What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

NOTE: I've gone a page and a half so far beyond my original post, and I haven't seen one word yet talking about the specifics of HR 3200. Hopefully there will be something in the most recent 4 or 5 pages about this thread's topic. :rolleyes:

Conservatives should remind themselves to keep their eyes on the road. The only thing that matters is getting the word out on what this bill is going to do to America, specifically as written in the bill's text. Taking the bait with personal attacks, smear campaigns, Fox News conversations, and other lowball tactics is playing a losing hand. The text of HR 3200 speaks for itself, that's all that you should be talking about. Reasonable people either already agree or will be horrified to learn what it entails. It is not important to engage the Obama heard - they have their marching orders. They are not open to even reading HR 3200, much less discussing it.

Liberals, you should keep doing what you're doing and if you're lucky, HR 3200 will never be discussed on this thread. ;)

Handyman said:
You think I am one of the people you are whining about...are you just kidding around or are you really that stupid? I ask this honestly because your posts are dangerously close to being Glenn Beck like...are you gonna cry too? :p

Why would I want to discuss a bill I don't support? Why would I care to engage with you anyways, someone who obviously isnt going to change their mind or go into any discussion with an open mind? You don't like the bill, that is great you dont have to like it. But I am not going to talk to you just so you can feel validated in your beliefs and can spout off the rhetoric bring something of value to the discussion and be willing to listen to what others have to say or whats the point?

But hey Glenn, if it makes you feel like more of a man to call me a coward and accuse me of being one of the big bad liberals...you go right ahead! :D
Click to expand...

And that's what you call a 100% pure copout, my friends. Either this guy is unwilling to debate the text of HR 3200 or he isn't capable of conversing at that level.

Either way, I think you'll be able to understand why I consider this guy's choice of words as beneath responding to. I'm here for intelligent debate of HR 3200 and this guy just isn't fit for such an exercise. :)

leswp1 said:
gregg- You might find that people read past the first few lines if you don't start your post by maligning the people you might want to enlighten. I am not sure I like the bill but anything that starts out by condescendingly insulting people shuts me off. I never made it past the first few lines to see what everyone is all in a twist about.
Click to expand...

Les that would almost be some great advice but... well, like condescending behavior shuts you off, hypocritical behavior shuts me off. For you to single me out and scold me for being "insulting" after reading so many other petty posts here, including some that went after me, well not only is that extremely hypocritical but it smacks of bias against any who would dare disagree with an Obama decree. I hope this explains, in a very noninsulting way, why I don't have any respect for your post.

Be that as it may, in the interests of being pleasant and merry while still maintaining my stance against Obama's socialist agenda, I shall repost the facts in as emotionally disinterested a manner as I can. Fair enough?

Because I really am curious now to see if I was singled out for the sole reason of being very much against HR 3200, or if giving a pass its supporters who came after me personally was just an "oversight." ;)

_________________

Alright folks, I'm going to repost my original one for Les so he can read it without his sensibilities being rattled, and then I'm gonna read the rest of the thread.

This is my last non-HR 3200 related post on this thread. I don't have high hopes whatsoever, but if there's anyone in the Obama herd or even any moderate liberal above the petty arguments, I'd really love to actually talk about HR 3200. :)
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Here you go Les. I am a man of my word. Sanitized and cleansed of all negative vibes towards anyone on the left. ;)

gregg729 said:
What will HR 3200 entail? You decide. The first link is a conservative organization's list of "gems" from the bill that are somewhere on the scale of sketchy to downright alarming.

(I think a disclaimer would be wise: I already know the exact angle the lefties are going to use to discredit everything in here. <EMOTIONALLY CENSORED>)

The second link is the text of HR 3200 itself, all 1000+ pages of it -so you can judge for yourself if HR 3200 is overreaching and invading your private life or not.

http://www.lc.org/media/9980/attachments/healthcare_overview_obama_072909.pdf

www.docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf

Personally, I think it is every good American's job to be very outspoken in being 100% against this trillion-dollar piece of legislation.

Absolutely, we need healthcare reform. But all that's needed is tort reform, not this abomination that Obama and Congress are trying to force upon Americans against their will.

I'm not even gonna try to read through this thread - so I'm sure some of this has already been said but then again, it's worth repeating. Here's my thoughts, in no particular order.

First of all, in general terms, bureacracies suck at running businesses. Outside of the DC beltway, everyone with half a brain knows the free market is infinitely better at delivering services than government. Amtrak is an inconvenient example of how pathetic of an entrepeneur Uncle Sam is, which is why HR 3200 supporters dismiss it without any intelligent response. And supporters completely ignore failed examples of socialized healthcare schemes in place today. We've all heard how bad Canada's socialized healthcare is. And then there's socialized healthcare in America. 30 to 45 days on average for a veteran to be seen at a VA hospital. 50 to 60 days on average for someone to be seen under the Massachusetts experiment with socialism in the medical field. This is compared to 10 to 12 days for Americans that use the free market system. You need less than half a brain to decide which way is better.

It makes me laugh when supporters mention that America spends far more on healthcare than other countries. So they want to spend well over a trillion dollars on top of what we are already spending? Let me rephrase: Supporters of HR 3200 say we should spend >$1,000,000,000,000 in order to get private sector healthcare costs under control. Someone's a dummy here, either me for not understanding that logic or them for using that logic. Can I get some help here please? :rolleyes:

Not to mention the timing of this full court press for socialized healthcae is just downright stupid and irresponsible of Obama and Congress. North Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq, the economy, Iran, dependence on foreign oil. There are so many things that healthcare reform should be taking a back seat to. Smarten up, Obama - apply your energies to issues that are actually urgent and pressing.

And then you get into the specifics of HR 3200. It's shocking to see just how much those arrogant politicians in Washington look down on people like you and me. While the conservative group whose website I cited may have overly alarmist interpretations on some of the specifics (or quite possibly not), it is quite clear that the cronies down in DC have no respect for the average American's right to make their own medical decisions and show undisguised contempt for the average American's privacy rights.



  • - It isn't clear to me whether or not this bill gives the bureacrats the right or not to take money out of my bank account. It is plain as day though that this bill gives the federal government the right to get realtime snapshots of my financial worth and financial activity. This is outrageous government intrusion. Realtime ability also can help them keep tabs on the general whereabouts of all Americans that use credit and debit cards for most purchases. Shades of 1984, scary.


  • - HR 3200 DOES ration healthcare. Those that deny this are either lying or haven't read the bill. You aren't allowed to make decisions on what and how much treatment you can get. Your doctor doesn't make those decisions either. He is forced to go by a manual written by a team of bureacrats in Washington.


  • - HR 3200 definitely puts the screws to the private sector, and it will certainly probably destroy the private sector in time. Punitive taxes to employers who use the private section, provisions for auto-enrolling Americans onto the socialized healthcare plan when they switch jobs, there's alot of stuff in there that punishes employers and employees who don't embrace Obama's socialized healthcare plan.

Those are just a few gems, and there are so many more.....

But hey. Maybe politicians do know what's best for you and me after all. Maybe we do need socialized healthcare but we're just too stupid to realize it. So it begs the question - if HR 3200 is such a blessing, why are the none of the Congressmen and Senators willing to give up their own government healthcare plan? Hmmmm....

The good news is that the American people were on the ball with this one. Once word got out about the rationing and the government making the healthcare decisions for individual Americans, people started fighting back. Through town hall meetings across the country we're making it clear to those corrupt DC politicians that voting for HR 3200 may well end their political career.

Don't be fooled by the Obama town hall meetings - those were all staged. Go on youtube and look at Obama's town hall meeting in Portsmouth NH. Those questions he was asked couldn't be more sugar-coated if they were packaged in a Krispy Kreme box. That 15-year-old girl with the "mean signs" question was the daughter of Obama activists by the way. Isn't it quite the coincidence that although less than 1/4 of Americans support HR 3200, 100% of the people in that auditorium seemed to support it? How disrespectful to the American people (not to mention dishonest) that this guy packed the auditorium with his supporters instead of letting the average American in.

But I digress. Let Obama feel good about himself by insulating himself from us dirty commoners. The Congressman and the Senators are who we need to focus on. I'm telling everyone I see that they would be doing a great service to our country and to each other to take a half hour out of what remains of the summer and call, write, or email your Congressional delegation and tell them to vote against HR 3200. Keep their feet to the fire, and we'll win this one! :)

HR 3200 FUN FACT: Think free market healthcare is expensive? HR 3200 is over 1000 pages long and if enacted, the cost will be over $1 BILLION per page of text.
Click to expand...

There you go Les, if you honestly care about developing an informed opinion about HR 3200, that should get you started. :)

HR 3200 FUN FACT: The ONE MILLION MILLION dollar price tag of HR 3200 is not included in the $9 TRILLION deficit forecast, which itself was $2,000,000,000,000 higher than predicted by the Obama Administration. (Fun Fact Bonus: Wow, off by $2 trillion?? Obama's financial advisors are pretty lousy at math, huh?)
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

gregg729 said:
NOTE: I've gone a page and a half so far beyond my original post, and I haven't seen one word yet talking about the specifics of HR 3200. Hopefully there will be something in the most recent 4 or 5 pages about this thread's topic. :rolleyes:

Conservatives should remind themselves to keep their eyes on the road. The only thing that matters is getting the word out on what this bill is going to do to America, specifically as written in the bill's text. Taking the bait with personal attacks, smear campaigns, Fox News conversations, and other lowball tactics is playing a losing hand. The text of HR 3200 speaks for itself, that's all that you should be talking about. Reasonable people either already agree or will be horrified to learn what it entails. It is not important to engage the Obama heard - they have their marching orders. They are not open to even reading HR 3200, much less discussing it.

Liberals, you should keep doing what you're doing and if you're lucky, HR 3200 will never be discussed on this thread. ;)



And that's what you call a 100% pure copout, my friends. Either this guy is unwilling to debate the text of HR 3200 or he isn't capable of conversing at that level.

Either way, I think you'll be able to understand why I consider this guy's choice of words as beneath responding to. I'm here for intelligent debate of HR 3200 and this guy just isn't fit for such an exercise. :)



Les that would almost be some great advice but... well, like condescending behavior shuts you off, hypocritical behavior shuts me off. For you to single me out and scold me for being "insulting" after reading so many other petty posts here, including some that went after me, well not only is that extremely hypocritical but it smacks of bias against any who would dare disagree with an Obama decree. I hope this explains, in a very noninsulting way, why I don't have any respect for your post.

Be that as it may, in the interests of being pleasant and merry while still maintaining my stance against Obama's socialist agenda, I shall repost the facts in as emotionally disinterested a manner as I can. Fair enough?

Because I really am curious now to see if I was singled out for the sole reason of being very much against HR 3200, or if giving a pass its supporters who came after me personally was just an "oversight." ;)

_________________

Alright folks, I'm going to repost my original one for Les so he can read it without his sensibilities being rattled, and then I'm gonna read the rest of the thread.

This is my last non-HR 3200 related post on this thread. I don't have high hopes whatsoever, but if there's anyone in the Obama herd or even any moderate liberal above the petty arguments, I'd really love to actually talk about HR 3200. :)
Click to expand...

I am a she.

I 'singled that out' because if you were earnest and really are interested in an answer from folks you can get some intelligent, well thought out responses in here when you ask in a way that doesn't light a flame. I really have learned a lot about why people object to certain parts of what is being offered/proposed. I may not always agree but I do see things others have thought of that I did not consider before. There have been posts that make me rethink stuff or might make other people rethink stuff. IMHO if I really believe something I would like to convince someone else I am right. I may be presumptuopus but I would imagine you feel the same way.

and I got stuck on tyhe same opening paragraph as last time. sorry.
 
Last edited:
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

I could say something about my transgender surgery paid for by public asst but............




:p
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Handyman said:
Sorry but killing in the name of God is no better than killing in general no matter how much the faithful try and spin it.
Click to expand...

Ah, yes, the "completely irrelevant point" argument tactic. Very nice.

Who said anything that remotely resembles what you just tried to attribute to me? All I said is that it is moronic to use religious wars as an argument against religion. Mankind has proven time and time again that they'll just find other stuff to fight over.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

ExileOnDaytonStreet said:
Ah, yes, the "completely irrelevant point" argument tactic. Very nice.

Who said anything that remotely resembles what you just tried to attribute to me? All I said is that it is moronic to use religious wars as an argument against religion. Mankind has proven time and time again that they'll just find other stuff to fight over.
Click to expand...

I was just fighting fire with fire because you said he used that as his main argument against religion which is not true in the slightest. Your point was no more relevant than mine but thanks for making my point for me :)

Not that any of this matters because it has nothing to with the topic...
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

gregg729 said:
And that's what you call a 100% pure copout, my friends. Either this guy is unwilling to debate the text of HR 3200 or he isn't capable of conversing at that level.

Either way, I think you'll be able to understand why I consider this guy's choice of words as beneath responding to. I'm here for intelligent debate of HR 3200 and this guy just isn't fit for such an exercise. :)
Click to expand...

Oh Glenn come on I agree with you the Bill sucks and don't support it and yet somehow you still make me out to be the bad guy. Well don't you worry your pretty little head about it you are right and everyone else is wrong...those dirty liberals are the devil and you conservatives are the Messiah!

Quick question though...if you were here for intelligent debate why did you start flaming people right away? Lots of people have made comments for and against HR 3200 without feeling the need to label the other side as Satan Incarnate but you felt the need to attack anyone who may just support the idea before you even engaged them in any sort of discourse. Yet they (the lefties) are supposed to ignore your cheap shots and talk to you in a rational manner when you basically lowered the conversation to sandbox level before it even started? (we wont even get into the fact that you were completely offbase including me with the "evil people" who apparently are walking lockstep with Obama on this which I am not and never have been only to then skirt the issue instead of apologizing)

You make valid points, most of them I agree with as do others, but yet we arent vilifying people who think differently because we actually want to hear what people have to say and look upon things with an open mind. Maybe if they got the sense you were doing the same thing they might not huwt your widdle feewings :p
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

It takes an average of five posts before every poster new to our political threads self-IDs as either:

1. The Peacemaker (pro: might actually change their mind when confronted by contrary evidence; con: insufferable)

2. The Soldier (pro: not deliberately mendacious; con: conditioned to read and believe exclusively within an echo chamber constructed by others)

3. The Operative (pro: sometimes very funny when read with eyes open; con: under the delusion that principles are So Vital that deliberately lying to defend them is justified by the Greater Good)

By definition, Peacemakers and Operatives know who they are, while Soldiers think they're in one of the other categories. The relative ratio is about 1:7:2.
 
Last edited:
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Handyman said:
I was just fighting fire with fire because you said he used that as his main argument against religion which is not true in the slightest. Your point was no more relevant than mine but thanks for making my point for me :)

Not that any of this matters because it has nothing to with the topic...
Click to expand...

It's relevent to the topic because someone (not naming names here) brought up Bill Maher's arguments on health care. There's no reason to use Bill Maher in any rational debate any more than it would make sense to use the arguments of Bill O'Reilly, Michael Moore or Anne Coulter. Arguments based around any of those bullying, things-are-true-because-they-say-so personas are just null and void.

And to the anonymous neg-repper: First off: grow up. Don't assume that just because I disagree with Maher that it automatically means I haven't seen his little trifle of a film. Trust me, the film isn't so amazing that it will convince everyone who sees it to convert to the Way of the Maher. You're trying to give that film a lot more power than it will ever have. It's halfway between Michael Moore and Borat (for better and for worse) in its approach to the subject. It's entertaining to see someone pick on extremist idiots. It's entertaining because Maher behaves like he has his own reality show, with the obnoxious way he approaches people who think differently than him (and that's laughing AT him, not WITH him... just like every other Moore/O'Reilly/Coulter/Reality Star: obnoxious people are somehow entertaining). But anytime you try to take the film seriously, you're just left with a Moore/Coulter clone: someone who is just incredulous that the world doesn't agree with him.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

never shake hands with Bill Maher. icky.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

It's possible that a mouthbreather like Maher or Olberman or Coulter (Jesus, *all* Cornellians, WDF?!) might someday stumble upon a valid argument. But it's like the poster who linked to a VDH article a while back -- once you've read enough VDH you realize it's not cost-effective to sift through the mountains of garbage on the tiny chance of finding a good point. Same principle behind not wasting time on MSNBC or the Fox Short Bus Network or Red State Hatred Radio -- the final nail is not they're annoying, but they've forfeited all legitimacy.
 
Last edited:
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Kepler said:
It's possible that a mouthbreather like Maher or Olberman or Coulter (Jesus, *all* Cornellians, WDF?!) might someday stumble upon a valid argument. But it's like the poster who linked to a VDH article a while back -- once you've read enough VDH you realize it's not cost-effective to sift through the mountains of garbage on the tiny chance of finding a good point. Same principle behind not wasting time on MSNBC or the Fox Short Bus Network or Red State Hatred Radio -- the final nail is not they're annoying, but they've forfeited all legitimacy.
Click to expand...

I'll drink to that. Well said.

And it doesn't matter what side those swill merchants come from. Conservative bias and liberal bias can't hold a candle to Lowest Common Denominator bias. Or an obnoxious use of assertations as fact.

BTW: "Cornellians"... why does that sound like a word I'd hear in a Star Wars movie?
 
Last edited:
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

MattS said:
I'm not sure any of them ever had any legitimacy to forfeit!
Click to expand...

LOL. :)

Hey, I start by giving them the benefit of the doubt. Liberals are magnanimous. ;)
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

ExileOnDaytonStreet said:
It's relevent to the topic because someone (not naming names here) brought up Bill Maher's arguments on health care. There's no reason to use Bill Maher in any rational debate any more than it would make sense to use the arguments of Bill O'Reilly, Michael Moore or Anne Coulter. Arguments based around any of those bullying, things-are-true-because-they-say-so personas are just null and void.
Click to expand...

I didnt neg rep you...I need to spread before I give you anymore plus I always sign it :D

And I brought up Maher not cause I agree with his stance (he is for the Public Option and supports Single Payer and I hate both) but I agree with his idea that Obama and the Dems need to take a play out of the GOP handbook and be proactive...if they honestly think this is what is in the best interest of everyone stop being a part of these ridiculous debates, stop worrying about if your approval drops by a couple points and just DO IT! Don't be wishy washy, don't change your opinion every twelve seconds just take your position and go with it! Make sure everyone you need is on the same page (which has been a huge failure for the Dems) and push it through. He has the votes so stop being a wimp and act!

That was the point of what I was saying...as it is I think the Bill and all socialized medicine is a bad idea (in the US) but the Dems have all the control and yet they still play right into the hands of the GOP and tuck tail and run whenever some blogger calls them a bad name. That is not what leadership does, that is what cowards do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top