quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

I know your opinion is based upon the latest link you find; but the time question was directed to everything BUT the Health-care issue.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Such a careful editing job. Show me the various speeches and interviews in full.

The Barney Frank quote wasnt edited, it is the entiretly of his response to a question about why the current bill doesnt go all the way to single payer. The Obama speeches are such plain clear words that what would adding the rhetoric around them do. To his union supporters, SEIU and AFL_CIO he was very clear that he supports single payer and that his vision is for employer plans (which ARE the private insurance industry) to be gone in 15 to 20 years.


But, go ahead and ignore the facts and play your childish games as you always do.

So it's his vision? How precisely is that a plan to eliminate privatehealth insurance? Nice attempt at goal post moving but not good enough.

BTW were you similiarly outraged over McCain's plan which was to intentionally eliminate employer provided coverage and force everyone into the market for individual plans?
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/apr2008/db20080429_854428.htm
http://www.factcheck.org/mccains_5000_promise.html

Yes that his precisely his vision. He said it. There is no goalpost moving, nice try at deflection though.

McCain? Why would I care what he thought, Ive never been a McCain supporter. Nice try at a strawman though.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain

Unemployment - 25 year high and increasing, Stimulus - Followed Bush plan and added another $787 Billion,
It's not a perfect world, but to answer your question like I said before it takes time in economics for spending increases or tax cuts to effect unemployment. Yet he wants to take credit for a slower rate of loss in the GDP, before any of the stimulus money is even off the ground. Cant have it both ways, which he does, and which you do later in this post.

Iraq - Exiting....Someday,
At least they are exiting, reasonably soon, is it another year? In any case, I think it was George that wanted to stay there for 50 years if I remember correctly. You dont remember it correctly, it was McCain, not Bush and it was a quote taken out of context to start with. The Iraq timetabe is identical to Bush's.

Afghanistan - Escalating with US personnel dying in record numbers
I’m not sure what the answer is for that place because I’ve heard different solutions from various people, more aid, less troops or more troops but it sure would help if NATO did their fair share. So far, only the Canadians and the Dutch have contributed significantly with soldiers. Ie he isnt even as good as Bush in achieving consensus and having other nations join in.

Growth Industries - Foreclosure speculation and gold buying scams,
I think there are signs the economy is turning around. Alan Greenspan said something about that today. see above note on your inconsistency

Existing Business - Failures given more money, under Fascist model of government intervention, Profit and growth motive eliminated in consideration of additional regulation, taxes, and bureaucratic scrutiny,
Robert Kennedy Junior said the Republicans are 100% corrupt and the Democrats 60%. George Bush was definitely a fascist. His grandfather was a fascist too selling weapons to Hitler. You and I don’t disagree on this one. The money those bastards made on the war in Iraq privatizing the military and contracting everything out is disgusting.
http://costofwar.com/ Youre right, there will be disagreement on this one. Especially since you have no facts to base it on.


Factory Workers - Please take your parting gifts with you to the employment office. Best news is, unemployment may be extended again
I don’t have a problem helping those guys. Those guys just want to pay their bills and feed their families. And who's responsiblity is that?

Middle Class - You have a promotion pending; because this Administration doesn't lie, so this "President Barack Obama's treasury secretary said Sunday he cannot rule out higher taxes to help tame an exploding budget deficit, and his chief economic adviser would not dismiss raising them on middle-class Americans as part of a health care overhaul."
This doesn’t concern me right now because it won’t happen until the economy has significantly recovered and people are doing better. The treasury secretary said so during the interview. I listened carefully and heard it because I was very interested in his answer and how he would handle this question.
And I don’t expect higher taxes to happen unless he gets elected to a second term.
Why don’t you wait until he actually does lie before you accuse him of lying? Because either he and every advisor he has is a total dope on economics or he had to be lying. There is no way in hell his numbers ever could hang together without middle class tax increases. He may be a total dope, but his advisors arent.;
The other thing is you have to be fiscally responsible, unlike the Republicans who find tax cuts to be the answer to every problem. unlike the Democrats, who never saw someone elses dollar they didnt like, at least tax cuts have proven to be stimulative and have theoretical reasons why they are. Spending increases as stimulation were debunked before Keynes started to smell in his grave, and FDR proved in practice how damaging they are.


Middle Class Promotion must mean you are now part of the problem and you will be taxed as part of the solution. are worse than they were in January.
The Republicans are the problem because Obama wants to tax the rich or those making over $500,000 a year and the Republicans are strongly opposed and would prefer to tax the middle class and would prefer Obama break a promise so they can use it in the next election against him. LMAO, you must be on some good drugs.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Sanity claimed Obama had a plan to eliminate private health insurance (the title of the video he posted). Plan != vision. You tried to claim that vision was good enough. That's called moving the goalposts. Accusing me of erecting a strawman is a lie.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
BTW were you similiarly outraged over McCain's plan which was to intentionally eliminate employer provided coverage and force everyone into the market for individual plans?
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/apr2008/db20080429_854428.htm
http://www.factcheck.org/mccains_5000_promise.html

quote:

ORIGINAL: Maverick481
You are absolutely correct we need tort reform. And one step further. Loser pays!

That part right there will get rid of a ton of frivilous lawsuits. I don't have a problem with being able to sue but I have a problem with some of the lawsuits that are frivilous and tie up the court systems.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MmeGigs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Maverick481
You are absolutely correct we need tort reform. And one step further. Loser pays!

That part right there will get rid of a ton of frivilous lawsuits. I don't have a problem with being able to sue but I have a problem with some of the lawsuits that are frivilous and tie up the court systems.

Except that there aren't a ton of frivilous lawsuits. A study found that in 90% of malpractice cases, the plaintiff was actually injured, and that the vast majority of injured folks don't sue. It also found that the 10% of frivilous cases don't tie up the court system, they get thrown out.

Tort reform is a distraction in the health care debate. The U of Mich hospital was able to cut its malpractice costs by 2/3 by studying injury cases to make sure they don't repeat those mistakes, and apologizing when they screwed up and trying to make it right. That's way more of a savings than any kind of tort reform has been claimed to be able to deliver.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


The problem with Obama's plan is that he's inconsistent. He tells one group its this, and he tells another group its that. If that's his "vision" for our future then he's seeing double and he needs to get his head examined to find out why his "vision" is so messed up.

Why can't the man put his real plan on the table and let us debate it openly and honestly. Will a little bit of sun light kill everything that he wants to do?

It's beginning to look like it might.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Sanity claimed Obama had a plan to eliminate private health insurance (the title of the video he posted). Plan != vision. You tried to claim that vision was good enough. That's called moving the goalposts. Accusing me of erecting a strawman is a lie.

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

One more addition to Mercs list. The impending tax increase on the middle class. Tim Geithner and Larry Sommers admitted to the talking heads on Sunday that they are inevitable. Another campaign promise soon to be broken..   

quote:

Is This What America Voted For In Voting Obama As President?

quote:

George Bush was definitely a fascist

quote:

I think there are signs the economy is turning around. Alan Greenspan said something about that today

quote:

predicted that the economy would resume growth in the third quarter of 2009.

quote:

The U.S. unemployment rate may not peak until the second half of 2010, even as the broader economy shows signs of improvement, U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said.

quote:

The recession is starving the government of tax revenue, just as the president and Congress are piling a major expansion of health care and other programs on the nation's plate and struggling to find money to pay the tab.

The numbers could hardly be more stark: Tax receipts are on pace to drop 18 percent this year, the biggest single-year decline since the Great Depression, while the federal deficit balloons to a record $1.8 trillion.

quote:

Those guys just want to pay their bills and feed their families.

quote:

The Republicans are the problem

quote:

ORIGINAL: Maverick481

quote:

ORIGINAL: MmeGigs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Maverick481
You are absolutely correct we need tort reform. And one step further. Loser pays!

That part right there will get rid of a ton of frivilous lawsuits. I don't have a problem with being able to sue but I have a problem with some of the lawsuits that are frivilous and tie up the court systems.

Except that there aren't a ton of frivilous lawsuits. A study found that in 90% of malpractice cases, the plaintiff was actually injured, and that the vast majority of injured folks don't sue. It also found that the 10% of frivilous cases don't tie up the court system, they get thrown out.

Tort reform is a distraction in the health care debate. The U of Mich hospital was able to cut its malpractice costs by 2/3 by studying injury cases to make sure they don't repeat those mistakes, and apologizing when they screwed up and trying to make it right. That's way more of a savings than any kind of tort reform has been claimed to be able to deliver.

Yes, but even for that 10% that MIGHT get thrown out the doctor has to cover himself for those instances. I've talked to Doctors who tell me about lawsuits brought against them that are settled just to make them go away and they are frivilous lawsuits. Alot of Doctors settle these things out of court instead of dragging their name through the mud and ruining the practice and costing them money when they have to appear in court. If we had tort reform and the loser had to pay I know from the Doctors I have talked to they would fight more of the cases because they know they would win and it would cost the plantiff money that most of them can't afford. The fact that you say there are not a lot of frivilous lawsuits shows how out of touch with reality you are in this matter. Have you talked to Doctors about this issue? Do you have friends that are Doctors that can tell you about this issue.

Some of the lawsuits that I have heard about from Doctors are just insane. But hey, what the hell. It's an easy payday for someone and it doesn't hurt anyone but those rich greedy Doctors who spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to become a Doctor.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


I was specifically discussing the Obama video in that post, tazzy. The one Ken is so upset about.

This one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-bY92mcOdk

The subthread you are responding to has nothing to do with Congress at all, it is concerned only with Obama's lies concerning his "vision" for America's health care system.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

Uh, Rule - The title of the tread...
Just because you and the other Obama postulates don't like facts regarding results pointed out - it shouldn't preclude debate and discussion. Appreciating you'd prefer these things to be ignored - there is not one positive trend to date from this administration. Unless you consider unemployment, higher taxes, bloated bureaucracy, lower dollar value, escalating war, and weaker business environment positive "accomplishments"?

quote:



The only president to put the US in a position of private industry ownership has been Obama; by definition a Fascist act.

quote:

Name one sign? Mr. Greenspan said the economy "MAY" turn around by the end of the year.

quote:


A Bush Administration economist being relied upon for positive projections? Interesting. I thought the economy was Bush's fault? Would faith in his chief economic adviser be wise?

quote:


In looking for the Greenspan reference I found that the current Treasury Secretary doesn't think current policy decisions have been felt enough. He says the job market will get worse.

quote:


The numbers could hardly be more stark: Tax receipts are on pace to drop 18 percent this year, the biggest single-year decline since the Great Depression, while the federal deficit balloons to a record $1.8 trillion.

quote:


In that case, you should not be supporting this administration. The only union they support is the bureaucrats in the public sector. There is no job focus on any private sector worker and the policies being implemented, will eliminate most factory work in the USA.

quote:


They can not be the problem. No majority, no filibuster ability; under those circumstances HOW can they represent a problem?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Maverick481



Yes, but even for that 10% that MIGHT get thrown out the doctor has to cover himself for those instances. I've talked to Doctors who tell me about lawsuits brought against them that are settled just to make them go away and they are frivilous lawsuits. Alot of Doctors settle these things out of court instead of dragging their name through the mud and ruining the practice and costing them money when they have to appear in court. If we had tort reform and the loser had to pay I know from the Doctors I have talked to they would fight more of the cases because they know they would win and it would cost the plantiff money that most of them can't afford. The fact that you say there are not a lot of frivilous lawsuits shows how out of touch with reality you are in this matter. Have you talked to Doctors about this issue? Do you have friends that are Doctors that can tell you about this issue.

Some of the lawsuits that I have heard about from Doctors are just insane. But hey, what the hell. It's an easy payday for someone and it doesn't hurt anyone but those rich greedy Doctors who spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to become a Doctor.