The great Obama LIE !

That's friggin AWESOME!!! I didn't watch tonight because i hear enough of his lies to keep me unhappy with him for the rest of his hopefully short term. It's idiots like him who will usher in a 2nd civil war. Blatant right-wing lies and illegal acts will not be tolerated by the true American populace forever. He still hasn't proven his American citizenship. :eek: I couldn't join the military without my birth certificate, but this kenyan sits in the highest seat of our country without one. It :q pisses me off.:mad:
 
WASHINGTON (Sept. 10) AP -- Democrats and Republicans alike are denouncing Rep. Joe Wilson for shouting "You lie" at President Barack Obama during his speech to Congress, an extraordinary breach of decorum for which the South Carolina Republican swiftly apologized. "I was embarrassed for the chamber and a Congress I love," Vice President Joe Biden said Thursday on ABC's "Good Morning America." ''It demeaned the institution."

House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, R-Va., told ABC on Wednesday: "Obviously, the President of the United States is always welcome on Capitol Hill. He deserves respect and decorum. "I know that Congressman Wilson has issued an apology and made his thoughts known to the White House, which was the appropriate thing to do," Cantor said.

Wilson's outburst came after Obama said extending health care to all Americans who seek it would not mean insuring illegal immigrants. "You lie!" Wilson shouted from his seat on the Republican side of the chamber. After the speech, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said, "There'll be time enough to consider whether or not we ought to make it clear that that action is unacceptable in the House of Representatives." "Let's see what he does," Hoyer told WTOP radio before Wilson issued an apology. "Then there's time enough to consider further action."

Wilson's behavior caused a political hangover for him and possibly for the Republican critics Obama had cast as shrill and more interested in killing any health care overhaul than finding a way to provide it. Later, Wilson was contrite. "This evening I let my emotions get the best of me," he said in a statement. "While I disagree with the president's statement, my comments were inappropriate and regrettable. I extend sincere apologies to the president for this lack of civility." He then tried to call Obama to apologize personally, but ended up talking with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel instead, Wilson's office said. Biden said Thursday that he hadn't spoken with Obama, but, "knowing the president, I'm sure he accepted the apology."

By late Wednesday, though, the congressman's Web site had crashed, he had taken a beating on his Twitter page and Democrat Rob Miller had raised thousands of unexpected dollars online for a possible rematch with Wilson in next year's midterm elections, according to Lachlan McIntosh, Miller's campaign manager. In the eight hours since Wilson's outburst, his Democratic opponent, former-Marine Rob Miller, has received nearly 3,000 individual grassroots contributions raising approximately $100,000, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee said.

"Everybody was stunned," Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., said of Wilson's eruption. "It was just something that nobody had ever witnessed before. We all felt embarrassed." Republicans froze; several glanced in Wilson's direction. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi directed a fierce frown at him; first lady Michelle Obama pursed her lips and shook her head from side to side. Biden looked down and shook his head too. Obama, meanwhile, looked toward the outburst and replied, "That's not true" before going on with his speech.

Wilson appeared to consult his Blackberry for much of the rest of Obama's speech. He shook his head defiantly after several of the president's statements. When Obama finished, Wilson bolted from the chamber.

Wilson's behavior was "totally disrespectful," Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who had been Obama's rival in the 2008 presidential election, said on CNN. "There is no place for it in that setting, or any other, and he should apologize for it immediately."
 
T_Man said:
WASHINGTON (Sept. 10)Democrats and Republicans alike are denouncing Rep. Joe Wilson for shouting "You lie" at President Barack Obama during his speech to Congress
Click to expand...

Yes, because it is horrible to call a president on DECIEVING TO THE NATION!!

Wilson should not be apologizing but simply clarifying and proving his point. Obama was lying. The description was dead on.
 
#1...He said "that's a lie".

#2. What's worse...

A) A Congressman calling out the President for lying

OR

B) The President lying to the American People!
 
shagdrum said:
Yes, because it is horrible to call a president on DECIEVING TO THE NATION!!

Wilson should not be apologizing but simply clarifying and proving his point. Obama was lying. The description was dead on.
Click to expand...

:bsflag:

WRONG, Joe Wilson IS THE LIAR, NOT Obama:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...lson-south-carolina-said-obama-lied-he-didnt/

Joe Wilson of South Carolina said Obama lied, but he didn't

We suspect it's rare that the president gets heckled during a speech to a joint session of Congress, but Rep. Joe Wilson didn't hold back.

"You lie!" shouted the South Carolina Republican. This was in response to President Barack Obama's statements on illegal immigrants.

"There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants," Obama said. "This, too, is false – the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally."

So who's right here? Wilson or Obama?

Incidentally, Wilson apologized for the outburst after the speech, but said he still disagreed with Obama's statement.

We've been monitoring claims about health care reform and illegal immigrants for some time now. Most notably, a chain e-mail claimed that page 50 of the House bill gave free health care to illegal immigrants. That page didn't say that. Rather, it included a generic nondiscrimination clause that said insurers may not discriminate with regard to "personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services." So we rated the chain e-mail's claim Pants on Fire.

We read all 1,000-plus pages of the health care bill and were struck by the fact that it is largely silent on health care for illegal immigrants. Keep in mind that experts estimated there were 6.8 million uninsured illegal immigrants in the United States in 2007, out of a total of 11.9 million illegal immigrants. Right now, most states have laws on the books that require hospitals to treat severely ill people who arrive at the hospital, regardless of immigration status, and we didn't see anything that would change those laws, either.

Most illegal immigrants are also now excluded from Medicaid, the government-run health care for the poor. We didn't see anything that would change that.

One place where the bill does mention immigration status is for "affordability credits." These are tax credits for people of modest means need to buy health insurance. The credits would help them buy insurance on a national health insurance exchange. The bill specifically says that people in the United States illegally are not eligible for tax credits, on page 132, section 242.

Still, given all that, we have heard from people who said that other aspects of reform could benefit illegal immigrants.

One of the most detailed responses was from the anti-immigration group Federation for American Immigration Reform, called FAIR. You can read their statement on the matter on their Web site.

Primarily, they argue that illegal immigrants would be permitted to purchase insurance on the national health insurance exchange because the bill does not include a mechanism for verifying citizenship. So illegal immigrants would have the chance to purchase insurance in the public option, a government-run health care plan that would offer basic coverage at a low price.

FAIR also argues for more robust verification measures for the affordability credit and making sure that illegal immigrant parents won't be able to receive coverage if their citizen children are eligible.

FAIR has a point that illegal immigrants would likely be able to buy insurance on the national health insurance exchange. We don't see anything in the bills that would hinder that. A Congressional Research Service report issued Aug. 25, 2009, confirmed our observation. The House bill "does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens participating in the Exchange—whether the noncitizens are legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently," the report said.

But it's worth pointing out that illegal immigrants participating in the exchange would be paying for their insurance like everyone else. That's similar to the current system -- we're not aware of any particular restrictions that stop illegal immigrants from buying private insurance now. Under health care reform, illegal immigrants would be able to buy private insurance or the public option.

When we look at all of this evidence, it seems that health reform leaves in place the status quo on illegal immigration, and certainly does not provide any new benefits particularly for illegal immigrants. We hope to look at this issue more in the days ahead, because some hospitals are particularly concerned about recouping their costs for treating illegal immigrants, and we're curious to know more about that problem and how it might or might not be solved by reform.

The best argument that we find that health reform would help illegal immigrants is that some might be able to purchase the public option -- if it passes, and it might not -- on the new health insurance exchange. They would purchase that at full cost. Obama's said "the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally," which Wilson said was a "lie." Actually, Obama can make a pretty thorough case that reform doesn't apply to those here illegally. We don't find the public option argument enough to make the case that Obama "lied." We rate Wilson's statement False.
Click to expand...

But go ahead and keep showing your classy Right-Wing-Whacko behavior. The majority of us Americans are getting a kick out of it while watching you marginalize the GOP into oblivion.
:cool:
 
JohnnyBz00LS said:
But go ahead and keep showing your classy Right-Wing-Whacko behavior. The majority of us Americans are getting a kick out of it while watching you marginalize the GOP into oblivion.
:cool:
Click to expand...

Your full of it Johnny.

Do your own research on what Obama has said in the past, the legislation he co-authored in the Illinois State Senate, etc.

His strategy is well-known. Obama has even stated it may well take 10, 15 even 2 decades to get everyone (INCLUDING ILLEGALS) covered.

You are one misguided lib.:(
 
shag - under the current plan illegal immigrants are specifically barred from receiving payments, but opponents of the reform say that without verification, the system is open to abuse (to paraphrase your article).

So, Obama wasn't lying, the plan doesn't allow illegal immigrants access to subsidies under the system. But, the bill needs to be amended to put into place the types of checks and balances that will confirm the citizenship status of the person applying for government health insurance. This has been stated to also be key in the illegal immigration question overall. How is the government going to create a tight system of making sure only people who are here legally get services?

Oddly, currently about 65% of immigrants are insured through private health insurance, usually through their employers. Those could be the people who end up in the private insurance 'co-op.' The place where the right has taken issue with the fact that some illegals could end up with health insurance. But, these people are already covered by private insurance. Once again - private insurers don't demand proof of citizenship. They will take anyone's money... it is all green to them.

What is another odd thing - that if the mandatory coverage clause goes through that number of immigrants with insurance is expected to rise. It is like taxes then - most (not all) illegal immigrants pay income taxes, SS, Medicaid taxes, etc. This would be similar to that type of set up. In the end, we could end up with more health care funds from illegal immigrants then we currently do.

So, the first part is in place - deny coverage, the second part needs to be shored up. Specifically how to identify people who are here legally and allow them access, and how to identify people who are here illegally and deny them access.

PolitiFact is correct - Wilson was wrong.
 
JohnnyBz00LS said:
But go ahead and keep showing your classy Right-Wing-Whacko behavior. The majority of us Americans are getting a kick out of it while watching you marginalize the GOP into oblivion.
:cool:
Click to expand...

If I were on the right - this would worry me. I have seen this type of statement a lot today...

Unless the right stops marginalizing itself in public (this was way public), middle America, although perhaps not happy with the current state of affairs, is going to shy away from what looks to be a right that is drifting further and further into the realm of 'whackiness'. The calm right of Reagan and Buckley is giving way to the in-your-face radicalism of Rush, et al. The right won when it was portrayed as the party of common sense and calm discourse. The right will lose if it continues down this path...
 
foxpaws said:
The right will lose if it continues down this path...
Click to expand...
BullCrap. You guys wish. Nice talking point.

Get off of HuffPo and KOS and see what the rest of the US is saying. Overwhelmingly people are saying Way To Go Joe!

I love how Lefties always try to argue that the Right loses when it fights back.

Wishful thinking.
 
MM - I never wander to Kos - and see Huffington about once a month, neither today.

Actually - I have really only read American Spectator and NPR today...

Oh, and the article that shag sent me to on HotAir - which is a re-do of a 2-week old article from the Washington Examiner, where no doubt Wilson got his idea that illegal immigrants are covered under this plan.

Keep wandering down this road MM - Wilson was wrong - not only in his accusation, but, doing it on the chamber floor during the President's speech. Everyone, right and left, is spanking him on that.
 
foxpaws said:
shag - under the current plan illegal immigrants are specifically barred from receiving payments, but opponents of the reform say that without verification, the system is open to abuse (to paraphrase your article).
Click to expand...

Yes, and those opponents are completely irrational for reading between the lines looking at history and reasonably predicting how this bill will be enacted. We can only take this bill at face value and view it completely in a vaccum instead of trying to rectify it with the real world and the history of how government tends to enact these things. :rolleyes:

Obama saying that this bill will not cover illegal immigrants is like throwing a ball into the air and not expecting it to come down due to gravity. It is willfully ignorant of reality.

Instead of examining the bill in a vacuum, you should rectify that bill with the various philosophical views and realities of political self-interest it was created with as well as the various economic, political, bureaucratic, etc. realities it will have to function under; basically, you need to rectify that wit the real world. To do anything less is exceedingly naively assuming that this bill is somehow immune to those realities. To criticise those who ARE rectifying that bill with reality (and raising legitimate concerns) and saying that what they are pointing to is untrue is foolishly wreckless at best, and dishonest at worst.

So, Obama wasn't lying, the plan doesn't allow illegal immigrants access to subsidies under the system.
Click to expand...

The bill doesn't prevent them from access. So, much like they already do with emergency room services they cannot pay for, this bill WOULD, by default allow them to access those services.

Only if you take this bill at face value (as politifact does) and ignore the realities that this bill will have to function under as well as the political and philosophical interests and views inherent in the creation of this bill can you conclude that the bill doesn't allow illegal immigrants to get services under it.

When you actually do a REASONABLE and in-depth analysis of the bill (instead of unreasonably and arbitrarily raising the burden of proof), it shows something completely different.

You are imposing an arbitrary and self-serving standard to evaluate that claim and you know it. If the bill doesn't explicitly say that it allows for healthcare to illegals, then it doesn't allow for them. The reasonable standard, due to the precautionary principle and considering the political motivations in this bill and the realities it has to function under is that, unless the bill explicitly and substantively prevents illegals from receiving taxpayer funded healthcare (not simply give lip service to that prevention) then it will end up allowing access to taxpayer funded healthcare for illegals.

That is something that Congressional Research Service has already shown.

But, the bill needs to be amended to put into place the types of checks and balances that will confirm the citizenship status of the person applying for government health insurance.
Click to expand...

They already TRIED that...and it was rejected (twice if I remember correctly).

PolitiFact is correct - Wilson was wrong.
Click to expand...

Again, only if you take the bill at face value. Something you consistently do with Obama's proposals but were unwilling to do with bills that Bush supported, like the Patriot Act. Your clearly had a different standard when looking at that bill. Care to explain your double standard?
 
foxpaws said:
Keep wandering down this road MM - Wilson was wrong - not only in his accusation, but, doing it on the chamber floor during the President's speech. Everyone, right and left, is spanking him on that.
Click to expand...

More distortions. the right is not "spanking him" on this "because he was wrong".

From this link:
The morning after Wilson shouted "You lie" at President Barack Obama during a joint session of Congress, Boehner offered reporters a lengthy defense of the congressman's complaint: that illegal immigrants would receive health care benefits under the Democrats' reform bill. Boehner even brandished the Congressional Research Service report he cited repeatedly at the outset of his weekly press conference.
​
 
shagdrum said:
More distortions. the right is not "spanking him" on this "because he was wrong".[/INDENT]
Click to expand...

They are spanking him because his outburst on the on the floor, during the speech, was wrong... That is what I meant shag...

LA Times
And Republicans like Arizona's John McCain, calling the heckling "totally disrespectful," immediately called on Wilson to apologize.

Republicans also said the heckling was out of line. “I think we ought to treat the president with respect,” said Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, “and anything other than that is not appropriate.”

NYT
And the House Republican whip, Eric I. Cantor of Virginia, told ABC on Thursday: “Obviously, the president of the United States is always welcome on Capitol Hill. He deserves respect and decorum.” He said that Mr. Wilson’s apology “was the appropriate thing to do.”

NPR
"I think the outburst was the single most helpful thing to the president," says Vin Weber, a former six-term Republican congressman from Minnesota. "He made the president look good, as he should have, and Wilson's paying the price, as he should."

Miami Hearld
That did not spare Wilson near universal condemnation in Congress. U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Seneca Republican, and U.S. Reps. James Clyburn, a Columbia Democrat, and Bob Inglis, a Greenville Republican, all condemned Wilson’s outburst.

Politco
“I’m told that [Republican Whip Eric] Cantor and [Republican Minority Leader John] Boehner were urging him to do it and he just said no, he’d apologized privately through Rahm,” said Frank. “We were told we weren’t voting cause Joe Wilson was going to apologize and now he’s not apologizing.”
 
Joe Wilson must have done something wrong or he wouldn't have gave an apology.

He embarrassed himself and the party.

It shows the level of frustration the republican party has right now.
They are left out.
This is a lefty bill no doubt about it.
McCain said this morning it will add one trillion dollars to the deficit.
Our kids will have to pay this one off.
There is nothing any fiscal responsable republican can do about it.
They just don't have the numbers.
Joe Wilson shouted out of frustation.
It still dosen't excuse his lack of control.

The best thing the republicans have going for them is when its all screwed up they can say..."we didn't do it"


Joe Wilson needs to STFU and let the cooler heads take the lead.
 
shagdrum said:
Yes, and those opponents are completely irrational for reading between the lines looking at history and reasonably predicting how this bill will be enacted. We can only take this bill at face value and view it completely in a vaccum instead of trying to rectify it with the real world and the history of how government tends to enact these things. :rolleyes:

Obama saying that this bill will not cover illegal immigrants is like throwing a ball into the air and not expecting it to come down due to gravity. It is willfully ignorant of reality.

Instead of examining the bill in a vacuum, you should rectify that bill with the various philosophical views and realities of political self-interest it was created with as well as the various economic, political, bureaucratic, etc. realities it will have to function under; basically, you need to rectify that wit the real world. To do anything less is exceedingly naively assuming that this bill is somehow immune to those realities. To criticise those who ARE rectifying that bill with reality (and raising legitimate concerns) and saying that what they are pointing to is untrue is foolishly wreckless at best, and dishonest at worst.
Click to expand...

I am not looking at the bill in a vacuum - but, I will also not 'imply' things that aren't there shag - as you are willing to do. I believe there should be very real restrictions to make sure that illegal immigrants are not allowed access to the new system, but I also know that this bill is not the best place to start to define how we work with disallowing illegal immigrants access to government services. That really needs to happen in a different type of bill - a more encompassing immigration bill. However, since that won't be happening anytime soon I do believe that particular restrictions concerning this bill should be in place. There are concerns - I have them shag - but to say that the bill allows for illegals to have access to the system is wrong. It specifically says 'no', now it needs to have the teeth to back it up.

The bill doesn't prevent them from access. So, much like they already do with emergency room services they cannot pay for, this bill WOULD, by default allow them to access those services.
Click to expand...

So, really shag - what 'services' does it allow them? It could allow them to buy health insurance - right? That is, if there isn't some sort of defined restrictions regarding how we identify illegals. Well, even if that does happen, isn't that better than having them uninsured? Heck, they will be buying something - and that emergency room visit will now be paid for by some sort of insurance - right?

Only if you take this bill at face value (as politifact does) and ignore the realities that this bill will have to function under as well as the political and philosophical interests and views inherent in the creation of this bill can you conclude that the bill doesn't allow illegal immigrants to get services under it.
Click to expand...

So shag - once again - this part of the bill is about health insurance, and access to it - not healthcare - I don't think we should allow illegals access to insurance - but, they in all reality already have access to it, within the private sector. And we are better off if they are insured, at least they aren't using the healthcare system for free, like they are now.

The access to subsidies is very strictly defined in the bill - there would be no money going to illegals in the form of subsidies - that is very clear. What is more muddy once again shag is the availability of illegals to buy health insurance within co-ops with their own money.

When you actually do a REASONABLE and in-depth analysis of the bill (instead of unreasonably and arbitrarily raising the burden of proof), it shows something completely different.
Click to expand...

No, shag - I am not raising the burden of proof - you are the one that is intent on pretending you can see into the future. You as assuming that certain things will happen - that is incorrect. You can't prove your assumptions.

You are imposing an arbitrary and self-serving standard to evaluate that claim and you know it. If the bill doesn't explicitly say that it allows for healthcare to illegals, then it doesn't allow for them. The reasonable standard, due to the precautionary principle and considering the political motivations in this bill and the realities it has to function under is that, unless the bill explicitly and substantively prevents illegals from receiving taxpayer funded healthcare (not simply give lip service to that prevention) then it will end up allowing access to taxpayer funded healthcare for illegals.

That is something that Congressional Research Service has already shown.
Click to expand...

Once again shag, you are confusing healthcare with health insurance. We are discussing the part of the bill that deals with healthcare insurance. The bill specifically states that the government subsidies for buying insurance would not be allowed for illegal immigrants, and it has teeth there, it really defines illegal immigrants. But, there is a 'loop-hole' as it were, regarding the insurance co-ops. It could allow immigrants to buy insurance through the co-op system, if that part isn't defined better.

Again, only if you take the bill at face value. Something you consistently do with Obama's proposals but were unwilling to do with bills that Bush supported, like the Patriot Act. Your clearly had a different standard when looking at that bill. Care to explain your double standard?
Click to expand...

I don't think I have discussed Bush's bills regarding 'face value' other than the Patriot Act - and this isn't about that.

However the Patriot Act at 'face value' is appalling regarding the trampling of our rights - but we have discussed that in the past. For example it allows your email to be perused just 'because' with no warrants... and no notification that they were in there if they didn't find anything. Same with library check out records, gun purchase records, phone calls, etc. It is all in the bill Shag, there isn't any 'assuming' going on there, the law allows those things to happen.

No double standard shag - I am taking both the part of the current Health Reform Bill that deals with insurance and the Patriot Act at face value.
 
There is an easy way to settle this. Kick all the illegals out (or kill em) and then post 50cals every 300 feet along the border. I'll man one for minimum wage. Maybe i'll finally get a kill into my career.

I don't have any respect for someone who hasn't proven his eligibility for office. Therefore it's not disrespectful to publicly disagree with him.
 
foxpaws said:
but to say that the bill allows for illegals to have access to the system is wrong. It specifically says 'no', now it needs to have the teeth to back it up.
Click to expand...

So, because the bill simply says "no" then the bill will prevent illegals from accessing the system?

Like the "War on Poverty" was going to help the poor?

Like Medicare was only supposed to cost $12 billion by 1990 (it cost $107 billion in 1990)?

Like only the rich were ever supposed to pay federal income taxes?

Like social security was supposed to be temporary and that three cents per dollar earned up to $3000 was supposed to be, "the most you will ever pay"?

Like the claim that, "Beginning November 24, 1936, the United States government will set up a Social Security account for you ... The checks will come to you as a right"?

Like the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) was only supposed to "encourage" certain lending practices and standards, not force them lenders?

Like the CRA was not supposed to be used to enforce quotas?

And most analogous to this bill and even this issue in which the bill supposedly states that no illegals will have access to taxpayer funded healthcare...

Like the 1965 Medicare act that said IN THE BILL, "Nothing in this title shall be construed to authorize any federal officer or employee to exercise any supervision or control over the practice of medicine, or the manner in which medical services are provided, or over the selection, tenure, or compensation of any officer, or employee, or any institution, agency or person providing health care services"?

No, shag - I am not raising the burden of proof - you are the one that is intent on pretending you can see into the future. You as assuming that certain things will happen - that is incorrect. You can't prove your assumptions.
Click to expand...

Do you think it is irrational to have a health skepticism and distrust of the government in general?

The bill specifically states that the government subsidies for buying insurance would not be allowed for illegal immigrants, and it has teeth there, it really defines illegal immigrants.
Click to expand...

Yes, it really defines illegal immigrants. Never mind the lack of any enforcement mechanism. :rolleyes:

However the Patriot Act at 'face value' is appalling regarding the trampling of our rights - but we have discussed that in the past.
Click to expand...

We HAVE discussed this before, and you know better then that. At the very best the supposed "trampling of our rights" can only be inferred from the text of the bill and from the realities that bill would function under. That conclusion can NOT be reach by taking the bill "at face value".

It is not as obvious as you make it sound and you know it.

No double standard shag - I am taking both the part of the current Health Reform Bill that deals with insurance and the Patriot Act at face value.
Click to expand...

So, you ARE taking the health care bill at face value. Do you think it is absurd to attempt to read between the lines and to try and rectify a bill based on ideals with the real world (and the various realities therein) that the bill would have to function in?

If that is your standard, then it would be absurd to think that the public insurance option would lead to a single payer system. Do you think that the public insurance option would lead to a single payer system eventually?
 
micahs97m8 said:
There is an easy way to settle this. Kick all the illegals out (or kill em)]/quote]
Totally uncalled for, twisted and warped.
And those here illegal should return.
Protecting the borders is critically important- but even joking about killing the illegals inside the country is screwed up.

and then post 50cals every 300 feet along the border. I'll man one for minimum wage. Maybe i'll finally get a kill into my career.
Click to expand...
Again- slaughtering people trying to get in?
Manned by sociopaths?

I wonder if those walls would be used to keep us in too?

I don't have any respect for someone who hasn't proven his eligibility for office. Therefore it's not disrespectful to publicly disagree with him.
Click to expand...
It's never disrespectful to disagree with a President or politician.
They aren't royalty. They aren't necessarily any better than us.
However, as much I as I agree that Obama was lying.... I do think that he violated the decorum and disrespected the institutions needlessly, as did the Booing during the Bush state of the union. If it wasn't "needlessly" done, he wouldn't have apologized for it.
Click to expand...
 
Shag - there are plenty of examples that show how government has screwed up - but there are just as many examples where government has done well... you list bad - I can create a list that goes on and on about good

Civil rights

Women's right to vote

Abolishing slavery

clean air and water laws

social security was a good law and still can be, with sensible reform - all laws age, this one has - and needs to be overhauled.

Medicare/medicaid

anti discrimination employment laws

consumer protection laws

Good samaritan laws

However we are talking about the health reform law - and what is written in it.

shagdrum said:
And most analogous to this bill and even this issue in which the bill supposedly states that no illegals will have access to taxpayer funded healthcare...
Click to expand...

Once again shag - the words 'you lie' came specifically when Obama was talking about how the government would not be insuring illegal immigrants, nothing about healthcare - we are talking about insurance here - right? Or are you going to change the subject? The entire 'you lie' debate is about health care insurance.

Do you think it is irrational to have a health skepticism and distrust of the government in general?
Click to expand...

I think it is irrational to have this complete distrust of the government that borders on anarchy. You have elected the people in government, do you distrust yourself that much? Both senators from Kansas are Republican and 2 out of 4 reps are as well - do you distrust them - you probably voted for some of them.

Without some level of trust the system falls apart to anarchy.

We HAVE discussed this before, and you know better then that. At the very best the supposed "trampling of our rights" can only be inferred from the text of the bill and from the realities that bill would function under. That conclusion can NOT be reach by taking the bill "at face value".
Click to expand...

Not inferred - from actual text of the USAPA, 216 shag -
Upon an application made under section 3122(a)(1), the court shall enter an ex parte order authorizing the installation and use of a pen register or trap and trace device anywhere within the United States, if the court finds that the attorney for the Government has certified to the court that the information likely to be obtained by such installation and use is relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation. The order, upon service of that order, shall apply to any person or entity providing wire or electronic communication service in the United States whose assistance may facilitate the execution of the order. Whenever such an order is served on any person or entity not specifically named in the order, upon request of such person or entity, the attorney for the Government or law enforcement or investigative officer that is serving the order shall provide written or electronic certification that the order applies to the person or entity being served.

It is not as obvious as you make it sound and you know it.
Click to expand...

It doesn't get any more obvious than that Shag...

So, you ARE taking the health care bill at face value. Do you think it is absurd to attempt to read between the lines and to try and rectify a bill based on ideals with the real world (and the various realities therein) that the bill would have to function in?
Click to expand...

I personally don't like many things in the law - as I have stated in other threads shag - but in this case Wilson was wrong. What I think is awful is the huge amount of misinformation out there about this law. There are good parts - and there are bad parts. Reform needs to happen - I personally don't think that HB3200, the way it stands, is a good 'common sense' way to go about getting the needed reform into law. But, with the current atmosphere it could be that no law at all will happen - that will be a terrible thing. I certainly don't think that 'any' law is better than 'no' law, but I do know that change needs to happen. And with this type of misrepresentation we will be throwing out the baby with the bath water. The right is killing all hope for health care reform with their misrepresentations of the bill. I think that many parts of the bill needs to be changed or deleted, but saying that the current way the bill is written that the government would end up paying for health insurance for illegal immigrants is a lie. If the right would quit fear mongering, and instead rationally point out the good and bad parts of the bill, and what are common sense 'fixes', then I would applaud them. But screaming out 'you lie' in the middle of the president's speech is killing any hope of good healthcare reform. For instance, I think that torte reform is very important - and I like that the right is bringing it up now, it should be addressed and sensible limits and restrictions put into place. But, does torte reform once again belong within the healthcare bill? Much like the immigration question, the question of reforming our current legal system regarding liability probably belongs in its own legislation so it can be universally applied across many different applications, such as product liability, personal responsibility, etc.

If that is your standard, then it would be absurd to think that the public insurance option would lead to a single payer system. Do you think that the public insurance option would lead to a single payer system eventually?
Click to expand...

I have also stated in earlier threads - I don't like the public option at all. I think it should be scrapped. I do believe it could lead to single payer. I like the earlier Obama plan (the one he was putting forth during the election) that certain people, if they met the criteria of income/insurability/ etc. would be allowed to 'buy into' the same insurance program that government employees use.

So, shag, since I answered your question about single payer - I have a question I would like you to answer...

You mentioned earlier...
And most analogous to this bill and even this issue in which the bill supposedly states that no illegals will have access to taxpayer funded healthcare...​
Where is the section of the bill that addresses illegal immigrants access to taxpayer funded healthcare? I would really like to know - I haven't seen where that is stated. However, it is a huge bill, HB3200, and I certainly could have missed it.
 
If the law doesn't specifically include provisions detailing how health care providers and government will ENFORCE citizenship requirements, then it is providing this care to illegals.

You can't ask for ID or proof of citizenship before providing care.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 118 (members: 1, guests: 117)
Back
Top