Repubs won't fund health care changes if they take over
in [Golf]
|
From: Carbon on 4 Aug 2010 18:32 On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 18:13:35 -0400, BAR wrote: > People will continue to die whether Obama Care is funded or not. > > The question how many of the 45 million people without health care > before Obama Care passed are still without health care after Obama > Care was passed. The numbers I have seen in the MSM are 26 to 30 > million. > > Is the cost worth the effort? You have no idea, and you hate it anyway.
From: BAR on 4 Aug 2010 18:50 In article <0bfb8dd8-47d3-4bbb-9047-ed16d676c930 @s9g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, johnb505(a)gmail.com says... > > On Aug 4, 3:52�pm, "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote: > > "Alan Baker" <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote in message > > > > news:alangbaker-CD69E0.11575304082010(a)news.shawcable.com... > > > > > > > > > > > > > In article > > > <a78ef6da-c403-4b76-8952-6a6acd495...(a)j8g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, > > > dsc-ky <Dudley.Corn...(a)eku.edu> wrote: > > > > >> I've had quite a while to think about Bummer Care. Callous or not, > > >> that's my opinion. > > >> Probably the majority of people in the US agree that the Bummer Care > > >> is a bad plan and not worth what it will cost in $. There's not even > > >> any conclusive proof that it will be better at saving any of those > > >> innocent lives you are worried about. It doesn't even kick in for 10 > > >> years. Wanna bet that the government finds a way to raid that fund too > > >> (like others)... and it never actually kicks in at all? > > > > > Nope. > > > > > That's not my point. > > > > > Someone says: "This will cost lives", and your reply is: "Meh.". > > > > > Justify it to yourself any way you like. > > > > The majority of Americans didn't want Obama care. �A majority of Americans > > have opposed all of Obama's major policies. �The polls aren't secret. �It > > isn't a surprise that Obama is polling at 41% approval if all of his major > > policies were against the wishes of the majority of Americans. > > > > It will be refreshing to have a government of the people by the people for > > the people instead of a government of the government by the government for > > the government. > > > > The saving lives line is a canard. �We all die. > > If a majority of Americans have opposed all of Obama's major policies, > then why did a majority of Americans elect him to be president? He > said during the campaign that he wanted to do health care, he wanted > to do a stimulus package, he wanted to do financial services reform. > So what happened? Did people change their minds about what they wanted? Because the believed in his false promises while he was campaigning. Obama is kind of like a snake oil salesman, lots of promises but delivers nothing.
From: John B. on 4 Aug 2010 18:56 On Aug 4, 6:37 pm, "Frank Ketchum" <nos...(a)thanksanyway.fu> wrote: > "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:3bf08710-4661-4736-a30e-72be86c76f73(a)i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... > On Aug 4, 5:47 pm, "Frank Ketchum" <nos...(a)thanksanyway.fu> wrote: > > > > > > > "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >news:0bfb8dd8-47d3-4bbb-9047-ed16d676c930(a)s9g2000yqd.googlegroups.com... > > On Aug 4, 3:52 pm, "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote: > > > > "Alan Baker" <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote in message > > > >news:alangbaker-CD69E0.11575304082010(a)news.shawcable.com... > > > > > In article > > > > <a78ef6da-c403-4b76-8952-6a6acd495...(a)j8g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, > > > > dsc-ky <Dudley.Corn...(a)eku.edu> wrote: > > > > >> I've had quite a while to think about Bummer Care. Callous or not, > > > >> that's my opinion. > > > >> Probably the majority of people in the US agree that the Bummer Care > > > >> is a bad plan and not worth what it will cost in $. There's not even > > > >> any conclusive proof that it will be better at saving any of those > > > >> innocent lives you are worried about. It doesn't even kick in for 10 > > > >> years. Wanna bet that the government finds a way to raid that fund > > > >> too > > > >> (like others)... and it never actually kicks in at all? > > > > > Nope. > > > > > That's not my point. > > > > > Someone says: "This will cost lives", and your reply is: "Meh.". > > > > > Justify it to yourself any way you like. > > > > The majority of Americans didn't want Obama care. A majority of > > > Americans > > > have opposed all of Obama's major policies. The polls aren't secret. It > > > isn't a surprise that Obama is polling at 41% approval if all of his > > > major > > > policies were against the wishes of the majority of Americans. > > > > It will be refreshing to have a government of the people by the people > > > for > > > the people instead of a government of the government by the government > > > for > > > the government. > > > > The saving lives line is a canard. We all die. > > > If a majority of Americans have opposed all of Obama's major policies, > > then why did a majority of Americans elect him to be president? He > > said during the campaign that he wanted to do health care, he wanted > > to do a stimulus package, he wanted to do financial services reform. > > So what happened? Did people change their minds about what they wanted? > > > - - - > > > Really? A majority? > > Try looking up the current population of the country. > > Then try looking up the number of votes for Obama. > > Now explain how that is a majority. > > > I would do it for you, but you would accuse me of lying somehow. > > Well, gee, you got me there, Frank. You must be feeling very good > about yourself. A majority of American VOTERS elected him. Is that > acceptable to you? > > - - - > > You miss the point completely. > How can a majority of Americans disagree with his policies when he was > elected president? A majority of Americans don't vote. Get it? "How can a majority of Americans disagree with his policies when he was elected president?" That's an interesting sentence. A majority of Americans don't vote, but a majority of eligible voters DO vote, at least they did in 2008. Eligible voters who opposed his policies then, but didn't bother voting, have only themselves to blame.
From: John B. on 4 Aug 2010 19:00 On Aug 4, 6:50 pm, BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > In article <0bfb8dd8-47d3-4bbb-9047-ed16d676c930 > @s9g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, johnb...(a)gmail.com says... > > > > > > > > > On Aug 4, 3:52 pm, "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote: > > > "Alan Baker" <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote in message > > > >news:alangbaker-CD69E0.11575304082010(a)news.shawcable.com... > > > > > In article > > > > <a78ef6da-c403-4b76-8952-6a6acd495...(a)j8g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, > > > > dsc-ky <Dudley.Corn...(a)eku.edu> wrote: > > > > >> I've had quite a while to think about Bummer Care. Callous or not, > > > >> that's my opinion. > > > >> Probably the majority of people in the US agree that the Bummer Care > > > >> is a bad plan and not worth what it will cost in $. There's not even > > > >> any conclusive proof that it will be better at saving any of those > > > >> innocent lives you are worried about. It doesn't even kick in for 10 > > > >> years. Wanna bet that the government finds a way to raid that fund too > > > >> (like others)... and it never actually kicks in at all? > > > > > Nope. > > > > > That's not my point. > > > > > Someone says: "This will cost lives", and your reply is: "Meh.". > > > > > Justify it to yourself any way you like. > > > > The majority of Americans didn't want Obama care. A majority of Americans > > > have opposed all of Obama's major policies. The polls aren't secret. It > > > isn't a surprise that Obama is polling at 41% approval if all of his major > > > policies were against the wishes of the majority of Americans. > > > > It will be refreshing to have a government of the people by the people for > > > the people instead of a government of the government by the government for > > > the government. > > > > The saving lives line is a canard. We all die. > > > If a majority of Americans have opposed all of Obama's major policies, > > then why did a majority of Americans elect him to be president? He > > said during the campaign that he wanted to do health care, he wanted > > to do a stimulus package, he wanted to do financial services reform. > > So what happened? Did people change their minds about what they wanted? > > Because the believed in his false promises while he was campaigning. > Obama is kind of like a snake oil salesman, lots of promises but > delivers nothing. What false promises? He promised health care reform and he delivered it. He promised a stimulus package and he delivered it. He promised financial services reform and he delivered it.
From: dsc-ky on 4 Aug 2010 19:14
On Aug 4, 4:21 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > In article > <8e636408-d9f3-4cbf-98ad-673eec414...(a)l20g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > dsc-ky <Dudley.Corn...(a)eku.edu> wrote: > > On Aug 4, 2:57 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > In article > > > <a78ef6da-c403-4b76-8952-6a6acd495...(a)j8g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, > > > > dsc-ky <Dudley.Corn...(a)eku.edu> wrote: > > > > On Aug 4, 2:03 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > > > In article > > > > > <3f2ee47f-66dd-48ed-9a37-93fc4ce35...(a)g19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > dsc-ky <Dudley.Corn...(a)eku.edu> wrote: > > > > > > On Aug 4, 1:22 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > > > > > In article > > > > > > > <960e79b4-7fa7-4b54-8bd5-b9b34c01b...(a)14g2000yqa.googlegroups..com>, > > > > > > > > dsc-ky <Dudley.Corn...(a)eku.edu> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Aug 3, 10:28 pm, George Orwell <nob...(a)mixmaster.it> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Innocent people will die. > > > > > > > > > Innocent people die every day... that's just part of life.... > > > > > > > > Yes, but most of us think it is something worth fighting... > > > > > > > Up to a point... then the costs become too high. > > > > > > I agree. But to casually dismiss something this important like that > > > > > seems incredibly callous to me. > > > > > > -- > > > > > Alan Baker > > > > > Vancouver, British Columbia > > > > > <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg> > > > > > I've had quite a while to think about Bummer Care. Callous or not, > > > > that's my opinion. > > > > Probably the majority of people in the US agree that the Bummer Care > > > > is a bad plan and not worth what it will cost in $. There's not even > > > > any conclusive proof that it will be better at saving any of those > > > > innocent lives you are worried about. It doesn't even kick in for 10 > > > > years. Wanna bet that the government finds a way to raid that fund too > > > > (like others)... and it never actually kicks in at all? > > > > Nope. > > > > That's not my point. > > > > Someone says: "This will cost lives", and your reply is: "Meh.". > > > Correct... that isn't necessarily a good enough reason... depending on > > what it costs. > > This latest answer is at odds with your earlier "who cares" attitude. > > -- > Alan Baker > Vancouver, British Columbia > <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg> Elaborate... |