Enough complaining about Health Care

**ejames01** · March-25-10, 12:52 PM

Do we really need to post every stupid Op-Ed piece about this bill? Why not wait until there is an actual change [[positive or negative) in your personal life?

Then we can discuss something other than all these stupid predictions and name-calling.

Retroit · March-25-10, 12:57 PM

What fun would that be?

Why not wait until our country goes bankrupt before we start to be financially responsible?

**Mikeg** · March-25-10, 01:19 PM

Do we really need to post every stupid Op-Ed piece about this bill? Why not wait until there is an actual change [[positive or negative) in your personal life? Then we can discuss something other than all these stupid predictions and name-calling.

Don't you know that "This is a Big F*#cking Deal" ? Obama and his sidekick Joe can't stop talking about it:

Iowa City first stop on Obama healthcare blitz

Patricia Zengerle
WASHINGTON
Thu Mar 25, 2010 9:01am EDT

[[Reuters) - President Barack Obama was to travel to Iowa on Thursday for his first big speech touting healthcare reform since signing the most sweeping new U.S. social policy in decades into law.

Taking his public relations blitz outside of Washington as he seeks to overcome public doubts and stiff Republican opposition, the president was scheduled to make an afternoon speech at the University of Iowa Field House in Iowa City......

[read the rest]

**Sstashmoo** · March-25-10, 01:43 PM

Quote: "Do we really need to post every stupid Op-Ed piece about this bill?"

Reading every thread here is not mandatory----like health insurance

[[might as well get used to saying it) if a thread bothers you pass it by..

ferntruth · March-25-10, 02:43 PM

Originally Posted by ejames01

Do we really need to post every stupid Op-Ed piece about this bill? Why not wait until there is an actual change [[positive or negative) in your personal life?

Then we can discuss something other than all these stupid predictions and name-calling.

Let them rant, whine and plan for the end of the world. They lost and its killing them. So, naturally they have to crank up the fear and lie machine.

**Zacha341** · March-25-10, 02:51 PM

)) Applause [[[[

LOL!

Originally Posted by Retroit

What fun would that be?

Why not wait until our country goes bankrupt before we start to be financially responsible?

Retroit · March-25-10, 02:53 PM

Taking his public relations blitz outside of Washington as he seeks to overcome public doubts and stiff Republican opposition, the president was scheduled to make an afternoon speech at the University of Iowa Field House in Iowa City

Aren't you supposed to do this before signing laws?

**Zacha341** · March-25-10, 02:57 PM

Ahhhhh, would it be so "neatly" simple were just an "us vs them" thing... that was the perspective sold and some went their appropriate slots or corners-of-the-Boxing-ring of the "us vs them" package. A package that really blinded us somewhat as we took our perspective prescribed sides refusing to see any value in concern if it was brought up by the "them".

Withstanding all the punditry, Americans will surely have to adapt to this bill over the long haul as the kinks are worked out. That would have been with any bill, even one not so far reaching.

Originally Posted by ferntruth

Let them rant, whine and plan for the end of the world. They lost and its killing them. So, naturally they have to crank up the fear and lie machine.

**Zacha341** · March-25-10, 02:59 PM

Precisely, he is still in "community organizing" mode making it all about him so those who would continue to criticize it would be like directly critiquing him and we cannot have that... and after all only the "right wingers" are un-happy. Everyone else is content and happy. Weeee!

Originally Posted by Retroit

Aren't you supposed to do this before signing laws?

**ejames01** · March-25-10, 06:16 PM

Blah, Blah, Blah.....

**gibran** · March-25-10, 07:09 PM

I would like to hear oare older members reaction to this ...Ray36 et al...they or their parents were around when other landmark or socially active issues were addressed.... I am sure the opponents to social security were howling in the streets about SSI as Socialism..or medicare as socilized medicne...or the ADA or Civil Rights etc...

it would be interesting to leave you own bias out and report what people were saying back then.

**firstandten** · March-25-10, 08:20 PM

People, the sun will shine tomorrow, [[those of us in Michigan maybe not). The sky will not fall. We get this anytime there is major legislation passed. People cried when FDR signed the social security act, and its various amendments over the years. This current bill will end up helping people and we won't go broke.

What we has a nation must decide is if we consider affordable health care a right or a privilege. I have heard several people say that this is the fundamental question that as a nation we need to come to grips with. I am of the mind that it is a right and this bill just tinkered around the edges. However a lot of people don't see it that way.

As a nation we have made that decison on other issues. K-12 education.. a right and we make provisions for it. Driving motor vehicles.. a privilege so we understand we must buy auto insurance.

One poster made a comment about employer based health care. The first discussion that needs to be made is "do we still need this type of delivery system"? This system dates back to WWII and it worked for us then in a tight labor market. However if your economy is way out of equilibrium like it is now and you are nowhere near full employment, an employer based health care delivery system smacks of health care being a privilege and any bill that keeps that delivery system intact which this does, will draw heat because the wingnuts[[especially the unemployed ones) who even though it would be in their best interest if health care was a right will argue against it based on reasons they really don't understand or misleading information.

If we as a society made a decision that health was a right we would make it work in terms of cost, delivery and any other hurdles we might face. However we aren't there yet and history has shown in terms of social security, medicare and medicaid that it may take a few decades before we are of one mind on this issue.

**firstandten** · March-25-10, 09:21 PM

Originally Posted by ejames01

Do we really need to post every stupid Op-Ed piece about this bill? Why not wait until there is an actual change [[positive or negative) in your personal life?

Then we can discuss something other than all these stupid predictions and name-calling.

Agreed !

Besides there's going to be plenty of time for name calling and for the followers of Rush and Beck as they get on the wrong side [[again ?) of history as we move to financial regulatory refom and the economy before the midterms. Then after the midterms when the GOP doesn't do as well as they thought because Obama made them implode during the financial regulatory debates we can go to the issues that will set the GOP back decades. Immigration reform and don't ask don't tell. After the GOP thoroughly and totally alienates these two huge voting blocks by being the party of NO! Obama will sail in for a second term.

Well wingnuts after all that happens at least you will be glad you have affordable health care !

**Mikeg** · March-25-10, 09:24 PM

People, the sun will shine tomorrow....The sky will not fall. We get this anytime there is major legislation passed. People cried when FDR signed the social security act.... This current bill will end up helping people and we won't go broke...... any bill that keeps that delivery system intact which this does, will draw heat because the wingnuts [[especially the unemployed ones) who even though it would be in their best interest if health care was a right will argue against it based on reasons they really don't understand

Just keep on applying the divisive "wingnuts" labels [[and homophobic "teabaggers" slurs) on those who disagree with the timing, process and provisions of this legislation. Dismiss them as being too stupid to understand what's in their best interests at your peril. When your country is in a hole of 10% unemployment and $3.6 trillion budget deficits, many people believe it to be quite risky to commit to tax increases along with a huge new entitlement program, particularly one whose net costs have been purposely underestimated. The "health care is a right" position becomes a moral failure if you make the promise and then cannot deliver on it down the road.

Social Security, Medicare and the Civil Rights Act legislation all enjoyed bi-partisan support [source] - unlike this "Big F*#king Deal" legislation, which passed despite bi-partisan opposition.

**firstandten** · March-25-10, 09:48 PM

Originally Posted by Mikeg

Just keep on applying the divisive "wingnuts" labels [[and homophobic "teabaggers" slurs) on those who disagree with the timing, process and provisions of this legislation. Dismiss them as being too stupid to understand what's in their best interests at your peril. When your country is in a hole of 10% unemployment and $3.6 trillion budget deficits, many people believe it to be quite risky to commit to tax increases along with a huge new entitlement program, particularly one whose net costs have been purposely underestimated. The "health care is a right" position becomes a moral failure if you make the promise and then cannot deliver on it down the road.

Social Security, Medicare and the Civil Rights Act legislation all enjoyed bi-partisan support [source] - unlike this "Big F*#king Deal" legislation, which passed despite bi-partisan opposition.

First of all the wingnut label is a little unfair and over time I will refer to them as Rush followers or Beck followers and there not stupid, its low information voters... big difference.

Teabaggers in my mind are nothing but the KKK without the hoods and robes and I don't say that in a homophobic sense. That group in my opinion deserves all the scorn they get.

You are right concerning bi-partisan support of legislation. What you don't consider however is that the GOP made a decision that they were not going to support anything the Dems and Obama put out there [[ the waterloo strategy). That calculated political decison made bi-partisan support a non-starter. The political environment when those other major bills where passed was certainly different and allowed for some bi-partisan support. And the GOP continues that kind of strategy at the "peril" of there party being relevant.

**Sstashmoo** · March-25-10, 09:53 PM

Quote: "Well wingnuts"

You really think anyone that complains is simply the other party? That is a pretty sad commentary from you regarding the intellect of others. I claim neither party. Anyone that cannot see this ill-concieved, misguided conquest for glory and corporate scam for what it is --- is nuts.

**firstandten** · March-25-10, 09:58 PM

Originally Posted by Sstashmoo

Quote: "Well wingnuts"

You really think anyone that complains is simply the other party? That is a pretty sad commentary from you regarding the intellect of others. I claim neither party. Anyone that cannot see this ill-concieved, misguided conquest for glory and corporate scam for what it is --- is nuts.

You mean Rush and Beck followers

**Mikeg** · March-25-10, 10:03 PM

What you don't consider however is that the GOP made a decision that they were not going to support anything the Dems and Obama put out there [[ the waterloo strategy). That calculated political decison made bi-partisan support a non-starter.

And exactly what "calculated political decision" was made by those Dems who joined their GOP counterparts in opposing this legislation?

**firstandten** · March-25-10, 10:09 PM

Originally Posted by Mikeg

And exactly what "calculated political decision" was made by those Dems who joined their GOP counterparts in opposing this legislation?

They made a calculated decision that politics was more important than helping the people.Those were mostly Dems in conservative districts at political risk. Some Dems on the left felt the bill didn't go far enough and opposed the legislation.

**Mikeg** · March-25-10, 10:25 PM

They made a calculated decision that politics was more important than helping the people.Those were mostly Dems in conservative districts at political risk. Some Dems on the left felt the bill didn't go far enough and opposed the legislation.

What "spin"! They made the calculated decision to represent their constituents' preferences, knowing that if they didn't. they would stand accountable at the polls.

By the way, most of the Dems who opposed the bill from the left eventually caved in exchange for a plane ride, increased water allocations, a judgeship for their brother, etc.

**Kevgoblue** · March-25-10, 10:40 PM

Originally Posted by Mikeg

And exactly what "calculated political decision" was made by those Dems who joined their GOP counterparts in opposing this legislation?

You're supporting the position you claim to oppose.
Individual dems opposed this legislation. Yet not a single republican broke party lines to support the legislation. Even though many repubs are representing states that are experiencing an economic tsunami [[i.e. Michigan) whose residents would disproportionately benefit from the expanded medical coverage.

**Gistok** · March-26-10, 12:02 AM

Sigh.... if only the folks worrying about bankrupting this country were as vocal when WMD was discussed back in the beginning of the decade.... we could have paid for this already....

**Bigb23** · March-26-10, 12:50 AM

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB80/

**RaumVogel** · March-26-10, 12:51 AM

Originally Posted by Sstashmoo

Quote: "Well wingnuts"

You really think anyone that complains is simply the other party? That is a pretty sad commentary from you regarding the intellect of others. I claim neither party. Anyone that cannot see this ill-concieved, misguided conquest for glory and corporate scam for what it is --- is nuts.

So any one that doesn't agree with you is an idiot?Please point out for us IN THE BILL,how this is a corporate scam,then maybe we won't be wingnuts any more.

**Papasito** · March-26-10, 06:57 AM

They lost and its killing them.

If you are a business owner or one of the lucky ones that has a job, you lost too, you just don't know it yet

Taking his public relations blitz outside of Washington as he seeks to overcome public doubts

Aren't you supposed to do this before signing laws?

These people are of the ilk that the Government knows better than you,
that Americans are stupid, and public opinion means nothing