Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
i have no problem with them waiting, even if he did come out with the full agenda, you would have still complained about it and criticized it. let's just be honest, nothing the republicans do will ever please you.
That's the problem there Yurt, they don't have a agenda because they don't want people to have a opportunity to debate the merits of it, and yes criticize it.
You'd have no problem waiting because you plan on voting for them no matter what they put out.
if you want to know about the republican strategy, take a look at new jersey and virginia.
that's a good start.
i just don't get the argument that republicans don't have any ideas. really? none whatsoever?
one obvious is tort reform.
does anyone believe that the reason a 2,000+ page healthcare bill contains no mention of tort reform has nothing to do with the fact that over90% of political contributions by trial lawyers goes to democrats?
i have no problem with them waiting, even if he did come out with the full agenda, you would have still complained about it and criticized it. let's just be honest, nothing the republicans do will ever please you.
That's the problem there Yurt, they don't have a agenda because they don't want people to have a opportunity to debate the merits of it, and yes criticize it.
You'd have no problem waiting because you plan on voting for them no matter what they put out.
ZOMG...you're personally attacking me....*sob*
your post is a lie, i've voted dem before and will always vote for the best person...
There's is absolutely no reason for the GOP to come out with a plan for 2012--when 2010 is already in the bag--
"Despite Missouri, Nullification Efforts Failing Across the Country"
What in the HELL does abortion have to do with 9.5+% unemployment--Americans losing their homes, etc. etc. etc. The U.S. Constitution guarantees a woman's right to choose.
Is this all you LIBERALS think about--Killing helpless babies. It appears to me that this is always your number 1 topic of concern.--
With Obama nose diving in approval rating to 41% in less than two years--you should get a real clue that the blame BOOOSH is no longer working.
Maybe--you can come up with something else for a nice change--like what has Obama done during the last 18 months?--
You voted for it, you got it, and now you OWN it.
He talked about fiscal responsibility AND small government.
Though under your logic, Barry Goldwater was a Liberal.
Thanks for playing though.
I don't think he meant it though--
Obama never talked about--well I guess he "talked about" fiscal responsibilty--after he signed off on the 450 BILLION dollar Ominus bill that was loaded with 9000 earmarks, political pay-offs, and goodies--then he casually mentioned fiscal responsibility--
But Obama has certainly never talked about "reducing" the size of government--he is on record course for tripling it's size and power.
You voted for it, you got it, and now you OWN it.
View attachment 11053
if you want to know about the republican strategy, take a look at new jersey and virginia.
that's a good start.
i just don't get the argument that republicans don't have any ideas. really? none whatsoever?
one obvious is tort reform.
does anyone believe that the reason a 2,000+ page healthcare bill contains no mention of tort reform has nothing to do with the fact that over90% of political contributions by trial lawyers goes to democrats?
2% of total healthcare costs. What else you got?
Obama never talked about--well I guess he "talked about" fiscal responsibilty--after he signed off on the 450 BILLION dollar Ominus bill that was loaded with 9000 earmarks, political pay-offs, and goodies--then he casually mentioned fiscal responsibility--
But Obama has certainly never talked about "reducing" the size of government--he is on record course for tripling it's size and power.
You voted for it, you got it, and now you OWN it.
View attachment 11053
Except I'm not talking about Obama, I'm talking about Lonestar. I don't know where you're going with this.
that is a strong argument
so republicans offer a way to lower healthcare costs, and the democrat argument for not implementing tort reform is, IT'S ONLY 2% OF HEALTHCARE COSTS?
so you're not arguing, tort reform would raise healthcare costs, you're arguing it would only lower them minimally so why bother?
i'm ten grand in debt, and i walk by a ten dollar bill and decide not to pick it up. why bother, it's only ten bucks, right?
is tort reform the solution to our healthcare problems? no.
can it help? i think so. give me a good reason why it wouldn't
I knew what you were talking about--but you know--President Bush left office 19 months ago--and we have a new President--(Barack Husien Obama) in case you just woke up?
Obviously you cannot list not one single accomplishment of your "messiah" so your tactic is to attack a previous President and his party. This tactic has been written a zillion times in the dummies guide on how to be a great liberal.
Again Obama nose-diving to a 41% approval rating--states that your liberal strategy is no longer working. Meaning not many Americans agree that this is all BOOOSHe's fault.
If you can't come up with one single thing or accomplishment that you approve of in this current administration--then I truly feel very sorry for you.
You voted for it, you got it, and now you OWN it.
View attachment 11054
Now up to 12.4 trillion. This before stimulus jr. of 28 BILLION to save government workers jobs.
that is a strong argument
so republicans offer a way to lower healthcare costs, and the democrat argument for not implementing tort reform is, IT'S ONLY 2% OF HEALTHCARE COSTS?
so you're not arguing, tort reform would raise healthcare costs, you're arguing it would only lower them minimally so why bother?
i'm ten grand in debt, and i walk by a ten dollar bill and decide not to pick it up. why bother, it's only ten bucks, right?
is tort reform the solution to our healthcare problems? no.
can it help? i think so. give me a good reason why it wouldn't
You're jumping to conclusions. I never said it would be wrong to do. I said it would drive down 2% of the costs, so I asked what else you had. Unless that's it. So I'll ask again, what else you got? I have a feeling I know what is next, but go on.
first answer me why tort reform wasn't included in a 2300 page healthcare bill? i think it was because of trial lawyers.
what's your explanation?
first answer me why tort reform wasn't included in a 2300 page healthcare bill? i think it was because of trial lawyers.
what's your explanation?
I don't know for sure, and neither do you. I could venture a guess and say in the overall scheme, they decided it would be a bad idea or it didn't come up for a vote. Not saying I agree if they did think it was a bad idea, but just saying they're reasoning.
However, I'm not about to say a entire healthcare bill is wrong because it didn't have Tort reform. Besides, Tort reform can always be done at a future point and be the sole focal point of a debate.
Now, what were some of your other ideas? I've answered you, now answer me.
ZOMG...you're personally attacking me....*sob*
your post is a lie, i've voted dem before and will always vote for the best person...
Not quite. Huh uh, we'll see.
Number one: let families and businesses buy health insurance across state lines.
Number two: allow individuals, small businesses, and trade associations to pool together and acquire health insurance at lower prices, the same way large corporations and labor unions do.
Number three: give states the tools to create their own innovative reforms that lower health care costs.
Number four: end junk lawsuits that contribute to higher health care costs by increasing the number of tests and procedures that physicians sometimes order not because they think it's good medicine, but because they are afraid of being sued.
that is a strong argument
so republicans offer a way to lower healthcare costs, and the democrat argument for not implementing tort reform is, IT'S ONLY 2% OF HEALTHCARE COSTS?
so you're not arguing, tort reform would raise healthcare costs, you're arguing it would only lower them minimally so why bother?
i'm ten grand in debt, and i walk by a ten dollar bill and decide not to pick it up. why bother, it's only ten bucks, right?
is tort reform the solution to our healthcare problems? no.
can it help? i think so. give me a good reason why it wouldn't
You're jumping to conclusions. I never said it would be wrong to do. I said it would drive down 2% of the costs, so I asked what else you had. Unless that's it. So I'll ask again, what else you got? I have a feeling I know what is next, but go on.
The Republicans are going to balance the budget by cutting your taxes and spending even more on the military.
What more do you need to know?
Our main problem with the soaring cost of health insurance--(according to my provider Anthem/Blue Cross Blue Shield) when the last time I called to complain about my premium--is the pharmacutical industry in this country..
Campaign contributions by pharmaceutical firms to Democrats and Republicans are about equal in 2008, after the industry donated about twice as many funds to the GOP over "most of the last decade," according to campaign finance reports, the New York Times reports. In the 2008 election cycle, political action committees and employees of drugmakers have contributed $20 million to federal candidates from the two parties, with 49% going to Democrats and 51% going to Republicans, according to data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics. According to the Times, the breakdown has not been that even since 1990. Democrats received 31% of the drug industry's campaign contributions in 2000, 26% in 2002, 34% in 2004 and 31% in 2006. The data indicate that the largest donors to political campaigns during the current election cycle have been Pfizer, Amgen and Johnson & Johnson.
Another potential reason for the decrease in donations to GOP campaigns is that Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) has proposed allowing the federal government to negotiate directly with drugmakers for lower prices for Medicare beneficiaries, a "position that is anathema to the industry," the Times reports. The Times reports that public programs account for a growing amount of the money spent on prescription drugs: 34% in 2006, compared to 23% in 2000, according to campaign finance data. Leading Democrats have proposed to further expand public involvement in the health care sector, according to the Times.
