 25 years (think about that) depending on the county of origin. A Mexican that doesn't marry an American has a snowballs chance in hell of gaining citizenship legally due to the polices and processes in place. Other Latin American countries fare a little better but it is a long and most often unsuccessful struggle.

Did you know that illegals paid $7.1 Billion into Social Security last year through false Social Security numbers? They will never collect a dime of it but they paid into it. That means more benefits for Americans due to the funds being available that otherwise would not be.

No economy in the modern industrialized world has ever sustained economic growth with a flat or negative population growth. Europe is heading towards major troubles in this regard. The U.S. has little population growth. Whites in this country actually have a negative population growth and some estimates indicate will be a minority in this country by 2050. Blacks are almost as bad. Hispanics are increasing. If it were not for immigration, this country would likely have a negative population growth which doesn't fare well for our economy.

I agree that the southern border fence is a waste of resources. There is saying in our military doctrine that if an obstacle is not over-watched, it's not an obstacle. What this really means in this situation is that if you can't interdict border crossers with actual people on the ground, then it's a waste of resources. The sensors, cameras, etc do nothing if you don't action on the events .

The cost of services provided to illegals is significant but reports I've seen are they actually use less resources than citizens. They exception to this being Emergency Room healthcare and of course medical identity theft is a growing problem. They are not eligible for federal educational aid.

What I'm getting at is this is a complex problem that is not solved by a mindset of "we were here first, keep em out". It's a global world now and some people just don't really understand what that really means.
Old    Jim Zarin (jimmy_z)      Join Date: Jun 2009       03-23-2010, 5:58 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by zo1 View Post
Sorry Jim but you seriously think that is a feasible solution? We can't even catch business who cook the books, cheat on their taxes, defraud investors et al and you think we would be successful at nabbing small businesses in every corner of this country using illegals as workers? not a chance...

I am being realistic and rather than avoiding the inevitable and handling problems like we typically do in America, by waiting till they boil over and then reacting on them, lets be proactive, realize that there is nothing that we can do to stop them from coming in and being employed, so lets make sure they pay in just like everyone else.

I did not even touch on the fact that your solution has us potentially sending employers inot prisons that are already overcrowded. then what happens? You take an independent revenue producing member of the business world out of the mix and put them into prison where the government is now responsible for paying for them.

You can;t come on here complaining about the national debt, deficit et al and then offer a solution that costs the country more money...
What your suggesting is burying your head in the sand and just give them citizenship, because that seems easy to you. THAT is not proactive.

There are millions of American citizens out of work now and you want grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens???? What are they going to "pay in" with???

Even if they were all miraculously employed, add these millions to the list for new healthcare bill, and your wish for a contributing taxpayer was INSTANTLY offset by the new bill that was passed.

"In a perfect world", it would be simpler to create a law to punish employers. But politics is never about a simple solution, its about agendas.

Im 100% sure that employers would police themselves quite successfully. No employer would risk going to jail for an illegal alien. Im positive they would actually go WAY out of their way to make sure they hired only US citizens.

If you dont think amnesty will cost this country money, you are sadly mistaken.
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-23-2010, 7:16 PM Reply   
Jim, let me ask you this. How exactly would the US efficiently deport the millions of illegal aliens? I mean how would you even go about rounding them together? Amnesty will cost the country money, but I believe this money hails in comparison to the money it would cost to deport them all. And then what, do we form a human chain of Americans on the border to make sure none sneak back into the country?

And as someone posted earlier, most illegals are working jobs that typical Americans feel "overqualified" for.
Old    Manzo (zo1)      Join Date: Aug 2002       03-23-2010, 8:01 PM Reply   
Quote:
Im 100% sure that employers would police themselves quite successfully. No employer would risk going to jail for an illegal alien. Im positive they would actually go WAY out of their way to make sure they hired only US citizens.
Jim, if you can't read this statement and realize that the argument makes no sense then I can't help you, but I will give you a hint: (People, companies, anyone, break laws like these because they don't think they are going to get caught.)
Old    Jim Zarin (jimmy_z)      Join Date: Jun 2009       03-23-2010, 8:13 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post
Jim, let me ask you this. How exactly would the US efficiently deport the millions of illegal aliens? I mean how would you even go about rounding them together? Amnesty will cost the country money, but I believe this money hails in comparison to the money it would cost to deport them all. And then what, do we form a human chain of Americans on the border to make sure none sneak back into the country?

And as someone posted earlier, most illegals are working jobs that typical Americans feel "overqualified" for.
Its called SELF-DEPORTATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!

When there are no longer jobs for them, they WILL leave.

Put on your tennis-shoes and start walking. The same way you came, only in the opposite direction.

All the illegal aliens do is take work away from underskilled and poor Americans.

Politicians have spun the idea of "illegals doing the work Americans dont want to do." Its jibberish.

I am willing to give any illegal alien a free ride to the border. I have a full size SUV so I can do about 20 at a time.
Old    Jim Zarin (jimmy_z)      Join Date: Jun 2009       03-23-2010, 8:26 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by zo1 View Post
Jim, if you can't read this statement and realize that the argument makes no sense then I can't help you, but I will give you a hint: (People, companies, anyone, break laws like these because they don't think they are going to get caught.)
If you owned a business would you risk going to jail for an illegal alien???

The reward wouldnt be enough to justify the risk.

I highly doubt there would be many trying to bend the rules when you can hire a US citizen for less risk with the same pay.
Old    Manzo (zo1)      Join Date: Aug 2002       03-23-2010, 8:38 PM Reply   
Quote:
If you owned a business would you risk going to jail for an illegal alien???
Sure it would still happen. it is not about the illegal, it is about the $$ (and the fact that it would be impossible to enforce)
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-23-2010, 8:58 PM Reply   
Reagan already gave illegals amenesty once. As far as illegals doing jobs that Americans won't do. You are wrong, wrong, wrong. Talk to union sheet rockers in California. I was talking to one waiting for DMV to open and he was talking about how illegals pretty much have taken over the sheet rocking union. He was explaining how the union liked to pocket the dues and retirement from them. Another thing to think about is Mexico actually tracks money sent from natives from the United States. I think it is around 25 billion a year. That is a lot of money not going into our economy also including the fact these people are using our medical facilities and schools while sending that money out of the country. Making them citizens is not going to help that kind of drain. All that will happen is the employers will just hire the next set of illegals just like they did after Reagan made them citizens. I think that cheap labor pretty much screwed the housing market in California. They built at such an over heated pace. It put pressure on all aspects of the economy and helped raise the price of goods with all the extra people competing for resources.
Old    Jim Zarin (jimmy_z)      Join Date: Jun 2009       03-23-2010, 9:01 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by zo1 View Post
Sure it would still happen. it is not about the illegal, it is about the $$ (and the fact that it would be impossible to enforce)
Not really that hard to enforce. They could require a 1-800 number on the Employee Rights Poster to call to report a possible illegal alien with a reward.

That alone would scare the heck out of any business even thinking about bending the rules.

Investigated by your states EDD, which should keep another huge bureaucracy from being developed.(wishful thinking)
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-23-2010, 9:01 PM Reply   
Go after the businesses. Mow your own lawn and nuke a couple of businesses so bad that no one will want to even consider it. An old story a trucker told. There was a whole line of trucks speeding and a cop pulled one out of the middle of the pack. The trucker asked why he chose one in the middle of the pack. The cop said he only needed to get one and the rest will get the message.
Old    Manzo (zo1)      Join Date: Aug 2002       03-23-2010, 9:11 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
Reagan already gave illegals amenesty once. As far as illegals doing jobs that Americans won't do. You are wrong, wrong, wrong. Talk to union sheet rockers in California. I was talking to one waiting for DMV to open and he was talking about how illegals pretty much have taken over the sheet rocking union. He was explaining how the union liked to pocket the dues and retirement from them. Another thing to think about is Mexico actually tracks money sent from natives from the United States. I think it is around 25 billion a year. That is a lot of money not going into our economy also including the fact these people are using our medical facilities and schools while sending that money out of the country. Making them citizens is not going to help that kind of drain. All that will happen is the employers will just hire the next set of illegals just like they did after Reagan made them citizens. I think that cheap labor pretty much screwed the housing market in California. They built at such an over heated pace. It put pressure on all aspects of the economy and helped raise the price of goods with all the extra people competing for resources.
Delta, here is the thing(s) IMO.

1. Amnesty does not = citizenship and the benifts of citizenship should not apply to illegals
2. the key to doing this is to abolish the income tax and move to a federal sales tax. At that point it does not matter how much $$ is being sent out of the country (this happens anyway) as all purchases that are made are funding their usage of available services.

what it comes down to IMO is this is just one more reason that no IRS and a fed sales tax makes sense. You are not gonna stop it, so might as well make them pay on it.
Old    Jim Zarin (jimmy_z)      Join Date: Jun 2009       03-23-2010, 9:18 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
Another thing to think about is Mexico actually tracks money sent from natives from the United States. I think it is around 25 billion a year. That is a lot of money not going into our economy also including the fact these people are using our medical facilities and schools while sending that money out of the country.
Excellent points, delta. (Only exports and oil sales have larger revenue streams for Mexico.)
Old    Mike (ponyh8r)      Join Date: Dec 2004       03-24-2010, 11:48 AM Reply   
Sorry Jimmy....our conversation was good but it got late in Baghdad and i had to get some sleep. At any rate, you assess then that if election turnout is lower from one election to another then that signals an election is not legit.

I assume then that you agree that the US elections have not been legit since the Reagan years.

The numbers of Iraqi voters, nearly 70%, would put America to shame in turnout. At any rate, i still can't see where the elections where not an overwhelming success. Here on the ground we saw little activity from insurgents that day, strong voter turnout from all ethnic groups, hardly any ethno-sectarian violence and a strong unity. I have shown you where both CNN and the UN have hailed the elections as a success, but you must have access to some information that I don't. I have actually spoken to Iraqis in the last few weeks and they are optimistic and excited about the elections as a whole.

As a nation we would be best served to deal with immigration by granting amnesty to those already here and then use land mines to secure the southern border from Cali to Texas. We are being invaded and land mines are the perfect tool to deny maneuver and freedom of movement to the enemy across terrain. Problem solved.
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-24-2010, 12:55 PM Reply   
In the US, people do not show up to vote because they are afraid a suicide bomber may walk into the polling station with a bomb strapped to their back or because they face consequences if they do not vote for who they are told to. Only 62% showed up in 2010 compared to 75% in 2005.

Voter turnout in the US is not comparable because of our system (electoral college). For example, everyone that voted Democrat (2008) in my home state (TN) could not have voted and it would not have mattered, Obama still wins, and each election is pretty much determined before election day in many key states. Everyone knew Obama would win California, etc. and that McCain would win Texas, etc. The only states where votes were really needed were in the key states and you witnessed that by where the candidates spent most of the campaign time close to November. Voter turnout was a bit low in 1996 because Clinton was all but assured winning the election again.

"I assume then that you agree that the US elections have not been legit since the Reagan years."

Not really sure what you mean by that. 1992, 2004, 2008 all had higher voter turnout (percentage of voting eligible) than 1980 and 1984.

I never really viewed illegal immigrants as the "enemy", and I think your idea to solving this issue is extremely misguided.
Old    Mike (ponyh8r)      Join Date: Dec 2004       03-24-2010, 1:14 PM Reply   
And there were exactly ZERO suicide bombers or IEDs inside secure voting areas in Iraq. As a matter of fact, mortars became the weapon of choice during the elections for AQI due to their inability to gain access to voting areas. And to put this into more perspective for you, the Iraqi security forces were responsible for the security of these areas and American troops were not allowed near the stations. So, by your count, Iraqi soldiers and police officers, who don't have clean water and electricity, were able to defeat crazed suicide bombers at the polling sites! haha. That is great. It is nothing like that here. It is still dangerous, but AQI is mostly targeting the Government. Shia continue to attack US forces but are not nearly as successful as in the past. You may really have your "facts" confused on the situation here.

ONLY 62%? Ok, well that is just a pitiful turnout isn't it? I can tell you, people ALOT smarter than both you or I have declared the voting in Iraq not only FAIR but also an overwhelming success. I have shown you several sources. I really don' t know what else you need to just admit they went pretty damn well.

No one typically views the ILLEGAL immigrants as the enemy, but that is what makes us different and disagree. To me, they are enemies of the United States. Leaching American taxpayers and hard workers for social program payouts. Drugs are trafficked across the border, crime along the border is out of control and Americans have been killed and kidnapped. Sounds like our friends to me.

Either way, they are ILLEGAL. They know they are breaking the law and so do you. I guess we should just allow it to take place. No, we should take action. Mining the border is pretty much the ONLY way to ensure that these violations stop. Seems to work to me. Do you have any other suggestions that would guarantee to stop it?
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-24-2010, 1:29 PM Reply   
But 38 Iraqis died in 2010 on election day. Maybe better than last time, but 38 Americans didn't die in 2008 elections.

I didn't say the elections were a failure, but I wouldn't declare them an "overwhelming success".

Speeding is ILLEGAL, do we execute speeders? I mean we issue tickets, suspend licenses, and in some instances jail offenders, yet people still speed. I guess killing the speeders is the only guarantee to stop them.
Old    Mike (ponyh8r)      Join Date: Dec 2004       03-24-2010, 1:33 PM Reply   
ughhh....you're right jeremy. Have a nice day. It is nearly midnight here and i have a long day tomorrow. Best wishes.
Old    Brett (bmcgee)      Join Date: Nov 2007       03-24-2010, 3:32 PM Reply   
Comparing illegal immigrants to speeders is a terrible comparison. Are speeders leaching off of American tax payers? Hardly so, if anything they contribute to the government via fines and in some cases community service. I also don't see speeders flooding our hospitals like illegal immigrants are. I'll agree that injuries caused by speeders without health insurance puts a burden on our health care system, but there are no where near as many uninsured drivers as there are uninsured illegal immigrants flooding our hospitals.
Old    Andy Graham (ottog1979)      Join Date: Apr 2007       03-25-2010, 11:29 AM Reply   
This thread lost me a while ago. Time to re-center it.

Over the past few years, Iíve become a fan of Fareed Zakariaís commentary, mainly published in his weekly column in Newsweek. Zakaria is centrist whoís analysis is almost never partisan. He skips all that, calls it like he sees it, both on domestic and international issues. Smart guy, good analysis and probably the best summary of Healthcare that Iíve read yet:



http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/03/2...ex.html?hpt=T2
Old    jimmy z (strife)      Join Date: Feb 2010       03-25-2010, 1:11 PM Reply   
Wow, anyone who thinks Sarah Palin is anything more than retarded needs to go back and watch the Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric interviews.
Old    Andy Graham (ottog1979)      Join Date: Apr 2007       03-25-2010, 1:18 PM Reply   
While Iíve never been liberal except on some social issues, Iíve become extremely disenchanted with the Republican party as well. Enough so to register independent a handful of years ago. Way too often, it seems, the whole lot of them in Washington (and Sacramento) are pushing publicity stances, whipping the public into a frenzy picking between Democrat & Republican, taking our eye off the ball. It really comes down to one side or the other keeping or taking power & the money that comes with it. Itís never really about the issues/stances, itís about the power. Meanwhile the general public, being duped into thinking itís about the issues, PAYS.

Guess Iím becoming cynical in my old age.
Old    Akadirtbikingdad (wakeboardingdad)      Join Date: Aug 2008       03-26-2010, 3:28 PM Reply   
I can only say that I have not felt this bad since 9-11. I see Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and the other voting democrats, as nothing more than domestic terrorists. What else could it be called when your country is in shambles, already broke, in debt up to it's eyeballs, and you decide to futher cut your country's throat with more taxes in the name of healthcare. It is clear they have no desire, but to make history any way they can, even if it is being part of the regime that completely and utterly ruined the greatest nation on earth. In comparision, this is like me going out, buying a Ferrari, buying a mansion, and then taking a trip around the world and thinking that my average check is going to pay for it. At that point, based on the recent events, I would deserve a bailout.

I'll admit that I have read other posts that really made me think and appreciate my insurance. I'll also admit that something should be done. However, it should not be to the degree that is being rammed down the taxpayers throats and expected to simply pay more taxes. I honestly cannot imagine my taxes being worse than they are already. I also cannot imagine the further jobless this healthcare plan will cause. There is a reason that healthcare has been desired for so long, and at the same time, it has not been implemented. It is too expensive. Do I think something should be done? Yes. Do I believe that now is the time? No. Let's get our house in order and then begin to include more social programs (as if what we don't already have enough).

Off soapbox now. I think my blood pressure is down a little bit now. Uh oh, it's going up again thinking about amnesty for the illegals.

Reply
Share 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:09 PM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home

 

© 2012 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us