Democrats Plan to Cut Out GOP in Final Health Care Negotiations

[Darkwind]

To be fair to you, I have no idea what experince's you have had in the real world but there are people who couldn't survive without Govt aide! Maybe you should go to the poorer parts of your town and tell those people that are out of a job "Unemployment it gone" and see what kind of response you get. I'm sure if you were in the position of not being able to buy private insurance and not being old enough for medicare, you wouldn't be so hasty with your steriotyping

I have had significant real world experience. That experience deals with tyrants as well.

Be sure you understand what is being discussed here. It is not the responsibility of the Federal government to provide for and ensure the survival of individual citizens.

Understand the Bill of Rights and further, understand that the governance of the people of this country occurs at the state level, not the federal level. If people need aid to survive, they need to look to their state governments, not the Feds.

perhaps this is how you feel things should be with state and federal government, the constitution and entitlements, however, your opinion does not represent realities in the US. not during your lifetime. maybe that's what the kid means about you getting out much.

It is not how I feel. It is how the Constitution is written. The Constitution is the controlling document for all of our lives.

Realities in the United States are such that we now find ourselves losing more and more freedoms through the thought processes of those who think entitlement programs at the Federal level are somehow the proper role of government.

The realities in the United States are such that our children are taught indoctrinated versions of the Constitution, where they believe that they have the right to vote themselves a safe life from the treasury.

The realities are that people of the United States have become so afraid and so self oriented that they are willing to enslave themselves just to abdicate their own responsibilities for their own lives.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

The Democrats have become and have now exceeded all the awful wrongs they accused the other Party of. This really is the most partisan,corrupt,and failed U.S. Congress i've ever seen. They simply gotta go.

 

[Darkwind]

Looking at the behavior of the opposition, it's pretty clear that the "kiddie table" is not in charge (thankfully).

The children clearly own the majority in both houses. Mature individuals do not act in such a manner and mature individuals understand the need to fully research an issue before crafting legislation that affects that issue.

They don't try to make back room deals in the dead of night and rush through unread laws that harm more people then it helps.

And do mature individuals hypocritically defend programs they earlier bashed (and vice-versa in at least one case) as a cynical ploy at scare-mongering?

Of course not. You'll note that I have not defended the GOP at all.

 

[Oddball]

Here is the Republican Instruction Manual on "Obstruction".

gregg

Still haven't done the head count, have you?

The repubs can do NOTHING to stop the democratics, if they ever decide that they want to get voted out office next time around.

Schmuck.

 

[antagon]

Not surprising. This is by far the most partisan and failed U.S. Congress in History. Lets hope this nation decides to make some big changes in 2010. It's time for Pelosi and Reid to go.

I actually have to agree with Libo on this one. I have never seen a Congress vote the party line on EVERY issue. Never seen such a disfunctional body. Libo will blame the Democrats, I blame both parties.
The Dems will lose their super majorities in 2010. They will still hold majorities but will have to be able to work with the Repubs to get anything done. Right now, it looks hopeless

to the contrary, i think that the spead of opinion from blue-dog to pelosi has obscured the party line from what it was 10 years ago. the evidence is in how much debate and revision is required for a super-majority to conjure a bill its components are happy with.

with blind partyline voting, pelosi's measure would be in effect by now. instead there's still tetering on the Option issue.

 

[rdean]

Here is the Republican Instruction Manual on "Obstruction".

gregg

Still haven't done the head count, have you?

The repubs can do NOTHING to stop the democratics, if they ever decide that they want to get voted out office next time around.

Schmuck.

Read the manual.

Republicans - dumb as a bag of rocks and more dangerous than al Qeada.

 

[Navy1960]

If they include the GOP in the process will the GOP vote for the resulting bill?

End of argument

Not in any stretch would that be considered the end of the argument. This is just more support of winnowing out half of the nation from input into a law that affects everyone.

You don't get to provide input on a bill you are voting NO on. What do you say? "If you include this, this and this.....I will vote against the bill"

Sort of defeats the purpose of actually having a representative form of Govt. then does it not? Of course those that do not favor any legislation regardless of party if it effects those they represent and it does should have a say so in how it is crafted. Come now, right, you know that regardless of party that keeping a party from being a part of crafting legislation be it republican or democrat is wrong. One of the things that is very striking about the founders of this nation when reading about them is over and over again the reasoning behind such a form of Govt. as we have, and that is that it is not about a majority dictating to the minority, but rather that the minority has a voice that is just as compelling as the majority.

"The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime; abuses its strength, and, by acting on the law of the strongest, breaks up the foundations of society." Thomas Jefferson

"A majority, held in restraint by constitutional checks, and limitations, and always changing easily, with deliberate changes of popular opinions and sentiments, is the only true sovereign of a free people." Abraham Lincoln

When someone seeks to omit others from the process simply because they feel the need to do so, then they are subverting the very fabric of the form of Govt. we have built and I would say the EXACT same thing for ANY party that seeks to omit the minority from having a voice in crafting legislation that will effect those they represent.

 

[Oddball]

Here is the Republican Instruction Manual on "Obstruction".

gregg

Still haven't done the head count, have you?

The repubs can do NOTHING to stop the democratics, if they ever decide that they want to get voted out office next time around.

Schmuck.

Read the manual.

Republicans - dumb as a bag of rocks and more dangerous than al Qeada.

What would be the point in reading a deflection?

You're making that bag of rocks look like a MENSA candidate.

 

[antagon]

I have had significant real world experience. That experience deals with tyrants as well.

Be sure you understand what is being discussed here. It is not the responsibility of the Federal government to provide for and ensure the survival of individual citizens.

Understand the Bill of Rights and further, understand that the governance of the people of this country occurs at the state level, not the federal level. If people need aid to survive, they need to look to their state governments, not the Feds.

perhaps this is how you feel things should be with state and federal government, the constitution and entitlements, however, your opinion does not represent realities in the US. not during your lifetime. maybe that's what the kid means about you getting out much.

It is not how I feel. It is how the Constitution is written. The Constitution is the controlling document for all of our lives.

Realities in the United States are such that we now find ourselves losing more and more freedoms through the thought processes of those who think entitlement programs at the Federal level are somehow the proper role of government.

The realities in the United States are such that our children are taught indoctrinated versions of the Constitution, where they believe that they have the right to vote themselves a safe life from the treasury.

The realities are that people of the United States have become so afraid and so self oriented that they are willing to enslave themselves just to abdicate their own responsibilities for their own lives.

actually, applying the constitution is quite subjective. the mechanism that it establishes relies on appointees to carry out oversight, opening a can of subjectivity on its practice. that your take is more confederate and less progressive than reality of the last century is certainly a matter of your opinion versus the official, constitutionally mandated opinions of the justices. i have some of these differences, but theyre certainly of opinion.

your latest realities, by the way, are more like it: the ol' wagner's law. im not one to knock it. standing out from that crowd is easier and more rewarding now than ever before in our history.

 

[rightwinger]

Not in any stretch would that be considered the end of the argument. This is just more support of winnowing out half of the nation from input into a law that affects everyone.

You don't get to provide input on a bill you are voting NO on. What do you say? "If you include this, this and this.....I will vote against the bill"

Sort of defeats the purpose of actually having a representative form of Govt. then does it not? Of course those that do not favor any legislation regardless of party if it effects those they represent and it does should have a say so in how it is crafted. Come now, right, you know that regardless of party that keeping a party from being a part of crafting legislation be it republican or democrat is wrong. One of the things that is very striking about the founders of this nation when reading about them is over and over again the reasoning behind such a form of Govt. as we have, and that is that it is not about a majority dictating to the minority, but rather that the minority has a voice that is just as compelling as the majority.

"The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime; abuses its strength, and, by acting on the law of the strongest, breaks up the foundations of society." Thomas Jefferson

"A majority, held in restraint by constitutional checks, and limitations, and always changing easily, with deliberate changes of popular opinions and sentiments, is the only true sovereign of a free people." Abraham Lincoln

When someone seeks to omit others from the process simply because they feel the need to do so, then they are subverting the very fabric of the form of Govt. we have built and I would say the EXACT same thing for ANY party that seeks to omit the minority from having a voice in crafting legislation that will effect those they represent.

Just voicing the realities of the situation Navy. The purpose of bipartisanship in a bill is the give and take process to refine legislation. The idea is, you give the other guy what he wants and he gives you what you want ...then you both vote for the bill.

It is ludicrous to solicit Republican input on the bill when they have already shown they will not vote for any healthcare bill.

 

[WillowTree]

Still haven't done the head count, have you?

The repubs can do NOTHING to stop the democratics, if they ever decide that they want to get voted out office next time around.

Schmuck.

Read the manual.

Republicans - dumb as a bag of rocks and more dangerous than al Qeada.

What would be the point in reading a deflection?

You're making that bag of rocks look like a MENSA candidate.

Priceless..

 

[Dr.House]

[
I don't project... I call it like it is...

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

And once again, folks, he keeps throwing stones while living in a glass house.

"The Democrats intend to lead the most honest, most open and most ethical congress in history." - Nancy "Stretch" Pelosi

In case you missed it, Krunchy....

 

[Navy1960]

You don't get to provide input on a bill you are voting NO on. What do you say? "If you include this, this and this.....I will vote against the bill"

Sort of defeats the purpose of actually having a representative form of Govt. then does it not? Of course those that do not favor any legislation regardless of party if it effects those they represent and it does should have a say so in how it is crafted. Come now, right, you know that regardless of party that keeping a party from being a part of crafting legislation be it republican or democrat is wrong. One of the things that is very striking about the founders of this nation when reading about them is over and over again the reasoning behind such a form of Govt. as we have, and that is that it is not about a majority dictating to the minority, but rather that the minority has a voice that is just as compelling as the majority.

"The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime; abuses its strength, and, by acting on the law of the strongest, breaks up the foundations of society." Thomas Jefferson

"A majority, held in restraint by constitutional checks, and limitations, and always changing easily, with deliberate changes of popular opinions and sentiments, is the only true sovereign of a free people." Abraham Lincoln

When someone seeks to omit others from the process simply because they feel the need to do so, then they are subverting the very fabric of the form of Govt. we have built and I would say the EXACT same thing for ANY party that seeks to omit the minority from having a voice in crafting legislation that will effect those they represent.

Just voicing the realities of the situation Navy. The purpose of bipartisanship in a bill is the give and take process to refine legislation. The idea is, you give the other guy what he wants and he gives you what you want ...then you both vote for the bill.

It is ludicrous to solicit Republican input on the bill when they have already shown they will not vote for any healthcare bill.

How do you know though unless given the chance to actually sit down and craft a bill that is more representative of what the nation wants rather than what half the nation wants? Give you an example, if they could craft a bill that would lower costs for everyone, not cost the taxpayers, increase quality for all , not mandate that Americans conform, increase access to affordable insurance, lower the costs of malpractice.. would you vote for something like that? Personally I think the art of compromise is only something that a party in power believes exists among it's own party. Even Medicare, and Social Security passed with wide bi-partisan votes because in the end both parties saw some good there for all Americans. This current bill only one side is saying that. In the end this bill is a bill that reflects the wishes of a minority that has the rule of the majority, in fact they are not even honoring the wishes of thier own partys platform in this bill . So again, I really do believe that if given the chance to craft a real bill, that many can get behind it would mark a real positive turning point for our nation.

 

[EriktheRed]

The children clearly own the majority in both houses. Mature individuals do not act in such a manner and mature individuals understand the need to fully research an issue before crafting legislation that affects that issue.

They don't try to make back room deals in the dead of night and rush through unread laws that harm more people then it helps.

And do mature individuals hypocritically defend programs they earlier bashed (and vice-versa in at least one case) as a cynical ploy at scare-mongering?

Of course not. You'll note that I have not defended the GOP at all.

Really? So what is it with saying "The children clearly own the majority in both houses" while not saying anything about the behavior of the minority?

 

[rdean]

Come on now, get it straight. It's not that Democrats Plan to Cut Out GOP in Final Health Care Negotiations.

It's

Republicans have Cut the American People out of good health care.

You know the Republicans supported the Public Option in the Iraqi Constitution (Article 31 and 32)? Funny they care more for Iraq then us.