Thread: Health Care Reform Fight Shifts From Congress to the Courts

Originally Posted by hawgballs

Originally Posted by Blakeman

Originally Posted by hawgballs

Originally Posted by Blakeman

Originally Posted by hawgballs

Originally Posted by ...bigdog...

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Sore losers.

right.....who won again?

Apparently not the status quo, or those that want to uphold it....

Who is the status quo Hawg? Who determines the status quo?

C'mon, really?
I dunno, maybe Aetna, CIGNA, Wellpoint and their CEO's...... You know those guys that only insure the healthy and deny those that most need it. The ones that compensate their CEO's and board members tens of millions of $ while charging more and covering less.... To name a few.

So those are the only people that did not like this plan? You have to be in bed with the insurance companies to be against this bill? So that determines the losers?

I'm not a CEO nor do I like insurance companies as they have been, but I am against this type of reform. Is that grounds for me being on the losing 'side'?

Look at what you quoted Blakeman...........
BD asked who won in this healthcare reform bill. In regards to this legislation, I said it was "the status quo that lost and those that supported the status quo."

If you would rather have the healthcare to stay the same as it has for the past decade (more money for less coverage amongst other things is the trend) then I suppose you are included in the status quo.

As much as I think that this bill doesn't go far enough, and how it sorta stinks, it is BETTER than doing absolutely nothing. Which although might not be exactly what you want, but is what you advocated when you support the demise of this bill. Because what positive healthcare changes occur if this bill was defeated? Nothing. So yes, if you were against this bill, then you are indeed supporting the status quo. Take note, I didn't say that everybody is "in bed with the insurance companies" if they are against this bill.. But they are definitely siding with them, if they are so against this bill that they would rather see nothing change at all, because it isn't exactly how "they" want it to be...........

So if I 'side' on one side of something it automatically makes me in bed with that? You and I don't like the Patriot act so we are 'siding' terrorists?... that's equivalent of what you just said.

Some folks still don't get the fact that I am not on a 'side', I want what I think is best.... this ain't it.

I never said I was against all reform, just against this reform (oh and I did read the whole bill).

Doing the wrong thing is not better than proposing something else.

Originally Posted by hawgballs

Originally Posted by Blakeman

I love the hypocrisy of the bi partisan urging by both and then after the big 'we won, you lost' type talk.

By that definition we were all the status quo hawg.

So Trigger throws a little egg in the face of those that wanted to defeat this bill, and all of a sudden, everybody that supports this bill is saying "N'yah, n'yah, nin'yah, n'yah"? Get over it Blake..... Trigger speaks for himself, his opinion is as representative of the official opinon of those that lean left, as much as Commander's opinion as being representative of your ideals.

Wasn't really referring to specifically trigger, more all the dems who are hyping this up after it was voted on. It is just as bad on the rep side where they are denouncing it so adamantly but half of them are spouting off nonsense.

I'm well 'over it' hawg, just laughing at how fucked up the process is and how everything is hyped.

Originally Posted by hawgballs

Originally Posted by Blakeman

So if I 'side' on one side of something it automatically makes me in bed with that? You and I don't like the Patriot act so we are 'siding' terrorists?... that's equivalent of what you just said.

Not quite. Knowing full well that insurance coverage is getting worse as it's premiums are getting higher, to advocate doing nothing is basically siding with the opposition. I do believe that changing the trend of our health care system is very very necessary, and if someone doesn't believe that, then one must assume that they are for the status quo, which is their right, but they ought not get offended when called out on it. I don't know about you, but I didn't agree that the Patriot Act was necessary to prevent terrorism, that doesn't mean I support terrorists.

I believe in changing health care as well, you know this, but I don't think this was the correct way to go about it. I don't think this bill does what is needed and does a lot of things wrong, that doesn't mean I support the insurance companies you call the status quo.

Originally Posted by hawgballs

Originally Posted by Blakeman

Some folks still don't get the fact that I am not on a 'side', I want what I think is best.... this ain't it.

I never said I was against all reform, just against this reform (oh and I did read the whole bill).

Doing the wrong thing is not better than proposing something else.

Is it really doing the wrong thing? Or is it that you think that your idea is better? Even if you are correct in your speculation that your idea is better, what is going to have more positive effect? Doing nothing at all, or opting for the idea that isn't up to par with yours?

To me, I don't think it is "the wrong thing", I don't think that it goes far enough, but it is a start and is certainly better than to have to deal with a ever worsening status quo system for another decade or two.

See I think goes about reform in the wrong way, I think it went too far as far as taxation and mandatory health care and honestly thought that regulation might change your status quo into something that wasn't as bad. Reigning in insurance companies like this administration had started to do with credit card companies was something I was more for.

The full extent of this bill doesn't go into effect till 2012, many folks seem to think that it all hits tomorrow (on both sides) and that this was the 'last chance'.

It is never the last chance to make something right, hopefully we don't ruin everything in haste.

Originally Posted by ...bigdog...

Originally Posted by SovietDooM

Wait a tik, didn't congress recently act to continue the patriot act

ding ding ding.

and there's still terrorists in guantanamo. And KSH is not going to be tried in federal court, nor are many/most of the terrorists we're still holding. And gays still can't serve in the military, or get married. And we increased our involvement in Afghanistan, killing more people there, and even our unmanned killing of people in pakistan. And there's still 100,000's in iraq. and and and.

mouthpieces for the machine, who have been told they are fighting the machine, simply so they don't notice the machine.

Wait, what? I thought we were "changing" all of that.

Maybe go over some heads but, Why does bread cost $2 a loaf, there's no tax on it right?

End consumer pays out the ass. Or for you plumbers, shit rolls down hill....

If my research is right, the only real winners in this are the pharmaceutical companies because the House bill rewards drug companies with a stronger patent protection. So there will be more people able to pay for their prescriptions and it will be harder for generic drugs to get into the marketplace.

I see that there's 5 pages in this thread and 17 pages in the other thread, so it looks like the debate is raging. I'll just throw in that hey, I feel healthier already! Democrats passed health care and my allergies cleared up! Coincidence?!