Oddball
Unobtanium Member
"Parts" is not a complete bill.
Thanks for your concession that there is in fact no bill.
Thanks for your concession that there is in fact no bill.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The Republicans eschewed a halfway compromise and put all their chips on an all or nothing campaign to defeat health care and Obama's presidency. It was an audacious gamble. They lost. In the end, they'll walk away with nothing. The Republicans may gain some more seats in 2010 by their total obstruction, but the substantive policy defeat they've been dealt will last for decades.
More GOP bite off your nose to spite your face. The tactics of the "Party of NO" are blowing up in their face. Once again, the GOP is on the wrong side of history
As everyone knows, I'm not a GOPer, but I've often wondered what is wrong with being labeled the "Party of NO." I want a politician to consistently vote 'No' to big government programs. It's the ones who vote 'Yes' that are the problem.
Quit lying out your ass. You're a dem Kool-Aid banger and Boyking ass spelunker, and we all know it.And while I hate framing legislation as a "win" for one side and a "loss" for the other - good legislation is a win-win, bad legislation is a lose-lose - it was the overconfident GOP (sound familiar) who presented this as Obama's waterloo. If it passes, much egg to be cleaned from many faces.
Why did the GOP vote NO??
1. Private Option? Gone
2. Coverage of Abortion? Never was in there
3. Death Panels? Sarah Palin Hysteria
4. Coverage of Illegal American? Never was in there
5. Costs too much? CBO says it saves money
So GOP...why did you vote to deny Americans healthcare reform?
A big government program that saves money? Just how much Kool Aid do you have to drink to believe that?
And while I hate framing legislation as a "win" for one side and a "loss" for the other - good legislation is a win-win, bad legislation is a lose-lose - it was the overconfident GOP (sound familiar) who presented this as Obama's waterloo. If it passes, much egg to be cleaned from many faces.
Why did the GOP vote NO??
1. Private Option? Gone
2. Coverage of Abortion? Never was in there
3. Death Panels? Sarah Palin Hysteria
4. Coverage of Illegal American? Never was in there
5. Costs too much? CBO says it saves money
So GOP...why did you vote to deny Americans healthcare reform?
A big government program that saves money? Just how much Kool Aid do you have to drink to believe that?
Must.....shoot.....up....more....Kool-Aid!And while I hate framing legislation as a "win" for one side and a "loss" for the other - good legislation is a win-win, bad legislation is a lose-lose - it was the overconfident GOP (sound familiar) who presented this as Obama's waterloo. If it passes, much egg to be cleaned from many faces.
The GOP had an opportunity to participate substantially in what may be the most important piece of legislation in the last 40 years.
Instead, they used the opportunity to make this "Obama's Waterloo". A chance to turn this legislation into a political sword to use against Obama in 2012.
They have undoubtedly earned the loyalty of the teabaggers at the cost of once againg aligning themselves on the wrong side of history
What makes you think they did not try?
Only the ones that the democrats are successful with "bribing"(more like horse trading in my book) are reported--not the ones that they fail to tempt.
The Dems only need 60, so they purchase the cheapest votes, not the more audacious ones!!
is english your second language?
Come again?
"Parts" is not a complete bill.
Thanks for your concession that there is in fact no bill.
Then post a link to the complete bill, asshelmet.I guess that answers PART of my question - at least SOME GOPers are going to continue to play make-believe. Like make believe we don't know what's in the bill. Like make believe there is no funding mechanisms included ...
Ya know - I have some REAL concerns about the proposed funding mechanisms because I KNOW where at least some of it is coming from (me - I have a "cadillac" plan). So, if you want to show how little you actually know about the issue as you comment on the issue, keep it up. But don't blame me that you guys are bleeding membership to the sub-30% range.
I guess this is a matter of spin and bullshit."Parts" is not a complete bill.
Thanks for your concession that there is in fact no bill.
I guess this is more a question of syntax.
When you say the "final Bill", are you asking what is the final Health care package is?
Or are you making reference to each individual bill that makes up the final Health Care package?
If it is the fomer, no one knows what that is until after all the bills have been voted on.
If you are referring to the latter, then yes, each individual bill is pretty much decided, except in the cases where new bills are introduced and not considered. The new bills, unless they are a compromise and agreed upon before hand, are most likely to be voted down.
And while I hate framing legislation as a "win" for one side and a "loss" for the other - good legislation is a win-win, bad legislation is a lose-lose - it was the overconfident GOP (sound familiar) who presented this as Obama's waterloo. If it passes, much egg to be cleaned from many faces.
The GOP had an opportunity to participate substantially in what may be the most important piece of legislation in the last 40 years.
Instead, they used the opportunity to make this "Obama's Waterloo". A chance to turn this legislation into a political sword to use against Obama in 2012.
They have undoubtedly earned the loyalty of the teabaggers at the cost of once againg aligning themselves on the wrong side of history
i'm not even breathing heavily