So with the New Health Care Reform passed through the House. Who is for or against it?? Why or why not?

I am not in favor. My opinion (whether it's right or wrong) is why should we pay for the people who are too lazy to get a job just so they can have health insurance? Now it's different if they are disabled and unable to work. But these people who won't get off their butts to get a job shouldn't get subsidized health care that we, tax payers, are paying for!

Edited November 8, 200916 yr by TN_girl21

The possibility of my being killed by foreign terrorists is slim to none and it has absolutely nothing to do with anything George W. Bush did while in office.

I'm glad you saw fit to refute my questions. And just so's you know, it was mostly done tongue in cheek.

As for the final question, I was just kidding around because someone said you're actually patty in disguise. (I think that might be for the reason that you and she have similar political views, use similar grammar and misspell some of the same words.)

Grammar police? Really? Over half of my posts are posted from my iphone. I always find it amusing when people online decide to nit pick grammar, I've had a few other people try it with me before. They always think it shows something, about themselves, and the person with poor grammar or spelling. But nevertheless I've always been able to go back and find dozens and dozens of their own mistakes. If you want to make attacks towards people for grammatical errors, how about your pal phil, who uses the most random a$$ parenthesis I've ever seen in my life, they make no sense whatsoever, And make reading his post's very difficult.

Thats a very nice maneuver around a comment you obviously couldn't say no to, but thought by saying yes you would be congratulating President Bush, good job with that.:thumbup:

A terrorist attack is an act of war. Pearl Harbor killed 2400 people under Roosevelt's term.

Pearl Harbor was not a terrorist attack, it was an attack from a recognized government of another nation, 9/11 was an attack by a militant group. Same result just not the same thing.

So your iphone inhibits good spelling and grammar? Oh, pardon me I had no idea that iphones had that built in glitch. And I'm not the police, I just notice things like that and sure, go ahead and go through my posts and pick out my own grammatical and spelling mistakes. That ought to keep you busy for a while. :-)

I forgot that I wanted to take issue with one of your other statements. The one where you said I HATE George Bush. And I want to take issue with it because I do not HATE George Bush. I have many strong feelings about him but HATE is not one of them. That's funny... it just occurred to me that patty also loves to accuse people of HATE a lot.

Yeah phil does use parentheses often in odd places. But I have noticed other things about his posts to call attention to. And I have done that.

I didn't mention your mistakes to complain about them. I mentioned them in reference to what loserbob posted.

And I dunno, maybe loserbob has a point...

Good point Leigha. I can't imagine someone saying that Pearl Harbor and 9/11 were both acts of war.

If the U.K. thought that, they would have gone to war with Muslim nations that have been committing terrorist attacks in their country for a very long time.

And they'd also have to declare war on certain militant areas of Ireland, eh? Oh wait, Ireland is part of the U.K. so I guess those bombings would have to fall under the term "domestic violence" and would be more like the Timothy McVeigh and the abortion clinic bombings in the U.S. You could hardly call them declarations of war.

The funny thing is that even if you could stretch the imagination and intellect to call 9/11 a declaration of war on the U.S. Who would you retaliate against?

Letsee, oh if you're the Bush administration, you'd declare war on and bomb a country that had nothing to do with it, just to scare everybody in the Middle East, right? So thousands of Americans and thousands of innocent Iraqi people are killed so the U.S. can shake its' fist and stamp its' foot like a petulant bully on a playground.

That makes so much sense. That is sarcasm, for those who just don't get it.

Americans by 9 percentage points have a favorable view of the health care overhaul that President Obama signed into law Tuesday, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds, a notable turnaround from surveys before the vote that showed a plurality against it.

By 49%-40% those surveyed say it was "a good thing" rather than a bad one that Congress passed the bill. Half describe their reaction in positive terms, as "enthusiastic" or "pleased," while about four in 10 describe it in negative ways, as "disappointed" or "angry."

The largest single group, 48%, calls the bill "a good first step" that should be followed by more action on health care. An additional 4% also have a favorable view, saying the bill makes the most important changes needed in the nation's health care system.

And as the months go by and people see that all the lies about healthcare were just that and they begin to see all the positives about this, poll numbers will reflect this.

Republicans who run on repealing this do it at their own peril. Perhaps it will be their waterloo. I will sure do my part to make sure it is.

When Fox news shows the poll results they'll say"only 48% approve the plan. They wont say how 30% didnt like it and the other 22% where undecided(30-20% just made up numbers). They'll lead you to believe 48% like it and 52% dont!

I got an interesting question to ask about the new health care. One of my clients asked me today and I really had no answer. If a mother is on welfare and she has a child that is 24 and lives with her, can that child get back on her welfare insurance? I thought this was interesting and if not what does a kid who lives at home do to get insurance if they got kicked off that welfare insurance at 18 and that is the only insurance she has? Is this the group of people that won't be able to get the insurance even if they are poor? Those not connected to mom and pop insurance but still live at home ecause they don't make enough to pay for it?

I would assume if they cant get on mothers welfare they could get Medicaid(assumeing they're not makeing much money).

Obama made certain that all of the "wonderful" things that this bill entails will be acted upon within the first 6 months of its signing. (how convenient, right before the November elections) These" wonderful" things are the same things that the majority of the nation wanted. Even so, they did not want this bill to pass for all the other things that are in it, and it's COST to us and especially the GIANT stepping stone that it brings to our government for their full control of our HC decisions in the future.

We will NOT forget to vote the democrats out of office in November. They might as well start packing right now. I know that most of them are aware of thier fate.:thumbup:

The dems are majority. They showed you during the 2008 election scare tactics dont work. Hannity, Rush tried, Obama won by a landslide, thats right landslide!! The only way rep will be voted in is if dems get mad, dont think it will happen.

Your mostly wrong, we'll go over these so your clear as to where you stand.

1. I don’t like paying taxes, who does? It matters not what they are for. My gripe isn’t that I don’t want to pay for things I don’t want, or don’t like, it’s that I already pay and exorbitant amount, now I’ll have to pay more, being penalized for being successful, I didn’t think that was part of America. So no, you don’t have that right.

2. I don’t like Bush, didn’t vote for him, and I am glad while he was president a terrorist didn’t kill me. That’s correct. I’d bet you feel the same way. You hate him, you didn’t vote for him, and I’ve got to believe you’re glad you weren’t killed by a terrorist while he was president.

3. I do think it’s fair to call it obamacare, it’s a nickname, I hear it all the time, and even on the left wing news outlets when I flip threw them. Also to go along with that thought process, this bill will be paramount to the obama presidency, one way or another, he will live or die by this so, calling it obamacare is actually kind of fitting. I imagine by you asking this, you think calling it this is bad. But you are right I have called it that. But I don't remember calling it socialism, so this actually a wrong now too. Sorry didn't read thoroughly the first time.

4. I did vote to keep gay marriage legal, why would you think badly of me for that? Yes I have a gay cousin; she didn’t influence my vote at all. I actually didn’t know about her sexual orientation until after the first vote. It’s just not something that bothers me, if you think badly of me for that, I apologize. So you’re wrong here too.

So all in all, you got one of four points correct. 25%, that’s an F. Sorry. I don’t know what the last question is regarding? But no; I would not exclude someone from getting free food for smoking. That seems a little strange. People have vices, who cares.

Actually 25% would be a C under the "Bush" no child left behind act!

The people that really pi$$ me off are the ones on Medicaid(not all). I thought Medicaid was another form of medicare. I was unaware it was for "poor" people. The ones that pi$$ me off are the ones who are upset with the new plan. They where interviewing medicaid patients on the news the other day and some where complaining they might have to pay for healthcare. A few said they might quit their jobs so they dont make to much to qualify for medicaid. I guess everyones interpretation of the American Dream is different! So you have the rich who can afford whatever taxes they have to pay(didnt say they'd be happy). You have the "poor" who have a healthcare plan offered to them for free or greatly discounted but the middleclass Americans who try to work hard to make a descent living are caught in the middle where they cant afford to have healthcare but cant afford not to. Ya theres nothing wrong with the current system.

Socialized insurance administration? Well if the government pays the ins. and the ins. pays the doctors, then in turn, the government is paying the doctors, so.... socialized medicine again. Maybe not complete socialized medicine, because most hospitals are government ran yet, but it's still pretty much socialized medicine. Your calling Medicare socialized medicine, and your advocating for medicare for all, doesn't that mean socialized medicine for all?

No, you misunderstood me. I said that those other programs were Socialized Medicine and “Medicare for All” could at best described as Socialized Insurance (or Administration). The point in this thinking is that we do a very good job of administrating Medicare today (we just don’t fund it properly), doctors prefer it to private insurance because they don’t have nearly the administration cost that they do with private healthcare, the people that have Medicare now wouldn’t give it up for anything (which should tell you how good it is).

kartman it may not be the plan that most Americans want, but it is the plan that they need. Most Americans seem to still believe the stigma that was planted in their brains for years about "socialized" medicine.

BJean, Don’t misunderstand me – I am happy that we got what we did. But I am certainly not ready to give up on what we “should” have gotten, which is Universal Health Care.

It's the right wing against the president. President Obama is evil incarnate.

There has not been one president in my lifetime, which is considerable, who has done more to cross party lines and try to be a fair and moderate representative of the people. But the Republican crazies, the extremists, the birthers and Sarah Palin all still hate Obama and blame him and perhaps the Speaker of the House for things that have not happened and will never happen. And they scream it at the top of their lungs. It is just plain disgusting and embarrassing. Oh and stupid. Did I mention stupid? Very, very stupid.

You are right, the opposition to this plan has always been more about opposition to Obama rather than to the concepts of the plan.

Read his post, he called medicare, socialized medicine. And prior to that he had advocated for medicare for all. If that doesn't equal socialized medicine for all tell me what it equals?

Look, if you are going try to quote me, at least read what I said. I said what I am advocating is NOT Socialized Medicine. I went on to say that our VA and the British systems ARE socialized medicine because the whole system (Administration, Doctors, and Hospitals) are paid by and are part of the government. What you are probably getting confused on is that I said we already have a system the likes of what I am advocating in Medicare.

I didn't call obamacare socialized medicine I don't think, unless thats another one of those pesky post's that keep disappearing like kartman was having trouble with earlier before he decided he couldn't win that argument because he was making stuff up and trying to represent it as my opinion.

I have no idea what are talking about. I never decided I couldn’t win an argument with you. Why would I? I firmly believe in my convictions and am thoroughly convinced that your reasoning is fundamentally flawed. I haven’t gone back to every single message in the thread, so maybe I didn’t see it. Or, it’s quite possible that whatever you are referring to did not interest me enough to warrant a response.

Ten states (so far) have lined up to sue over obamacare, florida AG says,

They can sue if they want , but they will lose and they will waste a ton of money doing so.

Here is interesting piece on why they are doomed to fail:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/03/24/jost.health.bill.challenges/index.html?hpt=T1

In full disclose, this guy is clearly a Democrat – so he his undoubtedly biased, but most legal scholars that I have read in the last few days come to very similar conclusions.

I got an interesting question to ask about the new health care. One of my clients asked me today and I really had no answer. If a mother is on welfare and she has a child that is 24 and lives with her, can that child get back on her welfare insurance? I thought this was interesting and if not what does a kid who lives at home do to get insurance if they got kicked off that welfare insurance at 18 and that is the only insurance she has? Is this the group of people that won't be able to get the insurance even if they are poor? Those not connected to mom and pop insurance but still live at home ecause they don't make enough to pay for it?

If the 24 year old is truly that poor, they likely would qualify for Medicaid on their own so that would be a moot point.

Grammar police? Really? Over half of my posts are posted from my iphone. I always find it amusing when people online decide to nit pick grammar, I've had a few other people try it with me before. They always think it shows something, about themselves, and the person with poor grammar or spelling. But nevertheless I've always been able to go back and find dozens and dozens of their own mistakes. If you want to make attacks towards people for grammatical errors, how about your pal phil, who uses the most random a$$ parenthesis I've ever seen in my life, they make no sense whatsoever, And make reading his post's very difficult.

I have horrible spelling and grammar (which is even worse on the iphone), so I can relate. I agonize over it on the computer and usually am able to clean most of it up (although I usually spot something later on a reread). I don’t think that problem has anything do with our political views or even our intelligence for that matter.