The arrogance of Obama on display.
I had a little time today to actually watch Obama's sham known as his "Health Care Summit". The Greek columns weren't present nor was the echo chamber. What was also noticeably missing was Obama's trusty Hope & Change 5000 teleprompter deluxe. Maybe it was in the shop being cleaned. Barack has always come off sounding and appearing arrogant and smug. The exchange between Obama and McCain today clearly demonstrates what I've been saying for a long time. Barack Obama is a clear cut megalomaniac. He believes that everything should and does revolve around him.
The true believers of "the one" will never accept the premise that their beloved narcissist is indeed stuck on himself. When Obama said "let me just make this point John, because we are not campaigning anymore, the election is over", two words popped into my head. Those words were "arrogant smuck". McCain for once actually made some valid points and stood up to Obama, but he backed down in his typical sniveling McCain fashion when Obama basically embarrassed him in his response. If I were McCain, I would have handled Obama's response in a completely different "non" John McCain way. I would have told Obama the following
Me as John McCain "We all know that the campaign is over except for you Mr. President. Everyday you campaign against a candidate that you never faced in 2008, that being George W Bush. It has been a little over one year since the election and you are the one who is still stuck in campaign mode. If you know that the campaign is over Mr. President, start governing and stop blaming and smearing others. This is you and your party's 2,000 page bill in front of us that most Americans don't want. Me and my Republican colleagues had nothing to do with the creation of that bill." You are the one who said that the health care negotiations would be on CSPAN". That is your broken promise not ours Mr. President. So don't make this about me, because I didn't put the words in your mouth when you made your promises".
This is why I could never be elected to office. The political class freaked out when Joe Wilson said Obama lied, I can imagine the massive fire storm that would have erupted if I was John McCain and said what I would have if I was him. Barack wouldn't have known how to respond to such a statement, because he is so use to getting his way. Most Americans want the whole health care process started over. Obama frankly doesn't care about what the masses think. Barack thought he was going to simply upstage the Republicans and make them out to be the bad guys in all this. That plan backfired miserably on him and his Democratic colleagues. Note to Obama. The blame Bush cow has been milked beyond dry, and Bush is back in Texas and is a distant memory except to the fringe left. Obama said it himself. The campaign is over, it looks like Obama still isn't ready for the responsibility for the job he campaigned for.
posted by Alpha Conservative Male at 5:38 PM
39 Comments:
CB (response posing as McCain);"This is you and your party's 2,000 page bill in front of us that most Americans don't want. Me and my Republican colleagues had nothing to do with the creation of that bill".
No Republican dare not say that to President Obama's face! Sure, you and other Repub's can spin the facts and fudge the actual numbers. But the truth is "MOST" Ameicans are "FOR" government run health care. Poll after Poll after Poll after Poll has shown that!
Granted, over the last few months, "MOST" Americans are now more concerned about the economy. Yet that still doesn't negate the support for government run health care.
p allen "Granted, over the last few months, "MOST" Americans are now more concerned about the economy. Yet that still doesn't negate the support for government run health care."
lol, lol, lol, what frequency is your mind working on at allen? Most Americans DO NOT support government run health care. Yes people support reforming healthcare, but they do not support the government having a major or sole role in it. If I was in that room by the way, I sure as hell would have said that to Obama and not even blink an eye in doing it. Let me chop down your deceptive wording allen for a moment. In the bloomberg poll that you posted, it didn't mention anything about the majority of Americans embracing a government run health care bill.
Bloomberg"Poll respondents weren’t asked whether they favor a so- called public option, or government-run program, to compete with private insurers"
Just like the Staples button allen, that was easy!lol Why are most of Americans saying kill the bill and start over if it is what they truly want allen? Why can't Obama pass a so called popular piece of legislation with his party controlling congress? IF Obama and company claims that Americans want this socialist healthcare bill so much, why was it create behind closed doors so nobody could see what was happening? If Americans wanted Obamacare, why did Scott Brown win in liberal Massachusetts when he campaigned openly that he would vote against what you said "most Americans want"? I can go on and on with this allen. It's too much fun.
the "media event" on display earlier today was akin to one of the show trials in the former soviet union. True to Stalinistic form, facts were twisted by the "dear leader" and arrogance was on full display. Good thing the American people are not buying what Obummer is selling.
CB;"iol, lol, lol, what frequency is your mind working on at allen? Most Americans DO NOT support government run health care".
Did you, or did you not click the links to the so-called "professional pollsters" I provided? These are the same pollsters that gave you your "talking points" on the presidents shrinking approval ratings!!!
Ohhh, I forgot... You're still upset over losing the election. Damn man, snap out of it....GET OVER IT! Palin will have her chance in 2012. In the mean time, snap out of it, get over it and face REALITY!
CB;"Bloomberg"Poll respondents weren’t asked whether they favor a so- called public option, or government-run program, to compete with private insurers".
Duhhhhhhhhh...? So Bloomberg didn't ask??? SO WHAT? Bloomberg didn't ask if they wanted "free" health care either...so what does that prove??
As usual, you attempted to "nit-pick" the article instead of reading it. Had you "READ" further you would have seen this reported stat from the poll;
"The poll conducted Sept. 10-14 finds that 48 percent of respondents favor Obama’s plan, while 42 percent oppose it".
48 to 42.... Do those numbers look familiar? That's almost the same margin by which Obama won the presidency.
From the NY Times/CBS Poll, June 2009--
"Americans overwhelmingly support substantial changes to the health care system and are strongly behind one of the most contentious proposals Congress is considering, a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll."
You can deny the "FACTS" all you please. If it soothes your aching heart, go right ahead! I'm one who feels that the truth sit's better with me over fantasy.
Oh yeah, by the way... Staples called and asked me to tell you that.... THEY WANT THEIR "EASY BUTTON" BACK!!!
CB;"iol, lol, lol, what frequency is your mind working on at allen? Most Americans DO NOT support government run health care".
Did you, or did you not click the links to the so-called "professional pollsters" I provided? These are the same pollsters that gave you your "talking points" on the presidents shrinking approval ratings!!!
Ohhh, I forgot... You're still upset over losing the election. Damn man, snap out of it....GET OVER IT! Palin will have her chance in 2012. In the mean time, snap out of it, get over it and face REALITY!
CB;"Bloomberg"Poll respondents weren’t asked whether they favor a so- called public option, or government-run program, to compete with private insurers".
Duhhhhhhhhh...? So Bloomberg didn't ask??? SO WHAT? Bloomberg didn't ask if they wanted "free" health care either...so what does that prove??
As usual, you attempted to "nit-pick" the article instead of reading it. Had you "READ" further you would have seen this reported stat from the poll;
"The poll conducted Sept. 10-14 finds that 48 percent of respondents favor Obama’s plan, while 42 percent oppose it".
48 to 42.... Do those numbers look familiar? That's almost the same margin by which Obama won the presidency.
From the NY Times/CBS Poll, June 2009--
"Americans overwhelmingly support substantial changes to the health care system and are strongly behind one of the most contentious proposals Congress is considering, a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll."
You can deny the "FACTS" all you please. If it soothes your aching heart, go right ahead! I'm one who feels that the truth sit's better with me over fantasy.
Oh yeah, by the way... Staples called and asked me to tell you that.... THEY WANT THEIR "EASY BUTTON" BACK!!!
CB;"Let me chop down your deceptive wording allen for a moment. In the bloomberg poll that you posted, it didn't mention anything about the majority of Americans embracing a government run health care bill".
Nee-gro' PUH-LEEEEEEEZZZ! Cain't chew reeeeed????
From the Bloomberg article, which they, (not me) polled Americans-
"The poll conducted Sept. 10-14 finds that 48 percent of respondents favor Obama’s plan, while 42 percent oppose it".
48 TO 42! FORTY-EIGHT (48), being the MAJORITY!
CB;"Let me chop down your deceptive wording allen".
You should watch where you're chopping Tyrone... You wouldn't want to chop the foot off that's stuck in you mouth...
p allen "Did you, or did you not click the links to the so-called "professional pollsters" I provided? These are the same pollsters that gave you your "talking points" on the presidents shrinking approval ratings!!!"
The polls you presented weren't from professional pollsters allen. Professional pollsters are Gallup, Zogby, Rasmussen, Quinnpac, Pew, Opinion Dynamics etc allen. I noticed how you completely dodged what I wrote. If the legislation is so popular with the American public, why is a "popular president" having so much trouble passing a "popular healthcare bill" with a congress that he controls by huge margins? Something just doesn't add up there allen. Keep spinning like a top allen.
p allen "Ohhh, I forgot... You're still upset over losing the election. Damn man, snap out of it....GET OVER IT! Palin will have her chance in 2012. In the mean time, snap out of it, get over it and face REALITY!"
As usual allen, you think long and wrong. When did you ever hear me said I liked John McCain? Maybe I was praising McCain in my sleep and didn't even know it or something. Upset allen? I said last year, from every carter a new Reagan will follow. Seriously, Obama is not only getting smacked around by the right, even his own base are starting to turn on him. Obama winning is the best thing that could have happened for conservatives allen.Liberal Dems control everything and they have no one to blame. Bush is gone, that ship has sailed. Republicans are poised to take control of congress in less then 6 months. If Obama can't get anything passed with a Democrat controlled congress, he might as well hang it up on November 4th, because he will be crippled politically. As Obama said allen, "the campaign is over" and so is the honeymoon of hope and change. lol
Actually I thank Obama for winning, because thanks to Carter Jr, he helped to cough up Ted Kennedy's seat, the governorship of New Jersey and Virginia in a years time. lol This wouldn't have happened if Juan McCain would have won allen. You know that sad thing in all of this is allen? As pathetic George Bush was a president on somethings, even "W" was able to get legislation passed with his Republican controlled congress, what's Obama excuse? Oh I forgot, Bush knew how to governor, because he actually had "executive experience" prior to becoming president opps! lol
p allen "Duhhhhhhhhh...? So Bloomberg didn't ask??? SO WHAT? Bloomberg didn't ask if they wanted "free" health care either...so what does that prove??"
So what?! How can you make an assumption that Americans support a government run healtcare system, when people in the poll didn't say that is what they wanted? You are making an "ASSUMPTION" allen. If the question was asked, and they responded to the question pro or con is something entirely different. I know you are a lib,but please try and let your brain get some circulation allen.
p allen "As usual, you attempted to "nit-pick" the article instead of reading it. Had you "READ" further you would have seen this reported stat from the poll;"
I know you hate those pesky things called "facts and details" allen. It is what it is. What can I say, that's how I roll. I know allen, why let facts get in the way of a good talking point right?lol
p allen ""The poll conducted Sept. 10-14 finds that 48 percent of respondents favor Obama’s plan, while 42 percent oppose it"."
Let me blow the poll right out of the water real quick. Read this very carefully allen. "Obama never had a plan". Pelosi and Reid had plans NOT OBAMA! UP OH! ;-0 Obama came out with his "PLAN" as few days ago. Maybe it's me, but I think it is kind of hard for 48% of people to support an Obama health care plan "THAT DIDN'T EXIST AT THE TIME"!! LOL LOL LOL LOL Keep them coming allen.
p allen "From the NY Times/CBS Poll, June 2009--
"Americans overwhelmingly support substantial changes to the health care system and are strongly behind one of the most contentious proposals Congress is considering, a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll."
Oh please allen, A New York Times poll to me has as much credibility then a Newsmax poll to you. NEXT!!
P allen "You can deny the "FACTS" all you please. If it soothes your aching heart, go right ahead! I'm one who feels that the truth sit's better with me over fantasy."
Your wild eyed illusions can't pass for "FACTS" all. In your fantasy land, I'm sure it's ok that 2+2=9 but in the real word, it just doesn't fly, sorry. lol
p allen "Oh yeah, by the way... Staples called and asked me to tell you that.... THEY WANT THEIR "EASY BUTTON" BACK!!!
I'm going to give you the "PIPE DREAM" Button instead. Speaking of polls allen, here's a poll from a real pollster Gallup. The headline is
"Americans Tilt Against Democrats' Plans if Summit Fails
http://www.gallup.com/poll/126191/Americans-Tilt-Against-Democrats-Plans-Summit-Fails.aspx
If Americans wanted government run health care so badly, why was there a need for a "health care summit" in the first place? I mean clearly Obama should have had a "mandate" from the majority of Americans to make it happen right allen? By Republicans standing against Obama, Pelosi and Reid on this issue, one would think that Republicans would pay a heavy toll come November right allen? Oh wait, they seem to be benefiting hugely by trying to "stop" a piece of legislation that you claim that the majority of Americans want allen. Gee, something just doesn't ad up. lol
p allen "You should watch where you're chopping Tyrone... You wouldn't want to chop the foot off that's stuck in you mouth..."
Gallup "If an agreement is not reached, Americans by a 49% to 42% margin oppose rather than favor Congress passing a healthcare bill similar to the one proposed by President Obama and Democrats in the House and Senate."
Got soul?
CB;"If Americans wanted government run health care so badly, why was there a need for a "health care summit" in the first place?".
It's called "POLITICS"! Presidents have "summits" with the opposition party if stalling or problems occur in the House and Senate. I do understand that you have no idea of how that works. Bill Clinton had one also during the Welfare Reform debates.
CB;"Gallup "If an agreement is not reached, Americans by a 49% to 42% margin oppose rather than favor".
"IF AN AGREEMENT IS NOT REACHED"! Which is the same as if you were selling something I wanted to buy. We'd have to reach an agreement on the price before I would even consider buying!
Facts are a strange thing Tyrone. You can always find them in the strangest places...like in the Gallop Poll you gave the link to!
From Gallop Poll conducted Feb. 23,2009---
Support for Passing a Healthcare Bill Similar to the One Proposed by President Obama and the Democrats in the House and Senate
Democrats: favor/oppose %- 49/19
Independents: 34/25
Republicans: 9/36
Totals:
Favor- 32%
Oppose- 26%.
The only "Poll" that shows "most" Americans don't want Government funded healthcare is the "POLL" in your head!!!!
Im not sure why anyone puts any faith in polling data. The usual poll surveys up to one thousand adults or more. They say that they are random, but how random?
P.Allen, you listed several polls that have a favorable percentage for Obama's Healthcare. If im not mistaken, all of those polls were done around mid 2009, and were from CNN, NYT, Bloomberg and CBS.
The polls TODAY, show the Healthcare issue at an almost 20 point disadvantage in favorability. Most Americans according to these polls, TODAY, dissaprove of the Reform and the way its going to effect Americans if passed.
But again, that depends on who is doing the polls, and what media outlet is spinning the results of a few thousand opinions.
In my mind whether its for it or against it, these polls DO NOT represent the MAJORITY of Americans.
The opposition to this Reform, if you want to call it reform, is bigger than anyone would like to believe its not. The Government has never been able to handle anything with great results. Its the People whom suffer political expediance, not the politician.
There are many ways to bring the costs down in Insurance premiums, and treatment cost. First and foremost eliminate the reckless and frivoulus malpractice lawsuits that are awarded daily. Second, we cannot continue to give free medical treatment at will, to people whom are here illegally. These non emergency costs, in California alone, are in the billions. No wonder people are leaving so fast.
You dont need polls, or media outlets to paint a picture of what the MAJORITY of Americans want. There is no disputing the simple fact that Most Americans do not want the Government to control another aspect of our lives.
Polling a few hundred, or even a few thousand, then taking the results to try and submit this as the will of the majority is a fallacy.
No matter what side your on, bet your buns, whatever they want passed, will have some polling influenced either way.
DONT BUY IT!
I find Obama's arrogance to be nauseating at best and outright infuriating at worst!
I find it reprehensible how he plans to push forward with his agenda despite the fact that many people want no part in it!
Greg;"Im not sure why anyone puts any faith in polling data. The usual poll surveys up to one thousand adults or more. They say that they are random, but how random?".
Very true Greg. I also don't place a amount of credibility in random polling. I look at most polls as a subjective view of perceived reality, rather than an objective view of popular thought. Simply put, the polls could be BS!
Greg;"P.Allen, you listed several polls that have a favorable percentage for Obama's Healthcare. If im not mistaken, all of those polls were done around mid 2009, and were from CNN, NYT, Bloomberg and CBS".
Right! The polls were taken during the height of the Health care debates. Remember the "Townhall Meetings" and the "Tea-Parties" of last summer?
Greg;"The polls TODAY, show the Healthcare issue at an almost 20 point disadvantage in favorability".
Really??? Can you post them??
I made a mistake when citing the Gallop Poll that Tyrone gave the link to. The poll was take Feb. 23 2010, not 2009... Sure, Gallop could be wrong. But it's "their" polling data, not mine. However, Tyrone placed enough stock in their data to post the link...
"Most Americans according to these polls, TODAY, dissaprove of the Reform and the way its going to effect Americans if passed".
Most Americans probably do disapprove of how congress is handling the health care issue, that's more than likely true. However, that's not what I'm stating.
I am saying this...nothing more, noting less; "MOST" Americans would like for the Federal Government to provide (or make available) a system that would insure quality health care for themselves and their families.
Actually, that idea is not to hard to fathom. We already have a government ran health care system in Medicare, which covers anyone over the age of 65. This survey found that 90 percent of beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans are satisfied with their coverage overall! 90 PERCENT!
Conversely, complaints against the private insurance companies (along with rates) continue to rise. Consumers Affairs shows that consumers have filed complaints against, not a few, but "EVERY" private Health Insurance provider in the country.
Greg;"The opposition to this Reform, if you want to call it reform, is bigger than anyone would like to believe its not".
I totally disagree! The the larger portion of the opposition to the so-called "Reform" is using the Health Care issue as a scapegoat!
Yes there are some who are truly concerned about "Big Government" and over spending. Yes there are some who believe "Government Run Health Care" is not the way to solve the problems. The fact is, the a fore mentioned opposition is by comparison very small.
Most of those who are openly protesting against the Presidents efforts, COMBINED, are either;
1. Far right zealots who "pray" for President Obama to fail by all means.
2. Disgruntled over losing the election.
3. Naive to the point that they were convinced (brainwashed) by "far-right" zealots to believe that President Obama is a Socialist, Marxist, Fascist, undercover Muslim, not born in America, who's intent is to destroy America, take their guns, indoctrinate their children, and destroy American society.
4. Racist White supremacist.
Combined, those listed above greatly out number those who have more serious concerns about government health care. And to prove my point, if "YOU" subscribe to any of the four idea's I've listed, you can include yourself as one who "scapegoats" with less than a serious concern.
Allen, you cite polls from June, July and Sept of '09 from CBS, Bloomberg, NYTimes - all left-leaning media outlets. To be fair, I'll cite this POLL from Rasmussen Reports dated Feb. 23, 2010; widely considered as the most accurate and fair polling institution.
p allen ok. I'll bite. You don't think much of your fellow Americans, do you? You stated "Most of those who are openly protesting against the Presidents efforts, COMBINED, are either;
1. Far right zealots who "pray" for President Obama to fail by all means.
2. Disgruntled over losing the election.
3. Naive to the point that they were convinced (brainwashed) by "far-right" zealots to believe that President Obama is a Socialist, Marxist, Fascist, undercover Muslim, not born in America, who's intent is to destroy America, take their guns, indoctrinate their children, and destroy American society.
4. Racist White supremacist."
My, God, man. Do you really believe this?
I can not assume to know, as you obviously do, what most Americans think or believe. All I know is that my friends, family and business associates are tired of our Constitution being trampled on. And this massive health care legilation not only tramples on the Constitution, it takes the heel of it's boot and smashes the Constitution into the ground.
Have you read the Constitution lately? Are you of the ilk that believes the Constitution should "evolve"? If you believe that, then I want to play a high stakes poker game with you with evolving rules. (Not my line, btw, but it works).
Legislation like this was supposed to be left up to the individual states. So if you don't like the laws in your state, you can move to another state.
When he federal government passes legislation like this monster, there's no place to go.
Bigger governemnt is not the answer to our woes. It only tends to exacerbate them.
From Gallop Poll conducted Feb. 23,2009---
Support for Passing a Healthcare Bill Similar to the One Proposed by President Obama and the Democrats in the House and Senate
Democrats: favor/oppose %- 49/19
Independents: 34/25
Republicans: 9/36
Totals:
Strongly Favor- 11%
Favor- 32%
Oppose- 26%
Strongly Oppose- 23%.
If you add it all up, the totals are: those in favor equal 43% while those that oppose equal 49%. It just looks like a few of the facts were left out of Allen's post by accident. :)
Frank;"Allen, you cite polls from June, July and Sept of '09 from CBS, Bloomberg, NYTimes - all left-leaning media outlets. To be fair, I'll cite this POLL from Rasmussen Reports dated Feb. 23, 2010;".
That Poll is clear in what it states; "A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 41% of voters favor the proposed health care plan, while 56% oppose it".
The "proposed health care plan", not "government run health care plans." What has happened is that people are becoming frustrated with government apparent ineptness and bickering on how to solve the problem.
Greg stated "Most Americans according to these polls, TODAY, disapprove of the Reform and the way its going" (he did add something about "if passed", but I'm going on the initial statement)
My response was, and still is, most Americans probably do disapprove of how congress is handling the health care issue, that's more than likely true.
However, that's not what I'm stating.
I've said this over and over again;
"MOST" Americans would like for the Federal Government to provide (or make available) a system that would insure quality health care for themselves and their families.
President Obama "campaigned" with universal health care as a major part of his platform. A "MAJORITY" of the American people voted him into office. That in itself should be proof enough that the "MAJORITY" of Americans want the government, at the very least, to "offer" some form of health care to the entire citizenry.
It is not true that the "MAJORITY" of Americans don't want the government to offer health care. Just try to use common sense. The government already provides health care for people over 65. If a "MAJORITY" of Americans were against government run health care, Medicare would not exist. The bottom line is that it's a "FACT" that a "MAJORITY" of Americans want the U.S. Government to provide some form of health care for the people.
Teah lee;"My, God, man. Do you really believe this?
I can not assume to know, as you obviously do, what most Americans think or believe. All I know is that my friends, family and business associates are tired of our Constitution being trampled on".
Let me make this perfectly clear. I said;
"Yes there are some who are truly concerned about "Big Government" and over spending. Yes there are some who believe "Government Run Health Care" is not the way to solve the problems.
and;
Combined, those listed above greatly out number those who have more serious concerns about government health care.
And yes, I truly believe that there are some in the opposition (particularly the "Tea Party" opposition) who are indeed serious in their concerns. There are some (although few) who truly want a government that spends less and taxes less. There are some who are angry over government ineptness, biases, size, bureaucracy and corruption. I AGREE, AND WILL STAND WITH ALL THOSE WHO HAVE SUCH GRIEVANCES!!!
However, when you "COMBINE" the Birthers, Militia Freedom Frighteners, Red Scarers, Election Sore Losers, and Racists, the overall serious message, and numbers become skewed.
I cannot, and will not stand along side of an individual, or with a group carrying signs stating "The President is a Illegal Alien Muslim Socialist Marxist Fascist Racist." Protest's where people openly display firearms or signs that state "We Came Unarmed...This Time."
This picture has appeared at more than one Tea Party rally.
I remember the Civil rights protest of the 1960's. To the best of my knowledge I never saw one sign depicting the president as a devil, witch, joker, or the like. As a matter of fact, I don't think you could find "ONE" sign, out of the thousands displayed during the time, that promoted anything except Civil Rights!
Prior to, and at the outset of the Iraq war, I participated in several protest forums. If at any time were the message to stray from the improper use of the U.S. military, and the central idea of a needless war, I would have walked away.
Remember the "Jena 6" march? I say video footage and plenty of photos from the event. Did anyone see a sign or poster depicting Bush, the Governor of Louisiana, the Mayor of Jena, or the prosecutor depicted in effigy? Were there any signs or posters promoting violence? Did anyone notice if any of the protesters were armed?
I was at the Million Man March. I saw nothing that promoted violence, hatred, civil disobedience or proposed unrest.
When I heard the very first buzz about the Tea Parties, I have to admit, that the idea sparked my interests. However, when I sat groups like The Council of Conservatives Citizens and American Renaissance promoting events I had second thoughts....
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, Allen but the majority of Americans already have health care plans. There are about 15 million without give or take. The majority that have plans are satisfied with those plans. Congress' ineptness has nothing to do with the opposition to the democrats health care proposals. Reagan said it best HERE.
Allen said: I cannot, and will not stand along side of an individual, or with a group carrying signs stating "The President is a Illegal Alien Muslim Socialist Marxist Fascist Racist." Protest's where people openly display firearms or signs that state "We Came Unarmed...This Time."
I have attend almost every march on D.C. and have never observed signs that you describe. There are signs calling Obama a Marxist, or a Socialist, etc. People are entitled to their opinions; Freedom of Speech. I have seen pictures of George Bush depicted as Hitler or Satan at anti-war rallies during the Iraq war.
CB, your "McCain quote" was chart-topping platinum. Obama would have cried like a bitch.
To conclude, I ask all of you this question.
Should the government provide health care for those who cannot afford it?
If your answer is "yes", in essence you are "for" government provided health care!
If your answer is "no", briefly explain why.
Frank;"If you add it all up, the totals are: those in favor equal 43% while those that oppose equal 49%. It just looks like a few of the facts were left out of Allen's post by accident. :)".
You're right Frank...you caught me- :(
However, I stand by the claim that it is the overall political process that has Americans upset over the health care issue. Yet that doesn't negate the fact that "MOST" Americans want's the government to provide some form of health care for those who cannot afford it. Health Care for all is still what "MOST" Americans want.
Allen said:To conclude, I ask all of you this question.
Should the government provide health care for those who cannot afford it?
If your answer is "yes", in essence you are "for" government provided health care!
If your answer is "no", briefly explain why.
My answer is No. Why? There is already a program in place to cover people without adequate coverage or the income to obtain such. That program is Medicaid. If the democrats wanted to really solve the problem of millions of uninsured, they could simply propose some changes to the eligibility qualifications. However, the democrats want a new system in place for about 15 to 18% of the entire U.S. population. My question is: Why would they want a new system when there is already one in place?
Frank;"I have attend almost every march on D.C. and have never observed signs that you describe".
Really? You might not have saw them, but I guarantee you some were there. Let me show you what you missed...
THIS.
THIS.
THIS.
THIS.
THIS.
THIS.
THIS.
THIS.
Texans and their governor have suggested that the state SECEDE from the union.
The most frightening sign I've seen to date is THIS.
The above photo's were taken at several different Tea Party rally's. I need not post a link to the presidents state visits where certain individuals saw fit to bring and openly display their guns...do I?
p allen "Should the government provide health care for those who cannot afford it?
If your answer is "yes", in essence you are "for" government provided health care!
If your answer is "no", briefly explain why."
The governments ultimate goal is the phase out private sector insurance companies and have just the government in charge of health care allen. If heard Obama
"Everyone in and no one out"
So using your previous statement it would appear that the government believes that "NOBODY" can afford healthcare and everyone should be
covered by them. The population of our country is 300 million. Your liberal pals change their numbers on the amount of people they claim are uninsured allen. Some days they claim 30 million and other days they claim 40 million. For some reason they don't subtract the number of illegal aliens in this country which is estimated at 20 million. So with that number taken out,that leaves about 10 to 20 million unisured. So that is roughly 5 to 7 % of Americans who don't have health insurance. That also means that 93 to 95% of Americans have health insurance allen. So now the question is should fundamentally change our health care system for the 5 to 7% of people who don't have health insurance?
p allen "I cannot, and will not stand along side of an individual, or with a group carrying signs stating "The President is a Illegal Alien Muslim Socialist Marxist Fascist Racist." Protest's where people openly display firearms or signs that state "We Came Unarmed...This Time."
Funny you should mention this allen. There were plenty of rallies when Bush was president that depicted him as a
monkey
crack head
satan
hitler
a dictator
a chimp
a dounce etc
You aren't suffering from short term memory loss are you allen?
Farnk;"My answer is No. Why? There is already a program in place to cover people without adequate coverage or the income to obtain such. That program is Medicaid".
Frank, I took a moment to analyze your answer. I read it and contextualized it in several ways in hopes that it would make sense in one form or another. The fact is, your answer make absolutely no sense!
I asked, should the government provide health care for people who cant afford it. You said "NO" because the government already provides health care for people who can't afford it...Duhhhh???
Soooo, the government shouldn't do something they already do, because they already do it???
Should I pay Frank if he works for me? "NO", because I pay everyone else who works for me. That's nonsense!
Either you are for government health care, or you aren't...which is it???
CB;"So now the question is should fundamentally change our health care system for the 5 to 7% of people who don't have health insurance?".
That's not an answer! At least Frank made an attempt (a very poor one), but still the effort was apparent.
Try this one;
Should the government "offer" health care for those who can't afford it? No? Why not?
CB;"Funny you should mention this allen. There were plenty of rallies when Bush was president that depicted him as a, etc...".
Okay, since "YOU'RE" bringing up Bush....
Where are the depictions of Bush for the initial TARP bailouts? Where were the "Tea Party's" Bush's Feb. 2008 $170 billion Stimulus Package which was basically a "cash giveaway"???
Where were the Tea Party's for the Bush Medicare Drug Bill, which some estimate to cost more than $1 trillion "tax payer" dollars?
Were they "for" the government spending, before they were "against" it?
Where are the "Tea Party" depictions of Bush as a "Illegal Alien Muslim Socialist Marxist Fascist Racist" which I saw of President Obama less that 90 days after he took office?
The "Tea Party" began brewing on November 5, 2008. It began to take it's shape in March 2009, as I said, within a few weeks after the inauguration. And , by April 2009, the Tea Party revolt was in full swing!
The opposition to Barack Obama's presidency was kicked off by the "I hope he fails" shout out from the moment he took office. The fears of the right were manifested long before any policy or proposed policy could even make it's way to congress.
p allen "That's not an answer! At least Frank made an attempt (a very poor one), but still the effort was apparent. "
Oh it definitely is an answer. You simply can't handle it. My question is the answer. It isn't worth the government taking over the health care system just to cover 5 to 7% percent of those who don't have insure. Can I make it any simpler for you allen? Does that system need correcting? Yes it does, but the government has proven time and time again that everything it touches ultimately ends in ruins.
p allen "Should the government "offer" health care for those who can't afford it? No? Why not?"
No it shouldn't for a very simple reason allen. The government will never stop at "just those who don't have insurance". Look at the hissy fit liberals threw when Bush dared propose that people take control of their retirement as a way of reforming Social Security. It was like Bush was saying something that was sac religious and taboo. When the government is involved in "competition" with the private sector, they can control the playing field, because they are the government. I'm all for making insurance more affordable for people, I don't know who's against something like that.
p allen "Where are the depictions of Bush for the initial TARP bailouts? Where were the "Tea Party's" Bush's Feb. 2008 $170 billion Stimulus Package which was basically a "cash giveaway"??? "
Allen, seriously thank you for continuously making me look good.:-)
Bush didn't create Tarp. It was Henry Paulson who created Tarp and then after it was passed changed it to a bailout slush fund. Remember what TARP stands for allen. Troubled Asset Recovery Program. Tarp was intended to buy up the toxic mortgages from the banks and place them in what was suppose to have been a "bad bank". This would have freed up the balance sheets of the banks. The toxic mortgages were then suppose to have been written down and sold off. Oh Henry Paulson is a liberal Democrat who onced worked for Goldman Sach which is run by and is full of liberal Democrats. Also allen, there was no Tea Party around when Tarp was passed. If you recall, many conservatives were pissed at McCain for voting for Tarp. Many conservatives didn't want the government involved in bailing out the banks and wallstreet in the first place. Did that help you out there allen?
p allen "Where are the "Tea Party" depictions of Bush as a "Illegal Alien Muslim Socialist Marxist Fascist Racist" which I saw of President Obama less that 90 days after he took office?"
It has only been five years and you have forgotten that quickly allen. Why do you think Republicans lost control of congress in 2006 allen!! Think bro think! Bush along with McCain, Graham, Hagel and other RINO Republicans tried to ran throough their amnesty immigration bill. It was conservatives "who basically make up today's tea party" who were calling their representatives demanding they vote against that bill. It was then that Bush's approval numbers took a nose dive, because Bush's conservative base then turned on him.
p allen "The "Tea Party" began brewing on November 5, 2008. It began to take it's shape in March 2009, as I said, within a few weeks after the inauguration. And , by April 2009, the Tea Party revolt was in full swing!"
The conception of the tea party movement started when Rick Santelli of CNBC made his infamous comments while broadcasting at the Chicago Board of Trade. That is how it got started. I even posted the video allen, so don't try the revisionist history.
p allen "The opposition to Barack Obama's presidency was kicked off by the "I hope he fails" shout out from the moment he took office. The fears of the right were manifested long before any policy or proposed policy could even make it's way to congress."
It looks like Rush was right, because most of America hopes he fails too, meaning they don't support his policies at all. In a center-right country, it is only natural that people now want him to fail once they are now seeing what the true agenda of Barack Obama is all about.
One thing I have learned over the years is that preception is not reality....think about that for a moment.
The Reform was designed to implement a more intrusive health insurance option in which the government has total control of.
This, they say is to cover those that cannot afford adequate health insurance, but it goes deeper if you read the bill. Ultimatley, with the government not having to use competitive pricing for premiums, would force most employers to option to the government plan, private sector entities would do this to spare them the increased taxes and penelties the new bill will force on them if its not equal in mandates.
In essence the government would take over healthcare coverage within 5 years, making ALL Americans to rely on government HI.
Medicare and Medicaid are two government ran HI's that are a failure, both to the taxpayer and the patient. Even Tricare Military is a poor plan. The government mandates these plans and most of the time lacks coverage of much needed medical proceedures. I see this daily in the elderly and patients with disabilities. So how is a greater platform that contains a universal coverage going to be any better? With 300+ million to cover? Medicare and Medicaid are consistantly broke, and to fund these programs, we, even P.Allen gets our tails taxed for it. Yes, even some poor folk like me gets taxed (lighten up folks).
Do we need some reform to make HI more affordable? Yes, but not a takeover by a bunch of politicians. Like I said, you do two simple things, and it would save the HC in ths country billions. The result would be lower medical costs for all. Tort Reform on medical malpractice, and self pays on millions of illegals.
Paying for healthcare for illegals is the same as paying your hard earned money, in taxes, and sending it overseas for someones HC.
Allen, the tea parties are made up of people on both political isles. The HC reform is not the pinnacle issue for them, its one of many though, and its not because Obama is of black and white decendants.
Greg;"Paying for healthcare for illegals is the same as paying your hard earned money, in taxes, and sending it overseas for someones HC".
Ahhhh...Your tax dollars already pay for "someone else's" health care! Both Iraq and Afghanistan have Universal Health Care written into their constitutions (at the behest of the U.S. of course). See page 11, article 31.
As part of the war funding, your tax dollars do pay for someone else's health care.
P.Allen said-
Ahhhh...Your tax dollars already pay for "someone else's" health care! Both Iraq and Afghanistan have Universal Health Care written into their constitutions (at the behest of the U.S. of course). See page 11, article 31.
As part of the war funding, your tax dollars do pay for someone else's health care.
SO if this upsets you, as it does me, then I can conclude you would agree that paying for illegals is just as mindless.
Lets not try to twist this discussion by inducing the War. The reference you gave was just, in detailing a wasted addenum to the war bill (that should not be in there to begin with).
IN a government takeover of medical insurance, whom would dictate its mandates? As you have reminded us, with the Iraq funding bill that possibly mandates coverage for Iraqis, do you not see even more turbulent and un useful mandates attatched to this as well? Point is, they make the bill, they can direct any one of the thousands of mandates in it, at any time they feel is ok? Do not delude yourself in thinking that they wont, or that it will not affect you in some way that may be profound.
TO force one into giving up all of ones personal identity, and individualism, is the same as forcing one into slavery. You no longer belong to yourself, but property of someone else.
The government wants everyone to rely on them for everything. In turn, they retain power over the people, and not FOR the people.
We can reform anything, in a sensable and financial form that can apply to those that need it, we do not need everyones HI fixed, or mandated, especially in a forceful manner as the GOV is proceeding to do.
Greg;"SO if this upsets you, as it does me, then I can conclude you would agree that paying for illegals is just as mindless".
Being "upset" about it is useless. Recognizing the mindlessness is simply relevant. Simply put, we both see how crazy things are, but the only thing we both can do is bitch about it!
Greg;"Lets not try to twist this discussion by inducing the War. The reference you gave was just, in detailing a wasted addenum to the war bill (that should not be in there to begin with)".
My reference was not to induce the "war" as a point of reference, rather than more so to point out the "FACT" that your tax dollars are being spent to support the health and care of Iraqi's and Afghan's.
Greg;"IN a government takeover of medical insurance, whom would dictate its mandates?".
Ohhhhh...! I see where you going with this.
So, it's best that we as a country advise, or even force other governments to supply universal heath care...even if we (tax payers) have to PAY FOR IT, and still don't have it ourselves!
Let me get this right...you're saying;
Universal health care is merely a "slippery slope" to "force one into giving up all of ones personal identity, and individualism, is the same as forcing one into slavery", and, it can only lead to, "even more turbulent and un useful mandates attatched to this as well".
So if what you're saying is true, Afghanistan and Iraq are being set-up by an American outlined, and pre-planned program to place the people of both countries under a dictatorship, with the puppet strings pulled by the U.S. Thus, the policies initiated by the Bush Administration (aka; Iraqi Freedom) was either a "roost" or a "lie."
Allen said-My reference was not to induce the "war" as a point of reference, rather than more so to point out the "FACT" that your tax dollars are being spent to support the health and care of Iraqi's and Afghan's.
Please give some factual details to support this! Lets try to not use Huffington Post opinions when doing so.
Allen, Just because the Iraqi Constitution states that every Iraqi has the right to healthcare (NOT FREE), does not mean that they have universal coverage provided by the American taxpayer.
Allen said-So, it's best that we as a country advise, or even force other governments to supply universal heath care...even if we (tax payers) have to PAY FOR IT, and still don't have it ourselves!
Again, there is not a single bit of truth, only perception in regards to this statement. Allen, we do have government plans, that WE pay for in AMERICA, and WE do not benifit from, Medicare to name one. By the time you and I need this benefit, it will be so bankrupt (it already is), Medicare will be more like a discount card rather than coverage. The Government cannot run anything without it failing.
Allen then lost his mind and said-So if what you're saying is true, Afghanistan and Iraq are being set-up by an American outlined, and pre-planned program to place the people of both countries under a dictatorship, with the puppet strings pulled by the U.S. Thus, the policies initiated by the Bush Administration (aka; Iraqi Freedom) was either a "roost" or a "lie."
You went Daily KOS on me, whats up with this? Stick to the subject at hand. We had a good volley going and you went into some deep space nine stuff.
Nothing personal, ok?
Let's just agree that we disagree.
Greg;"Please give some factual details to support this! Lets try to not use Huffington Post opinions when doing so".
Greg, with all due respect, please open your mind to "all" opinions available to you. There will be times that opinions contrary to your own will hold valid and truth.
Greg's reply in response to my advising him that U.S. Tax dollars pay for Iraqi health care;"Again, there is not a single bit of truth, only perception in regards to this statement".
Greg, all I can do is show the evidence. You will have to put it together for yourself. But mind you, that in order to see the "TRUTH" you must keep an open mind. You can't attempt to negate the "FACTS" based on you personal biases. Read what this AMERICAN TAXPAYER FUNDED ORGANIZATION is doing in Iraq and Afghanistan.
USAID ASSISTANCE FOR IRAQ. If you believe you can trust Wikipedia to breakdown the cost of USAID, you might want to look HERE.
I took note of two specific (as USAID worded it) "Key Accomplishments."
One was the renovation of "110" Iraqi medical facilities, and the equipped 600 centers with clinical and lab equipment. I paused for a moment and thought back to the 2007 closing of Riverview Hospital here in Detroit.
Next was the "Key Accomplishment" of immunizing 97% of Iraqi children against MMR and Polio. Last August U.S. News and World Report cited this as they're headline;
"U.S. Childhood Vaccine Rates Good But Could Be Better: CDC
Compliance still high and stable, but more coverage needed among poor, report finds".
Like it or not...believe it or not, those are the "FACTS".
Post a Comment
<< Home