Congress = FAIL

emilynghiem

Constitutionalist / Universalist
Jan 21, 2010
23,669
4,177
290
National Freedmen's Town District
Maaaaaan. Is there even a need to start a whole other thread on this where there are really no words needed besides THAT! ^^^

What do you think we the people should do when
1. half of us want "governmentalized" health care to be managed publicly/nationally
through govt and Congress, and want to push for the best ways to "micromanage" that
with the least nonsense and the maximum benefits
2. half the nation wants govt out of health care and health care out of govt

Why can't we write a bill that SAYS this and allows both?
Without conflict? Just take a side, stick to it, fund it and develop it.
AND LEAVE THE OTHER TRACK ALONE, to the other members to fund and develop.

What do YOU think of the idea of protesting by sending a bunch of
PINK SLIPS to our Congress reps, like MEMOs telling them THEY'RE FIRED

Their jobs are to write a bill that recognizes EQUAL beliefs in
free market choices OR in govt subsidized health care,
and find a way to SEPARATE those choices where
taxpayers aren't forced under the other policy they don't believe in.


EITHER DO YOUR JOB OR RESIGN!!!
And leave space for Trump to cosign on these pink slip memos...

ENOUGH! Where is Rosa Parks when you need
someone so sick and tired of this nonsense, they REFUSE
to go along with the garbage. And start a national uprising....
 
The GOP completely botched this whole process. Obamacare passed on on March 21, 2010, a whole year and two months after Obama took office. So what was the rush by the GOP? Why did they try and force a vote in 2 months? But with the said, Democrats passes a bad bill that no one read and they paid a price for it in 2010 and 2014. So the good news for the GOP is this is still salvageable. But they need to get together and get this done by 2018.
 
Maaaaaan. Is there even a need to start a whole other thread on this where there are really no words needed besides THAT! ^^^

What do you think we the people should do when
1. half of us want "governmentalized" health care to be managed publicly/nationally
through govt and Congress, and want to push for the best ways to "micromanage" that
with the least nonsense and the maximum benefits
2. half the nation wants govt out of health care and health care out of govt

Why can't we write a bill that SAYS this and allows both?
Without conflict? Just take a side, stick to it, fund it and develop it.
AND LEAVE THE OTHER TRACK ALONE, to the other members to fund and develop.

What do YOU think of the idea of protesting by sending a bunch of
PINK SLIPS to our Congress reps, like MEMOs telling them THEY'RE FIRED

Their jobs are to write a bill that recognizes EQUAL beliefs in
free market choices OR in govt subsidized health care,
and find a way to SEPARATE those choices where
taxpayers aren't forced under the other policy they don't believe in.


EITHER DO YOUR JOB OR RESIGN!!!
And leave space for Trump to cosign on these pink slip memos...

ENOUGH! Where is Rosa Parks when you need
someone so sick and tired of this nonsense, they REFUSE
to go along with the garbage. And start a national uprising....

You would have to send those pink slips certified mail so that they would have to sign for it when they got them... which would make the post office a shit ton of money. :lol:

Of course you better not try to hand deliver them...Paul Ryan will just have you thrown out like he did with the other people with boxes of signatures on petitions.
 
mass-layoffs-hit-jpmorgans-cincinnati-office-as-118-employees-could-lose-their-jobs.jpg
 
emilynghiem here is a syllogism to help you with all that --

1 - everyone deserves healthcare whether rich, middle class, or poor.

2 - ACA takes very good care of the poor people.

3 - employment takes very good care of the middle class.

4 - the rich were born with silver spoons in their mouths and everything is taken care of for them.

5 - it is easier to give than to take away.

6 - ergo ACA, Medicare, and OASDI are here to say.

Q.E.D.
 
Maaaaaan. Is there even a need to start a whole other thread on this where there are really no words needed besides THAT! ^^^

What do you think we the people should do when
1. half of us want "governmentalized" health care to be managed publicly/nationally
through govt and Congress, and want to push for the best ways to "micromanage" that
with the least nonsense and the maximum benefits
2. half the nation wants govt out of health care and health care out of govt

Why can't we write a bill that SAYS this and allows both?
Without conflict? Just take a side, stick to it, fund it and develop it.
AND LEAVE THE OTHER TRACK ALONE, to the other members to fund and develop.

What do YOU think of the idea of protesting by sending a bunch of
PINK SLIPS to our Congress reps, like MEMOs telling them THEY'RE FIRED

Their jobs are to write a bill that recognizes EQUAL beliefs in
free market choices OR in govt subsidized health care,
and find a way to SEPARATE those choices where
taxpayers aren't forced under the other policy they don't believe in.


EITHER DO YOUR JOB OR RESIGN!!!
And leave space for Trump to cosign on these pink slip memos...

ENOUGH! Where is Rosa Parks when you need
someone so sick and tired of this nonsense, they REFUSE
to go along with the garbage. And start a national uprising....

You would have to send those pink slips certified mail so that they would have to sign for it when they got them... which would make the post office a shit ton of money. :lol:

Of course you better not try to hand deliver them...Paul Ryan will just have you thrown out like he did with the other people with boxes of signatures on petitions.
Lewdog I just had a BIG idea.

To make HUGE poster sized pink memos for Pelosi, for Roberts, for Rand and Cruz. And ask people to come down to a press release and sign them. and leave the YUUUGEST space for Trump.

Put up these mega sized MEMO's. Get some mic's and some radio coverage. And let people say EITHER CREATE THE PLAN YOU PROMISED US OR RESIGN. And include BOTH sides screaming at their respective reps. DO YOUR JOB OR GET OUT OF THE WAY!!!
 
emilynghiem here is a syllogism to help you with all that --

1 - everyone deserves healthcare whether rich, middle class, or poor.

2 - ACA takes very good care of the poor people.

3 - employment takes very good care of the middle class.

4 - the rich were born with silver spoons in their mouths and everything is taken care of for them.

5 - it is easier to give than to take away.

6 - ergo ACA, Medicare, and OASDI are here to say.

Q.E.D.

That's fine but just leave that to the people who WANT it. yiostheoy

Catholicism and Christianity aren't going to be abolished any time soon.
but that doesn't mean to force those on everyone THROUGH GOVT
to fund and follow. Get it?

In Christianity people can choose to be under the Protestant
or Catholic wings and do things that way.

Why don't we recognize parties as political religions and declare them optional instead of forcing those beliefs on people who don't consent.
 
emilynghiem here is a syllogism to help you with all that --

1 - everyone deserves healthcare whether rich, middle class, or poor.

2 - ACA takes very good care of the poor people.

3 - employment takes very good care of the middle class.

4 - the rich were born with silver spoons in their mouths and everything is taken care of for them.

5 - it is easier to give than to take away.

6 - ergo ACA, Medicare, and OASDI are here to say.

Q.E.D.

That's fine but just leave that to the people who WANT it. yiostheoy

Catholicism and Christianity aren't going to be abolished any time soon.
but that doesn't mean to force those on everyone THROUGH GOVT
to fund and follow. Get it?

In Christianity people can choose to be under the Protestant
or Catholic wings and do things that way.

Why don't we recognize parties as political religions and declare them optional instead of forcing those beliefs on people who don't consent.

Well one of the big things is, some of the people in Congress don't think that men should have to pay for women's related health issues as part of their health coverage... just the same as a woman shouldn't have to pay for prostate men's type of coverage in their's. They are saying things should be more A'la Carte when it comes to health plans.
 
emilynghiem here is a syllogism to help you with all that --

1 - everyone deserves healthcare whether rich, middle class, or poor.

2 - ACA takes very good care of the poor people.

3 - employment takes very good care of the middle class.

4 - the rich were born with silver spoons in their mouths and everything is taken care of for them.

5 - it is easier to give than to take away.

6 - ergo ACA, Medicare, and OASDI are here to say.

Q.E.D.

That's fine but just leave that to the people who WANT it. yiostheoy

Catholicism and Christianity aren't going to be abolished any time soon.
but that doesn't mean to force those on everyone THROUGH GOVT
to fund and follow. Get it?

In Christianity people can choose to be under the Protestant
or Catholic wings and do things that way.

Why don't we recognize parties as political religions and declare them optional instead of forcing those beliefs on people who don't consent.
emilynghiem here is another syllogism to help you with that also --

1 - insurance companies are focused on making a profit.

2 - insurance companies have abused their clients for decades making more profits.

3 - insurance companies are a poor choice for running health care.

4 - what we had before was overly dependent on insurance companies.

5 - ACA is better than insurance companies running wild.

6 - Ergo, we need ACA.
 
emilynghiem here is a syllogism to help you with all that --

1 - everyone deserves healthcare whether rich, middle class, or poor.

2 - ACA takes very good care of the poor people.

3 - employment takes very good care of the middle class.

4 - the rich were born with silver spoons in their mouths and everything is taken care of for them.

5 - it is easier to give than to take away.

6 - ergo ACA, Medicare, and OASDI are here to say.

Q.E.D.

yiostheoy we all deserve good food and good health
but we are expected to work to earn the services and goods
produced by other people unless we provide these ourselves.

yiostheoy didn't slavery come up when we discussed this before?
well, if health care REQUIRES resources and labor
do you have the right to FORCE people to serve you for free
without you meeting conditions they ask?

When people serve out of charity, that's the agreement, it's free.

But with govt, this isn't free but taxpayers with ALL DIFFERENT VIEWS AND BELIEFS pitching in money.
So if we don't agree to the TERMS of the charity,
shouldn't we organize into programs where we DO agree to
fund and provide services under AGREED terms and conditions?

Why not organize in LIKEMINDED groups and collective unions and coops so people DO AGREE how to fund and provide these services?

That way yiostheoy people who believe CHARITIES do a more effective job would develop and invest in building THOSE hospital and teaching programs.

Govt is not the only choice.
And to some people it should only be for SPECIFIC functions and choices.

Who are you and I to dictate otherwise where people believe differently?
 
emilynghiem here is a syllogism to help you with all that --

1 - everyone deserves healthcare whether rich, middle class, or poor.

2 - ACA takes very good care of the poor people.

3 - employment takes very good care of the middle class.

4 - the rich were born with silver spoons in their mouths and everything is taken care of for them.

5 - it is easier to give than to take away.

6 - ergo ACA, Medicare, and OASDI are here to say.

Q.E.D.

yiostheoy we all deserve good food and good health
but we are expected to work to earn the services and goods
produced by other people unless we provide these ourselves.

yiostheoy didn't slavery come up when we discussed this before?
well, if health care REQUIRES resources and labor
do you have the right to FORCE people to serve you for free
without you meeting conditions they ask?

When people serve out of charity, that's the agreement, it's free.

But with govt, this isn't free but taxpayers with ALL DIFFERENT VIEWS AND BELIEFS pitching in money.
So if we don't agree to the TERMS of the charity,
shouldn't we organize into programs where we DO agree to
fund and provide services under AGREED terms and conditions?

Why not organize in LIKEMINDED groups and collective unions and coops so people DO AGREE how to fund and provide these services?

That way yiostheoy people who believe CHARITIES do a more effective job would develop and invest in building THOSE hospital and teaching programs.

Govt is not the only choice.
And to some people it should only be for SPECIFIC functions and choices.

Who are you and I to dictate otherwise where people believe differently?
Who am I ??

A nonpartisan unaffiliated voter who agrees with the DEM's on ACA but who also agrees with the GOP on 2A.

Majority rule decides.

Obama's legacy is safe. Even though lying Donald was elected POTUS.
 
What do you think we the people should do when
1. half of us want "governmentalized" health care to be managed publicly/nationally
through govt and Congress, and want to push for the best ways to "micromanage" that
with the least nonsense and the maximum benefits
2. half the nation wants govt out of health care and health care out of govt

I think maybe you overly "polarized" that summary. What people want is easy access and reasonable cost for medical services. The govt has a role in that. The focus should have always been on the 10% that were not insured. Not ripping up the other 90%.. I was a victim of ACA because it outlawed the large groups offered to the self-employed. I had insurance thru my professional org for 20 years of being self-employed and I was thrown "into the exchanges and my life hasn't been the same since.

The FAILURE is on the part of the folks who want the govt to "do it all". They have a totally irrational concept of the competence, brilliance, and execution of the Federal Govt. They stole SSec money out of the pockets of the working poor for decades, squandered the "excess" and left nothing of value in the "trust fund". They IGNORED the warning signs on ObamaCare and refused to manage and redirect it. Never even IMPLEMENTED all the provisions of the ACA. Congress no longer writes law. They write fill in the blank legislation that gets written at a myriad of agencies on their CLOCK time and without much oversight.

If ANYTHING -- programs like MediCaid should devolve more AUTHORITY to the states. Who hold the ultimate responsibility for the program. And ALLOW 50 different experiments to find better solutions.

It's the EXPECTATIONS that fail --- every time you devolve problem solving and solutions from 100 Million people to just the bureaucracy and the political animals.
 
Fix it before 2018 or suffer the consequences, that is meant for both parties. No excuses
 
Majority rule decides.

^^^ NOT where religion is involved yiostheoy ^^^
ie if Hindus and Muslims pushed a bill through Congress
requiring citizens to give alms to the poor, or
to respect all citizens as "spiritual beings" which is what Hindu means essentially,
then if such a policy were favored by "majority rule" it would still be unconstitutional
because govt is not authorized to legislate on something like that.

BELIEF that "health care is a right" is a political BELIEF
even stated as such in the Democratic party platform.
thus making that whole concept like a political religion, same as what happened with LGBT BELIEFS and creeds, expressions and practices that are FAITHBASED
subjective and not proven or believed universally by all people.

I am a constitutionalist yiostheoy
I believe govt cannot mandate force or regulate
policies like this that cross over into people's personal and private beliefs.

We the people can decide that for ourselves,
or go through states and authorize them on that level.

But the First Amendment bars Congress from either
prohibiting or establishing a religion or belief.

And this policy is faith based depending if
you BELIEVE health care is a right through govt
or you BELIEVE in free market choices of health care...
 
Last edited:
Majority rule decides.

^^^ NOT where religion is involved yiostheoy ^^^
BELIEF that "health care is a right" is a political BELIEF
even stated as such in the Democratic party platform.
thus making that a political religion, same as with LGBT BELIEFS
and creeds, expressions and practices that are FAITHBASED
subjective and not proven or believed universally by all people.

I am a constitutionalist yiostheoy
I believe govt cannot mandate force or regulate
policies like this that cross over into people's personal and private beliefs.

We the people can decide that for ourselves,
or go through states and authorize them on that level.

But the First Amendment bars Congress from either
prohibiting or establishing a religion or belief.

And this policy is faith based depending if
you BELIEVE health care is a right through govt
or you BELIEVE in free market choices of health care...
emilynghiem my dear friend, you are confusing Religion with Philosophy.

Ethics is a branch of Philosophy.

My own ethics allows me to compel with my vote with a clear conscience everyone to share in the medical costs of the rich, the middle class, and the poor.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top