DescentBB

Slick, if it was a compromise, why didn't any Rep. vote for it. And kindly link something that verifies what you posted.

woodchip wrote:Slick, if it was a compromise, why didn't any Rep. vote for it. And kindly link something that verifies what you posted.

please, woody, I don't have the time to link to something that was in the news archives every day for months. The final votes reflect GOP determination to obstruct everything, but the ACA itself is essentially a Republican idea from Gingrich and his colleagues. Of course, we all know about the MA model, from Romney's time as governor, as well. Merely because a compromise is made(and I cited the other two reasons they didn't plow ahead with Single Payer), doesn't mean that the GOP ends up voting for the final result.

You have time to post here yet you don't have time to link what you post about.

To help you out a bit:

During the 2009 health care debates over the bill that became the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, H.R. 676 was expected to be debated and voted upon by the House in September 2009,[8] but was never debated.[9] Advocates who remained staunchly for single-payer health care as the ultimate vote and passage of the America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 loomed tried to present HR 676 as a viable alternative to the Affordable Health Care for America Act (H.R. 3962), but were ignored, and in some cases arrested by police during various nationwide debate events, and the bill never received significant public support.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta ... h_Care_Act

You read the part about never debated? And stop bringing up old Newt Gingrich stories.

woodchip wrote:So you see any agreement between the parties?

I said sufficient level of agreement. Unfortunately, one republican voting for is sufficient in our current legislative process.

woodchip wrote:

vision wrote:Your concealed weapon analogy is so stupid it doesn't merit any attention other than pointing out how stupid it is.

Yeah, you don't like it so it must be stupid.

It is stupid not because I don't like it, but because you can't compare health care to gun ownership. It's a category error. I know what you are thinking, but maintaining heath is not the same as self-defense. In a world where everyone has access to health care everyone lives longer, healthier lives. In a world where everyone has the ability to kill at a distance every second of the day, everyone lives much shorter, stressful lives. It only takes the slightest mental effort to understand this is the case and you can even find enough real-world examples to see the truth in it.

Woody, simply because there was a limit on debate of the final bill, doesn't mean that leading up to that point a lot of debate wasn't held.

error posted to wrong thread. Grandchild distraction, involving stink-bug in house.

callmeslick wrote:error posted to wrong thread. Grandchild distraction, involving stink-bug in house.

best post evar! ;D

Well it seems that this administration gave the contract in a no bid offer to an American subsidiary of a canadian company that screwed up the Canadian web site so badly that Canada refused to pay them.

Go figure

can't stop whining can you? What is it, really, about Obama. This seems to go so far beyond politics, one has to wonder, CUDA, what your real motivation is. I certainly hope it isn't race, but don't remember you getting this worked up about GWB's missteps, nor anywhere near so willing to seek out tiny missteps. What's the beef?

callmeslick wrote:can't stop whining can you? What is it, really, about Obama. This seems to go so far beyond politics, one has to wonder, CUDA, what your real motivation is. I certainly hope it isn't race, but don't remember you getting this worked up about GWB's missteps, nor anywhere near so willing to seek out tiny missteps. What's the beef?

That is truly pathetic!
He takes issue over substance and you decide, and by doing so project onto him your own tendencies to bias, that staunch opposition is really caused by bigotry?!!

Has he ever attacked Obama for being black?
But you can raise the accusation in a backhanded fashion can't you?

Has anyone ever attacked you for being a child molester? Maybe your partisan zeal is caused by repressed pedophilia?

Doesn't feel good does it?

Well first off. You didnt know me during the Bush administration so it's not surprising you don't remember that. So once again you dont know what you're talking about.

second seems to me that the left and SEVERAL on this forum screamed bloody murder about haliburton. Cant take it when the shoe's on the other foot huh?

hypocrite

Why is it that people like you want to stifle honest debate by attacking someone for having an opinion. Why are you such a hater?

and once again you run from the point and attack the poster. That seems to be S.O.P for the slickster.

And I'm a racist too.

ignorant troll

CUDA wrote:Well first off. You didnt know me during the Bush administration so it's not surprising you don't remember that. So once again you dont know what you're talking about.

yes, I did, but it WAS late in his term.

second seems to me that the left and SEVERAL on this forum screamed bloody murder about haliburton. Cant take it when the shoe's on the other foot huh?

now that predates my being here, so I can't speak to it.

hypocrite

if in doubt, call me names. Happy-happy are we?

Why is it that people like you want to stifle honest debate by attacking someone for having an opinion. Why are you such a hater?

if questioning you on the 'why' behind your opinion stifles you, it would seem that you have the problem, not I. Find one instance where I ever advocated to 'stifle' debate.

and once again you run from the point and attack the poster. That seems to be S.O.P for the slickster.

CUDA wrote:And I'm a racist too.

ignorant troll

I clearly stated that I hoped that wasn't the reason, because it doesn't seem to fit you. I was wondering what the real reason was. And, you came up with nothing.

so, CUDA, why DO you hate Obama? You've done so since day one. He isn't a liberal ideologue(I wouldn't have ever supported him if he were), so it can't be that. You have seemingly been willing to bark up every tree to discredit or insult his very existence. Why? List your reasons, I'm all ears.

That’s a loaded question, and I also refuse to answer them.

Why do you rape children?

callmeslick wrote:so, CUDA, why DO you hate Obama? You've done so since day one. He isn't a liberal ideologue(I wouldn't have ever supported him if he were), so it can't be that. You have seemingly been willing to bark up every tree to discredit or insult his very existence. Why? List your reasons, I'm all ears.

Lol! Yea, it's Cuda's responsibility to explain why he isn't a racist...because the insinuation you made with no foundation whatsoever demands it!

slick, you are an asshat.

callmeslick wrote:

CUDA wrote:And I'm a racist too.

ignorant troll

I clearly stated that I hoped that wasn't the reason, because it doesn't seem to fit you. I was wondering what the real reason was. And, you came up with nothing.

ignorant troll. not that I need to justify myself to a man that cannot take my POV based on ideology and need to make it about race. what is it about you lefties that you cannot have a honest debate and always resort to attacking the poster to try and discredit someone and stifle debate. is your position that weak that, that is what you need to resort too?

rac·ist
ˈrāsist/
noun
noun: racist; plural noun: racists

1.
a person who believes that a particular race is superior to another.

ENGLISH 101 for slickster:


So please enlighten us OH forum troll on how my questioning the president for his policies is racial.

Respond to my point about the administration giving the contract to a NO BID contractor, who is so screwed up that another Government refused to pay them for their work. (wonders if they'll tie it into someone in the Spitehouse) but I shouldn't think that way. some of the children on this forum will think I'm a racist

callmeslick wrote:He isn't a liberal ideologue(I wouldn't have ever supported him if he were),

do you lie to your wife and kids too?

CUDA wrote:So please enlighten us OH forum troll on how my questioning the president for his policies is racial.

I merely find your constant whining puzzling. Clearly it CAN'T be ideology, as he has constantly conceded to the conservatives in everything from healthcare to Guantanamo. There must be something, and I tried to rule out racism,as that SEEMS counter to your professed belief system, but cannot for the life of me figure out the blind, monolithic hatred for the man you seem to show.

Respond to my point about the administration giving the contract to a NO BID contractor, who is so screwed up that another Government refused to pay them for their work. (wonders if they'll tie it into someone in the Spitehouse) but I shouldn't think that way. some of the children on this forum will think I'm a racist

I'm going to respond to that shortly. Keep on hatin' in the meantime.And, using derogatory language on a daily basis towards your elected President, and the office thereof doesn't exactly make you a Patriot, now does it?

Nice touch on the other comeback. If you think Obama even APPROACHES liberal purity, you ought to go out and talk to true Liberals.....which ought to be easy to locate in Oregon, by my guess.

will wait for actual facts on the website contract. All that is extant are exerpts from Conservative sites, which are chock full of 'it seems', 'we cannot locate' and mostly speculation. Facts will out, and we'll go from there. Thus far, exactly ZERO facts.

callmeslick wrote:but cannot for the life of me figure out the blind, monolithic hatred for the man you seem to show.

no one can possibly be as stupid as you want us to believe you are.

Policy, child, Policy.

do I need to give you another English lesson??

Keep on hatin'.

I'll keep hating just as long as you do. tell me why do YOU hate anyone that disagrees with the President? are you and he that weak that you cannot take criticism??

Depends on your definition of Patriot. Mine would be someone who defends principle over office or man.

Well the one thing we know for sure is the website is broke.

flip wrote:Depends on your definition of Patriot. Mine would be someone who defends principle over office or man.

man, yes, office no. And, the principle and consistent application of same are what I'm asking.

woodchip wrote:Well the one thing we know for sure is the website is broke.

for this, I have to agree for the moment. The one time I tried to set up an account, it didn't work. But, really, as present/former gamers and computer users, how many times have we seen this sort of snafu. Give them some slack, please, in that they are trying to set up a system with really tight security for access, different databases for 50 states and a few territories, millions of potential users and a constant hamstringing of staffing and budget by the GOP in the House. Not the easiest task, and I am sure that by the end of the year, when I need it, I will have insurance. If not, trust me, you will hear me give VERY specific complaints and criticism. It's just the immediate piling-on by people who whined about the bill from the get-go that I find alternately amusing and annoying.

Well, I can see giving respect based on decency, but nowhere near feeling compelled to agree with him on any level to feel patriotic. I voted for him, but mainly because I distrust a government that is in complete agreement more than one that in-fights

flip wrote:Well, I can see giving respect based on decency, but nowhere near feeling compelled to agree with him on any level to feel patriotic.

precisely my point.....'Spite House' and the other range of goofy to obscene words those with the Obama hate-on use are disrespectful, classless and serve the nation poorly.

woodchip wrote:Well the one thing we know for sure is the website is broke.

Even Robert Gibbs says this is an embarrassment. he says there are more problems then just the website. he says it's the whole architecture that's the problem.

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:Well the one thing we know for sure is the website is broke.

But, really, as present/former gamers and computer users, how many times have we seen this sort of snafu.

The game I play encompasses the whole world. The worst interrupt to game play was maybe a day. And then we were given free stuff to compensate.

woodchip wrote:

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:Well the one thing we know for sure is the website is broke.

But, really, as present/former gamers and computer users, how many times have we seen this sort of snafu.

The game I play encompasses the whole world. The worst interrupt to game play was maybe a day. And then we were given free stuff to compensate.

I'm talking rollouts. I've seen my share of disasters at the outset of everything from games to online portals to mail servers and so on. I'm an angler, and thus patient with pretty much anything. This will be no different.

callmeslick wrote:will wait for actual facts on the website contract. All that is extant are exerpts from Conservative sites, which are chock full of 'it seems', 'we cannot locate' and mostly speculation. Facts will out, and we'll go from there. Thus far, exactly ZERO facts.

bull★■◆● on the zero facts slick!

here, is CNBC nuetral enough for you? Hear it from someone who knows the way to do it, was asked to help make it work, knows the industry as well and was basically ignored....to the detriment of all.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101110161

waits to hear slick chime in about Aetnas CEO being biased/incompetent/right wing/racist Obama hater

Don't forget Robert Gibbs

Talk about respect for an elected official, then say that a bunch of them should be hanged…

Spidey wrote:Talk about respect for an elected official, then say that a bunch of them should be hanged…

its OK he's on the left, he's allowed to do that

I suggested trying them for treason first. And, I know there are 'similarities' in terms of respect, but at least I have a visible, in-the-present example that I'm dealing with. I really am starting to wonder if there isn't a faction in the GOP that really wants to completely paralyze the Federal government, and kill the domestic economy, in the interest of triggering a second Civil War. There is no other real explanation, that I can see. The demands they tack onto making the government function seem to change every couple of days, they seem unwilling to allow either the formation of a budget reconciliation committee or even a floor vote in the House. Can any of you tell me what, exactly, they are attempting to do if not subvert the Federal government, whcih would be treason?

Spidey wrote:Talk about respect for an elected official, then say that a bunch of them should be hanged…

And imagine saying that about the president.

They'd turn it racial saying you want to lynch a black man. Nothing like a hypocrite huh?

CUDA wrote:

Spidey wrote:Talk about respect for an elected official, then say that a bunch of them should be hanged…

And imagine saying that about the president.

They'd turn it racial saying you want to lynch a black man. Nothing like a hypocrite huh?

what is the penalty for treason, and the definition thereof?

callmeslick wrote:they seem unwilling to allow...... even a floor vote in the House. Can any of you tell me what, exactly, they are attempting to do if not subvert the Federal government, whcih would be treason?

You mean like Harry Reid has done since he's been in charge of the Senate?