We win the debate and health care is still going through?

[theDoctorisIn]

Almost 2/3 of people oppose health care reform proposed by yet it is going through anyways. We win the debate and it still is getting done. This is not democracy. This is a dictatorship.

You're right, this is not a democracy. It's a representative republic. And I understand by "dictatorship" you mean "doesn't agree with me", but if, like you claim 2/3 of the people in this country oppose this bill (not health care reform in general), then it's up to them to vote out the people who voted for this. Other than that, our system is working exactly how it is supposed to.

You are right its not a democracy but a democratic republic to be exact which means the democratic process is limited to what the constitution says it can do and I can't find anything in the constitution that says they can enact this law. Things are not working the way it is suppose to because a congressmen is suppose to check what the constituents back home think before they vote. I know this is a trend most politicians from both parties do but it shouldn't happen because a representative job is to vote as if the people themselves are sitting in the desk.

The fact that people are being ignored no matter what that decision is should be enough to recall your representative which is what I plan on doing in 2010.

Members of Congress are certainly not supposed to go and check with their constituents every time something comes up for a vote - that's NOT the way a democratic republic works. You elect someone for a term, accepting that they will use their judgment on how to vote. If you don't trust their judgment in the first place, then vote for someone else. If you don't like how they vote, you vote for someone else the next time.

Are you really suggesting that everything should be done on the will of the majority?
That's exactly the reason that we don't have a direct democracy - a democratic republic system is designed for the minority opinion to be heard. If you don't like how our system works, then go move to some other country.

 

[Truthmatters]

Aint going to happen fool.

People will no longer be dropped fpr being sick and people can no longer be turned down for preexsisting conditions.

That will win alot of voters over.

Anyone who cant afford to by it will be subsidized

 

[Immanuel]

Aint going to happen fool.

People will no longer be dropped fpr being sick and people can no longer be turned down for preexsisting conditions.

That will win alot of voters over.

Anyone who cant afford to by it will be subsidized

Who the hell decides if I can afford it or not? And what if I can't afford it but the son of bitch in Washington has decided that I can? I go to jail and my wife goes to jail.

That my friend is F'ing Bullshit!!

Immie

 

[ihopehefails]

You're right, this is not a democracy. It's a representative republic. And I understand by "dictatorship" you mean "doesn't agree with me", but if, like you claim 2/3 of the people in this country oppose this bill (not health care reform in general), then it's up to them to vote out the people who voted for this. Other than that, our system is working exactly how it is supposed to.

You are right its not a democracy but a democratic republic to be exact which means the democratic process is limited to what the constitution says it can do and I can't find anything in the constitution that says they can enact this law. Things are not working the way it is suppose to because a congressmen is suppose to check what the constituents back home think before they vote. I know this is a trend most politicians from both parties do but it shouldn't happen because a representative job is to vote as if the people themselves are sitting in the desk.

The fact that people are being ignored no matter what that decision is should be enough to recall your representative which is what I plan on doing in 2010.

Members of Congress are certainly not supposed to go and check with their constituents every time something comes up for a vote - that's NOT the way a democratic republic works. You elect someone for a term, accepting that they will use their judgment on how to vote. If you don't trust their judgment in the first place, then vote for someone else. If you don't like how they vote, you vote for someone else the next time.

Are you really suggesting that everything should be done on the will of the majority?
That's exactly the reason that we don't have a direct democracy - a democratic republic system is designed for the minority opinion to be heard. If you don't like how our system works, then go move to some other country.

Yes because the whole invention of representative democracy was created because none of us have time to sit in vote on every single thing so we elect people to do it for us. They in turn vote the way we would vote ourselves as if we were there because its our will that they do and not there will.

 

[EriktheRed]

No we were not.

Oh, I beg to differ...

Is there an explanation accompanied with this?

No explanation needed. Cons were consistently arguing that point during the Shrub years. It happened and happened often. Period.


As for the question asked in your OP, you started a thread yourself that might suggest an answer to your question:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...s-support-fascistic-policies.html#post1838230


Seems to be a bit of a contradiction here. Wonder why....

 

[ihopehefails]

Aint going to happen fool.

People will no longer be dropped fpr being sick and people can no longer be turned down for preexsisting conditions.

That will win alot of voters over.

Anyone who cant afford to by it will be subsidized

Wait until a healthy person has to pay twice as much because the insurance company that they have has to cover people who prone to getting sick because they can't turn them down to reduce cost.

 

[ihopehefails]

Oh, I beg to differ...

Is there an explanation accompanied with this?

No explanation needed. Cons were consistently arguing that point during the Shrub years. It happened and happened often. Period.


As for the question asked in your OP, you started a thread yourself that might suggest an answer to your question:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...s-support-fascistic-policies.html#post1838230


Seems to be a bit of a contradiction here. Wonder why....

If you can't back up what you say then you have no argument.

 

[EriktheRed]

Aint going to happen fool.

People will no longer be dropped fpr being sick and people can no longer be turned down for preexsisting conditions.

That will win alot of voters over.

Anyone who cant afford to by it will be subsidized

Will these things kick in soon enough to make a difference, though?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Almost 2/3 of people oppose health care reform proposed by yet it is going through anyways. We win the debate and it still is getting done. This is not democracy. This is a dictatorship.

That's a republic, sweetie. You elect 'em into office, you'd better either be damned sure they're going to listen to the people, or have the will to impeach 'em.

And the saddest thing is, people today have such pathetic memories and attention spans, half the country will have forgotten their outrage by the time the next election rolls around, and be raptly listening to the next round of propaganda.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You are right its not a democracy but a democratic republic to be exact which means the democratic process is limited to what the constitution says it can do and I can't find anything in the constitution that says they can enact this law. Things are not working the way it is suppose to because a congressmen is suppose to check what the constituents back home think before they vote. I know this is a trend most politicians from both parties do but it shouldn't happen because a representative job is to vote as if the people themselves are sitting in the desk.

The fact that people are being ignored no matter what that decision is should be enough to recall your representative which is what I plan on doing in 2010.

Members of Congress are certainly not supposed to go and check with their constituents every time something comes up for a vote - that's NOT the way a democratic republic works. You elect someone for a term, accepting that they will use their judgment on how to vote. If you don't trust their judgment in the first place, then vote for someone else. If you don't like how they vote, you vote for someone else the next time.

Are you really suggesting that everything should be done on the will of the majority?
That's exactly the reason that we don't have a direct democracy - a democratic republic system is designed for the minority opinion to be heard. If you don't like how our system works, then go move to some other country.

Yes because the whole invention of representative democracy was created because none of us have time to sit in vote on every single thing so we elect people to do it for us. They in turn vote the way we would vote ourselves as if we were there because its our will that they do and not there will.

But it's not just YOUR will. It's YOUR will along with everyone else in their district. Do you think that every senator should spend all of their time polling their district to find out what their district wants? Our system is based on the will of our representatives, and our individual votes should be based on which representatives will most matches my own.

And no, we are not a democratic republic because it takes too much time for everyone to vote. We are a democratic republic because the founding fathers didn't trust the average person to make a decision for themselves. See also the electoral college system.

 

[The T]

Almost 2/3 of people oppose health care reform proposed by yet it is going through anyways. We win the debate and it still is getting done. This is not democracy. This is a dictatorship.

You're right, this is not a democracy. It's a representative republic. And I understand by "dictatorship" you mean "doesn't agree with me", but if, like you claim 2/3 of the people in this country oppose this bill (not health care reform in general), then it's up to them to vote out the people who voted for this. Other than that, our system is working exactly how it is supposed to.

NO it isn't. YOU youself stated we ARE a REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC...and by most polls? PEOPLE are against this Legislation in BOTH HOUSES...But still and yet...they have to BRIBE members of Congress to pass it...

This only happens in BANANNA REPUBLICS...so the OP is correct.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Almost 2/3 of people oppose health care reform proposed by yet it is going through anyways. We win the debate and it still is getting done. This is not democracy. This is a dictatorship.

You're right, this is not a democracy. It's a representative republic. And I understand by "dictatorship" you mean "doesn't agree with me", but if, like you claim 2/3 of the people in this country oppose this bill (not health care reform in general), then it's up to them to vote out the people who voted for this. Other than that, our system is working exactly how it is supposed to.

NO it isn't. YOU youself stated we ARE a REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC...and by most polls? PEOPLE are against this Legislation in BOTH HOUSES...But still and yet...they have to BRIBE members of Congress to pass it...

This only happens in BANANNA REPUBLICS...so the OP is correct.

Nevermind. Sorry, I'm having a bad day.

 

[EriktheRed]

Is there an explanation accompanied with this?

No explanation needed. Cons were consistently arguing that point during the Shrub years. It happened and happened often. Period.


As for the question asked in your OP, you started a thread yourself that might suggest an answer to your question:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...s-support-fascistic-policies.html#post1838230


Seems to be a bit of a contradiction here. Wonder why....

If you can't back up what you say then you have no argument.

Oh well, you can deny it all you want I'm not gonna go back to hannity.com and mine all the times cons made this argument. Not to mention others on here have already backed me up.


Now how 'bout that other poll that you posted elsewhere I cited?

 

[The T]

Almost 2/3 of people oppose health care reform proposed by yet it is going through anyways. We win the debate and it still is getting done. This is not democracy. This is a dictatorship.

That's a republic, sweetie. You elect 'em into office, you'd better either be damned sure they're going to listen to the people, or have the will to impeach 'em.

And the saddest thing is, people today have such pathetic memories and attention spans, half the country will have forgotten their outrage by the time the next election rolls around, and be raptly listening to the next round of propaganda.

Then it could be said that many are neglecting their Citizenship Obligations, Correct?

But then the Old axiom of Frog-Pot Of Water-Slow heat kicks in...

 

[The T]

You're right, this is not a democracy. It's a representative republic. And I understand by "dictatorship" you mean "doesn't agree with me", but if, like you claim 2/3 of the people in this country oppose this bill (not health care reform in general), then it's up to them to vote out the people who voted for this. Other than that, our system is working exactly how it is supposed to.

NO it isn't. YOU youself stated we ARE a REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC...and by most polls? PEOPLE are against this Legislation in BOTH HOUSES...But still and yet...they have to BRIBE members of Congress to pass it...

This only happens in BANANNA REPUBLICS...so the OP is correct.

Nevermind. Sorry, I'm having a bad day.

AS am I...we all DO...Mine was an observation...

 

[Immanuel]

Members of Congress are certainly not supposed to go and check with their constituents every time something comes up for a vote - that's NOT the way a democratic republic works. You elect someone for a term, accepting that they will use their judgment on how to vote. If you don't trust their judgment in the first place, then vote for someone else. If you don't like how they vote, you vote for someone else the next time.

Are you really suggesting that everything should be done on the will of the majority?
That's exactly the reason that we don't have a direct democracy - a democratic republic system is designed for the minority opinion to be heard. If you don't like how our system works, then go move to some other country.

Yes because the whole invention of representative democracy was created because none of us have time to sit in vote on every single thing so we elect people to do it for us. They in turn vote the way we would vote ourselves as if we were there because its our will that they do and not there will.

But it's not just YOUR will. It's YOUR will along with everyone else in their district. Do you think that every senator should spend all of their time polling their district to find out what their district wants? Our system is based on the will of our representatives, and our individual votes should be based on which representatives will most matches my own.

And no, we are not a democratic republic because it takes too much time for everyone to vote. We are a democratic republic because the founding fathers didn't trust the average person to make a decision for themselves. See also the electoral college system.

Except that our representatives are supposed to represent OUR will and not the lobbyists will. They are doing it backwards.

They should listen to their constituents. They are supposed to represent their constituents. They are not there to represent themselves or the railroad that wants to take over that large plot of land via eminent domain. They are supposed to represent the people of their district which means they are supposed to listen to the people of their district and vote accordingly.

Immie

 

[The T]

Aint going to happen fool.

People will no longer be dropped fpr being sick and people can no longer be turned down for preexsisting conditions.

That will win alot of voters over.

Anyone who cant afford to by it will be subsidized

Subsidized [corralled by any definition] into something that MAY NOT FIT their circumstance...so they are FORCED...

So the option to OPT OUT is GONE lest they GO TO JAIL...

Nice...Real NICE...

That's TYRANNY by my yardstick...

 

[EriktheRed]

Almost 2/3 of people oppose health care reform proposed by yet it is going through anyways. We win the debate and it still is getting done. This is not democracy. This is a dictatorship.

Btw, did it occur to you how many of those 2/3 might be those who feel it doesn't go far enough?


Here's a partisan source that suggests another possible answer to your question.


(Note, btw, I admitted it's partisan.)

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Yes because the whole invention of representative democracy was created because none of us have time to sit in vote on every single thing so we elect people to do it for us. They in turn vote the way we would vote ourselves as if we were there because its our will that they do and not there will.

But it's not just YOUR will. It's YOUR will along with everyone else in their district. Do you think that every senator should spend all of their time polling their district to find out what their district wants? Our system is based on the will of our representatives, and our individual votes should be based on which representatives will most matches my own.

And no, we are not a democratic republic because it takes too much time for everyone to vote. We are a democratic republic because the founding fathers didn't trust the average person to make a decision for themselves. See also the electoral college system.

Except that our representatives are supposed to represent OUR will and not the lobbyists will. They are doing it backwards.

They should listen to their constituents. They are supposed to represent their constituents. They are not there to represent themselves or the railroad that wants to take over that large plot of land via eminent domain. They are supposed to represent the people of their district which means they are supposed to listen to the people of their district and vote accordingly.

Immie

I agree in spirit - but they're not supposed to vote how their constituents want, the constituents are supposed to vote for someone they think fits their own ideals. You've got it flipped around. There's no way of knowing what the "will" of a huge district is. Take for example, New York State. Should Schumer poll the whole state for every roll call? There's nearly 20 million people in New York State - how could you possibly know what the "will" of everyone really is?

 

[ihopehefails]

Members of Congress are certainly not supposed to go and check with their constituents every time something comes up for a vote - that's NOT the way a democratic republic works. You elect someone for a term, accepting that they will use their judgment on how to vote. If you don't trust their judgment in the first place, then vote for someone else. If you don't like how they vote, you vote for someone else the next time.

Are you really suggesting that everything should be done on the will of the majority?
That's exactly the reason that we don't have a direct democracy - a democratic republic system is designed for the minority opinion to be heard. If you don't like how our system works, then go move to some other country.

Yes because the whole invention of representative democracy was created because none of us have time to sit in vote on every single thing so we elect people to do it for us. They in turn vote the way we would vote ourselves as if we were there because its our will that they do and not there will.

But it's not just YOUR will. It's YOUR will along with everyone else in their district. Do you think that every senator should spend all of their time polling their district to find out what their district wants? Our system is based on the will of our representatives, and our individual votes should be based on which representatives will most matches my own.

And no, we are not a democratic republic because it takes too much time for everyone to vote. We are a democratic republic because the founding fathers didn't trust the average person to make a decision for themselves. See also the electoral college system.

Again YES! The founders didn't believe the people had to earn the trust of the elected but the elected had to earn the trust of the people because it is our country and it doesn't matter what our elected representatives want.

On one hand you say that our system is based on the will of the representatives which says that people should have no say and then in the next sentence you say our votes for a representative should be based on who most "matches my own".