Ina LANDSLIDE, House repeals Obamacare

[thereisnospoon]

For all the slavering neocons/oathers/birthers/teabaggers/Libertarians/Bluedog Democrats, etc.

The GOP "victory" in the House in Nov. 2010 was a result of LOW VOTER TURNOUT. Idiots that voted for Obama and were pissed that he didn't fight hard enough (in their opinion) for the policies and platforms they put him in for....decided that staying home was a good protest.

So now we've got a bunch of neocon GOPers who throw a bone to their teabag flunkies with this empty, time wasting gesture.

Reid's statement falls WELL within his rights for his position in the Senate....and the "people" WANT A HEALTH CARE REFORM. The GOP DOES NOT HAVE THE VOTES IN THE SENATE TO REPEAL THIS LAW! THE PRESIDENT CAN VETO THIS REPEAL BILL.....it's his right under the law, as it was Reagan's, as it was the Bush family's.

Bottom line: the GOP doesn't have squat with regards to jobs or healthcare accept to return to the very policies that caused our current problems. They seem to demonstrate a pattern that is indicative to the Party of NO and it's health insurance backers.....which is denying any FACT based evidence that contradicts YOUR conclusions and beliefs/assertions.

Case in point: it was the CBO that consistently caused the Obama administration to go back to the drawing board before a final proposal was deemed fiscally acceptable. The GOP and neocon punditry had NO problem with the CBO so long as they were complimentary to the anti-healthcare reform mantras. No suddenly, it's the old teabagger confusion about being against the gov't (while wanting gov't to enforce laws that favor corporations...go figure) because they tell you something you don't want to hear.

The fallacy that "all was well" before the healthcare reform bill passed is just that...fallacy. If you doubt that, just check out the Congressional testimonies of Dr. Peeno or Wendell Potter.

And if all the neocon/teabagger/oather/Libertarian/bither concern is about people getting something for nothing off of their tax dollars....then why don't they complain about the healthcare options that members of the House & Senate have?

Must be amateur night.
First. Both the insurance and pharmaceutical lobbies were instrumental in the writing of this bill.
The GOP offered several plans, all of which were rejected by democrats. The democrats essentially told the GOP to go to hell.
BTW, you can google it. The GOP proposal were marked up by the committee.
The dems rejected any notion of entertaining a GOP plan. You can google that too.
We've complained about the federal worker and elected official health care plans all along.
You're kidding yourself if you think Obamacare is going to remain intact. It isn't.
This is not going to fly. No way. Our side may not get rid if it before the next Congressional election....2012 there are 23 democrat Senate seats which are "vulnerable". all th GOP needs are 7 conservatives to be elected to those seats and it's bye bye Obamacare. Long before 2014 when this lunacy is supposed to kick in.
There is no debate on this. No need for you to reply. Don't waste your time denying the inevitable

 

[bigrebnc1775]

For all the slavering neocons/oathers/birthers/teabaggers/Libertarians/Bluedog Democrats, etc.

The GOP "victory" in the House in Nov. 2010 was a result of LOW VOTER TURNOUT. Idiots that voted for Obama and were pissed that he didn't fight hard enough (in their opinion) for the policies and platforms they put him in for....decided that staying home was a good protest.

So now we've got a bunch of neocon GOPers who throw a bone to their teabag flunkies with this empty, time wasting gesture.

Reid's statement falls WELL within his rights for his position in the Senate....and the "people" WANT A HEALTH CARE REFORM. The GOP DOES NOT HAVE THE VOTES IN THE SENATE TO REPEAL THIS LAW! THE PRESIDENT CAN VETO THIS REPEAL BILL.....it's his right under the law, as it was Reagan's, as it was the Bush family's.

Bottom line: the GOP doesn't have squat with regards to jobs or healthcare accept to return to the very policies that caused our current problems. They seem to demonstrate a pattern that is indicative to the Party of NO and it's health insurance backers.....which is denying any FACT based evidence that contradicts YOUR conclusions and beliefs/assertions.

Case in point: it was the CBO that consistently caused the Obama administration to go back to the drawing board before a final proposal was deemed fiscally acceptable. The GOP and neocon punditry had NO problem with the CBO so long as they were complimentary to the anti-healthcare reform mantras. No suddenly, it's the old teabagger confusion about being against the gov't (while wanting gov't to enforce laws that favor corporations...go figure) because they tell you something you don't want to hear.

The fallacy that "all was well" before the healthcare reform bill passed is just that...fallacy. If you doubt that, just check out the Congressional testimonies of Dr. Peeno or Wendell Potter.

And if all the neocon/teabagger/oather/Libertarian/bither concern is about people getting something for nothing off of their tax dollars....then why don't they complain about the healthcare options that members of the House & Senate have?

To any lefttard that thiks like this is full of shit. the democrats got their asses handed to them because of obama and his progressive agenda. If obama was running in 2010 we would have a ne President.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Neo has been posting wildly because he is stumbling. He lied in that I explicitly or even implicitly supported the following that he even won't tell us whether he believes in them or not.

Neo, you have to make a case with evidence, not assertions.

Show exactly where in each of the statements, I have support it, and secondly, tell us where you stand on each.

He won't do either and I will keep reminding him of his failure from now on.

Jake, it really is surprising how out of the mainstream you are sounding of late

-believing the General Welfare Clause can be used by itself for generating legislation
-believing that statism does not exist anywhere in the world
-believing that Rousseau had a greater influence on the founding of this nation than Locke
-believing that the Tenth Amendment does not exist or matter, such a reckless view of the Constitution
-believing that the Commerce Clause can be used to justify any Federal gov't intrusion
-the apparent use of resources that are outside the mainstream

Neo thinks he is mainstream. How funny.

I'm proof that you have made these claims one time or another.. and jake you are left of mainstream

 

[JakeStarkey]

Neo and bigreb both lie, both use the strawman fallacy. Maybe it is unintentional, that they can't comprehend others writings. I don't think so, but it is possible. I will post a definition here of the fallacy.

"The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

1. Person A has position X.
2. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3. Person B attacks position Y.
4. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person."

Neither Neo or bigreb are Republicans, so their POV on what a member should be simply does not matter. They misrepresent my positions because they can't argue clearly against them.

I will make a challenge to both of them.

Answer Neo's own list above about their own beliefs.

They have now and in the past said X, Y, Z about my beliefs without any evidence then demand rebuttal evidence against it. That's not it works.

Make your case from the list above with evidence, after you made your case for your own conservative credentials from the case above about yourselves.

I am waiting.
Examples of Straw Man

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Neo and bigreb both lie, both use the strawman fallacy. Maybe it is unintentional, that they can't comprehend others writings. I don't think so, but it is possible. I will post a definition here of the fallacy.

"The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

1. Person A has position X.
2. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3. Person B attacks position Y.
4. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person."

Neither Neo or bigreb are Republicans, so their POV on what a member should be simply does not matter. They misrepresent my positions because they can't argue clearly against them.

I will make a challenge to both of them.

Answer Neo's own list above about their own beliefs.

They have now and in the past said X, Y, Z about my beliefs without any evidence then demand rebuttal evidence against it. That's not it works.

Make your case from the list above with evidence, after you made your case for your own conservative credentials from the case above about yourselves.

I am waiting.
Examples of Straw Man

Jake you are not allowed to make any challenge because you neve address any questions askd of you.
Just exactly which of these statements haven't you made or gave a none answer too?
-believing the General Welfare Clause can be used by itself for generating legislation
-believing that statism does not exist anywhere in the world
-believing that Rousseau had a greater influence on the founding of this nation than Locke
-believing that the Tenth Amendment does not exist or matter, such a reckless view of the Constitution
-believing that the Commerce Clause can be used to justify any Federal gov't intrusion
-the apparent use of resources that are outside the mainstream
-NEW- believing that there is no transfer of man's rights in their Social Contract with gov't
-NEW- believing that Red China is a country of individual economic and personal freedoms.
-NEW- believing that the size of gov't does not matter

 

[Synthaholic]

For all the slavering neocons/oathers/birthers/teabaggers/Libertarians/Bluedog Democrats, etc.

The GOP "victory" in the House in Nov. 2010 was a result of LOW VOTER TURNOUT. Idiots that voted for Obama and were pissed that he didn't fight hard enough (in their opinion) for the policies and platforms they put him in for....decided that staying home was a good protest.

So now we've got a bunch of neocon GOPers who throw a bone to their teabag flunkies with this empty, time wasting gesture.

Reid's statement falls WELL within his rights for his position in the Senate....and the "people" WANT A HEALTH CARE REFORM. The GOP DOES NOT HAVE THE VOTES IN THE SENATE TO REPEAL THIS LAW! THE PRESIDENT CAN VETO THIS REPEAL BILL.....it's his right under the law, as it was Reagan's, as it was the Bush family's.

Bottom line: the GOP doesn't have squat with regards to jobs or healthcare accept to return to the very policies that caused our current problems. They seem to demonstrate a pattern that is indicative to the Party of NO and it's health insurance backers.....which is denying any FACT based evidence that contradicts YOUR conclusions and beliefs/assertions.

Case in point: it was the CBO that consistently caused the Obama administration to go back to the drawing board before a final proposal was deemed fiscally acceptable. The GOP and neocon punditry had NO problem with the CBO so long as they were complimentary to the anti-healthcare reform mantras. No suddenly, it's the old teabagger confusion about being against the gov't (while wanting gov't to enforce laws that favor corporations...go figure) because they tell you something you don't want to hear.

The fallacy that "all was well" before the healthcare reform bill passed is just that...fallacy. If you doubt that, just check out the Congressional testimonies of Dr. Peeno or Wendell Potter.

And if all the neocon/teabagger/oather/Libertarian/bither concern is about people getting something for nothing off of their tax dollars....then why don't they complain about the healthcare options that members of the House & Senate have?

To any lefttard that thiks like this is full of shit. the democrats got their asses handed to them because of obama and his progressive agenda. If obama was running in 2010 we would have a ne President.

Wrong again, Big Rebecca.

Liberals stayed home. That's why Democrats lost.

Unless you can show that more Republicans voted in the 2010 mid-term than the 2008 Presidential election.

 

[Liability]

By what laughably passes for the "reasoning" of guys like Simpleholic and tackylib, the literal thumping just taken by the liberal Democratics in the midterm elections is not a thumping at all.

No.

In fact, if you stand on your head, and squint and look through the right perceptual filter you can make out the following words on the back of the Declaration of Independence: "We didn't lose. We Won! We won BIG time! In fact, if it weren't for low liberal voter turn out, we'd have made impressive electoral gains in the House and the Senate! Praise be to Gaia!"

 

[JakeStarkey]

<snip>

You have made an accusation without evidence. You have done this before, and have been corrected for it. I don't have to answer a list in debate until my accusers have made a case. A list is not a case.

But I will let you make a defense of your conservative credentials, using that list.

Once you have done so, then I can respond with the same list.

Until you have done so, no obligation exists on my side.

 

[Synthaholic]

By what laughably passes for the "reasoning" of guys like Simpleholic and tackylib, the literal thumping just taken by the liberal Democratics in the midterm elections is not a thumping at all.

No.

In fact, if you stand on your head, and squint and look through the right perceptual filter you can make out the following words on the back of the Declaration of Independence: "We didn't lose. We Won! We won BIG time! In fact, if it weren't for low liberal voter turn out, we'd have made impressive electoral gains in the House and the Senate! Praise be to Gaia!"

Can you show that there was a bigger republican turnout for 2010 than for 2008?

 

[logical4u]

Helping the American people - bad.

Might be to you. But people who actually do want to help Americans are very glad that they voted to repeal the single most destructive bill to pass in the past 40 years.

But then, I guess I understand why you don't like that. You care more about controlling peoples lives then helping them. Otherwise, you'd be opposed to this piece of crap legislation too.

What's so destructive about "ObamaCare"?

What does it "destroy"?

The $600 purchase report system added to this bill will put companies out of business. Anyone that runs heavy machinery will have to get the documents almost every time they fuel their equipment. Since many of those use mobile equipment, they will have to collect documents from businesses from all over the country and document all the required information.

The insurance companies that made back room deals with the President that will soon find out the President means nothing he says and his deals are lies. The law will change and the insurance companies will see no profits in the future. They will collect payments as long as they can and delay pay-outs until they can hide the money and declare bankruptcy.

The hospitals that are run by religious charities will be "required" to perform services that are against their religion to collect government money for any service. The hospitals will close, leaving less care available.

The medical professionals that are tired of having paperwork come before the patient, will find under the "new system", even more paperwork is required leaving even less time for patien care. The ones that joined the medical professions to actually "care for people" will leave.

It goes on, only those that believe in unicorns and magic wands believe that something someone else has to provide is a "right".

 

[logical4u]

Neo and bigreb both lie, both use the strawman fallacy. Maybe it is unintentional, that they can't comprehend others writings. I don't think so, but it is possible. I will post a definition here of the fallacy.

"The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

1. Person A has position X.
2. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3. Person B attacks position Y.
4. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person."

Neither Neo or bigreb are Republicans, so their POV on what a member should be simply does not matter. They misrepresent my positions because they can't argue clearly against them.

I will make a challenge to both of them.

Answer Neo's own list above about their own beliefs.

They have now and in the past said X, Y, Z about my beliefs without any evidence then demand rebuttal evidence against it. That's not it works.

Make your case from the list above with evidence, after you made your case for your own conservative credentials from the case above about yourselves.

I am waiting.
Examples of Straw Man

Their ("Neo and bigreb") posts are a lot more straight forward than your "rambling". I would believe either of them before I would consider one of your post to have any substantial information. Wish it wasn't so, just know from trying to have conversations with you in the past.

 

[logical4u]

For all the slavering neocons/oathers/birthers/teabaggers/Libertarians/Bluedog Democrats, etc.

The GOP "victory" in the House in Nov. 2010 was a result of LOW VOTER TURNOUT. Idiots that voted for Obama and were pissed that he didn't fight hard enough (in their opinion) for the policies and platforms they put him in for....decided that staying home was a good protest.

So now we've got a bunch of neocon GOPers who throw a bone to their teabag flunkies with this empty, time wasting gesture.

Reid's statement falls WELL within his rights for his position in the Senate....and the "people" WANT A HEALTH CARE REFORM. The GOP DOES NOT HAVE THE VOTES IN THE SENATE TO REPEAL THIS LAW! THE PRESIDENT CAN VETO THIS REPEAL BILL.....it's his right under the law, as it was Reagan's, as it was the Bush family's.

Bottom line: the GOP doesn't have squat with regards to jobs or healthcare accept to return to the very policies that caused our current problems. They seem to demonstrate a pattern that is indicative to the Party of NO and it's health insurance backers.....which is denying any FACT based evidence that contradicts YOUR conclusions and beliefs/assertions.

Case in point: it was the CBO that consistently caused the Obama administration to go back to the drawing board before a final proposal was deemed fiscally acceptable. The GOP and neocon punditry had NO problem with the CBO so long as they were complimentary to the anti-healthcare reform mantras. No suddenly, it's the old teabagger confusion about being against the gov't (while wanting gov't to enforce laws that favor corporations...go figure) because they tell you something you don't want to hear.

The fallacy that "all was well" before the healthcare reform bill passed is just that...fallacy. If you doubt that, just check out the Congressional testimonies of Dr. Peeno or Wendell Potter.

And if all the neocon/teabagger/oather/Libertarian/bither concern is about people getting something for nothing off of their tax dollars....then why don't they complain about the healthcare options that members of the House & Senate have?

To any lefttard that thiks like this is full of shit. the democrats got their asses handed to them because of obama and his progressive agenda. If obama was running in 2010 we would have a ne President.

Wrong again, Big Rebecca.

Liberals stayed home. That's why Democrats lost.

Unless you can show that more Republicans voted in the 2010 mid-term than the 2008 Presidential election.

Isn't staying home "a vote" with your feet (or lack of using your feet)?

 

[Foxfyre]

Voter turnout in a midterm election has NEVER been even close to a general election so comparison between 2010 and 2008 is an exercise in futility.

But compared to other midterm elections, the voter turnout in 2010 was up, not down from the previous midterm when the GOP was voted out of power in the House and Senate.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Spurred by anger over the recession and closely contested races in several large states, Americans voted in higher numbers than in midterm elections four years ago.

With more than 95 percent of precincts reporting, election data indicate that turnout Tuesday was up in at least nine states, including significant increases in Florida, Minnesota and Texas. Turnout appeared to be down slightly in several other states, including Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Overall, turnout in the midterm elections was projected at 42 percent of registered voters, about 1.2 percentage points higher than in 2006.

The total popular vote nationwide was expected to reach about 90 million people, 6.2 million more than voted in 2006. About 131.1 million people voted in 2008. Turnout is higher for a presidential election than for midterm contests.

2010 ELECTION: Voter turnout increases from last midterm in 2006 - trentonian.com

 

[Liability]

By what laughably passes for the "reasoning" of guys like Simpleholic and tackylib, the literal thumping just taken by the liberal Democratics in the midterm elections is not a thumping at all.

No.

In fact, if you stand on your head, and squint and look through the right perceptual filter you can make out the following words on the back of the Declaration of Independence: "We didn't lose. We Won! We won BIG time! In fact, if it weren't for low liberal voter turn out, we'd have made impressive electoral gains in the House and the Senate! Praise be to Gaia!"

Can you show that there was a bigger republican turnout for 2010 than for 2008?

I see your effort at fraudulence was already soundly refuted by Foxfyre.

Comparing a midterm to a general election with a significant historic element in it.

Yeah. You're honest. Not.

 

[Synthaholic]

To any lefttard that thiks like this is full of shit. the democrats got their asses handed to them because of obama and his progressive agenda. If obama was running in 2010 we would have a ne President.

Wrong again, Big Rebecca.

Liberals stayed home. That's why Democrats lost.

Unless you can show that more Republicans voted in the 2010 mid-term than the 2008 Presidential election.

Isn't staying home "a vote" with your feet (or lack of using your feet)?

Sure. But it's not in any way an endorsement of conservative or teabagger dogma. It's intent was a protest against the abandonment of core campaign promises, like the Public Option, Gitmo, and watered down financial reform and general capitulation to the Rightwing. We will see if it was a bad idea or not.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Neo and bigreb both lie, both use the strawman fallacy. Maybe it is unintentional, that they can't comprehend others writings. I don't think so, but it is possible. I will post a definition here of the fallacy.

"The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

1. Person A has position X.
2. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3. Person B attacks position Y.
4. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person."

Neither Neo or bigreb are Republicans, so their POV on what a member should be simply does not matter. They misrepresent my positions because they can't argue clearly against them.

I will make a challenge to both of them.

Answer Neo's own list above about their own beliefs.

They have now and in the past said X, Y, Z about my beliefs without any evidence then demand rebuttal evidence against it. That's not it works.

Make your case from the list above with evidence, after you made your case for your own conservative credentials from the case above about yourselves.

I am waiting.
Examples of Straw Man

Their ("Neo and bigreb") posts are a lot more straight forward than your "rambling". I would believe either of them before I would consider one of your post to have any substantial information. Wish it wasn't so, just know from trying to have conversations with you in the past.

logical4you attacks the personality, giving up the discussion. That's OK.

 

[Avorysuds]

Sweet. Now what?

Now it goes to the Senate, gets referred to committee, and you never hear of it again.

They're so stupid. They're now perceived to have tried to take something away from people as their first order of business.

Good job Boehner.

Ahhh, Obamacare... a perfect example of "buying votes." Thanks G!

 

[Synthaholic]

By what laughably passes for the "reasoning" of guys like Simpleholic and tackylib, the literal thumping just taken by the liberal Democratics in the midterm elections is not a thumping at all.

No.

In fact, if you stand on your head, and squint and look through the right perceptual filter you can make out the following words on the back of the Declaration of Independence: "We didn't lose. We Won! We won BIG time! In fact, if it weren't for low liberal voter turn out, we'd have made impressive electoral gains in the House and the Senate! Praise be to Gaia!"

Can you show that there was a bigger republican turnout for 2010 than for 2008?

I see your effort at fraudulence was already soundly refuted by Foxfyre.

Comparing a midterm to a general election with a significant historic element in it.

Yeah. You're honest. Not.

It's not about total numbers, it's about percentage. The same percentage turnout in 2010, from Democrats, would have re-won the House.