AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 8, 2011 13:11:24 GMT -5
(and the american people) had an opportunity to readWas that the famous proclamation from the criminals that it would all be put on the web for everyone to see well in advance of any signing of the bill? Did it ever make it before the bill was signed... if so for how long was it there, a couple of days maybe? What a farce. Not only was the bill never made public, the Senators were only given the final version of the bill about two hours prior to the vote.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Mar 8, 2011 13:18:13 GMT -5
(and the american people) had an opportunity to readWas that the famous proclamation from the criminals that it would all be put on the web for everyone to see well in advance of any signing of the bill? Did it ever make it before the bill was signed... if so for how long was it there, a couple of days maybe? What a farce. All bills are available on the web posted within a few days of them being submitted for printing by the House or Senate. So you can pretty much see them as soon as they are available for congress. thomas.loc.gov/
|
|
reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on Mar 8, 2011 13:20:33 GMT -5
(and the american people) had an opportunity to readWas that the famous proclamation from the criminals that it would all be put on the web for everyone to see well in advance of any signing of the bill? Did it ever make it before the bill was signed... if so for how long was it there, a couple of days maybe? What a farce. All bills are available on the web posted within a few days of them being submitted for printing by the House or Senate. So you can pretty much see them as soon as they are available for congress. thomas.loc.gov/So since it was submitted 2 hours before they actually lied about it being availlable before the voting?
|
|
burnsattornincan
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 23:05:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,398
|
Post by burnsattornincan on Mar 8, 2011 13:31:54 GMT -5
Not only was the bill never made public, the Senators were only given the final version of the bill about two hours prior to the vote.
With this kind of malign protocol you really have to wonder what their true agenda is.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Mar 8, 2011 13:33:56 GMT -5
I don't know about the 2 hour deal, but I would call BS unless WCP has a source for this fact. Source please...
Eitherr way, the bill had gone through several iterations & tons of debate. So even if the final bill was available late, the earlier versions had been available for weeks/months depending on which version you look at. So, it wasn't as though you needed to read the whole bill from scratch, you just needed to review what had been changed, which should have been the stuff that was covered in the debates.
I read through most of the house bill before the senate ever voted & then later glanced through the senate bill, which was fairly similar. It is sad that so many of you are against the bill, but apparently have never even seen it or even knew where to find it on the web. Good to know that most of you are so uniformed on the subjects of which you speak.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 8, 2011 13:38:42 GMT -5
Well in a quick read of Rep Bachmans definitely isn't a fan of the President, didn't see one positive post in the long blurb. . I have no idea what she is talking about in the health bill, $105 million, we all knew there were costs involved, is that what she is talking about? Hope she didn't think it was a free thing, if so then pubs should have voted for it. It's not $105 million; it's $105 BILLION with a "B"!! OOPs. yeah a little difference...isn't this the cost of the health intuitive program, at least the initial costs of to get in the kitty to have on hand when it is all in effect , programs, in I think 2014 or when ever, not sure anymore , and these $ are fees on Insurance companies and where ever..as well as revenues that are now used from the federal on Medicaid, Medicare. From her post, the Representative, she is insinuating that is $105 Billion snuck into as a expenditure, secretly, no revenues to pay for , say a Bridge to no where " , as a pork barrel expenditure and it's suppose to just sneak through. I don't believe that is the fact and yet that is what sh is alluding to, which is not true,you don't get $105 Billion pork barrell toys, then she really is a douche bag as a representative and we have enough of them there. Some honesty is needed, not just people who have political agenda's. By so doing, all they, the douche bags are doing is playing the emotions of good folks like us who really just read the headlines, rarely reading the small print and if we do , understanding what it , small print, is saying.
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Mar 8, 2011 13:40:53 GMT -5
You do realize that when the Republicans take control of the Senate and White House in 2012, they are going to do exactly the same thing with omnibus bills to repeal Obamacare and to try to reverse the damage Obama and the Dems have done, and you (and the other libs) are going to scream holy hell about it...I can't wait!
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Mar 8, 2011 13:48:11 GMT -5
Here is the history of the bill: thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:HR03590:@@@sNotice it was first recieved by the senate on 10/8/09 They then debated regarding the bill & voted on dozens of amendments between 11/19 - 12/23, before the final vote was done. So, I'm not sure how long they had a copy of the final version of the bill, but they had over 2 months on which they could read the bill & discuss amendments. All admendments to the bill were voted on, so there shouldn't have been anything in the final version that hadn't been discussed & voted on earlier. All this would have been available on the web during the process -- so, trying to say that this was rushed through & no one had time to review it is just a lie. There is links on that website to what congress did yesterday, including transcripts & the full text of all the bills they discussed & voted on.
|
|
burnsattornincan
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 23:05:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,398
|
Post by burnsattornincan on Mar 8, 2011 14:02:09 GMT -5
It is sad that so many of you are against the bill, but apparently have never even seen it
I saw enough of it to form a pretty good conclusion - that it was rife with liberal bs like the part about Muslims being exempt from forcibly having to buy insurance, like real Americans are forced to do.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Mar 8, 2011 14:16:07 GMT -5
It is sad that so many of you are against the bill, but apparently have never even seen itI saw enough of it to form a pretty good conclusion - that it was rife with liberal bs like the part about Muslims being exempt from forcibly having to buy insurance, like real Americans are forced to do. If you read it, then you should know it doesn't specify muslims. If you read it, then you should know that it probably won't apply to most muslims because most sects don't have a history of objecting to medical insurance, which would be required to get out of this. Also, any person who abstains from the required health insurance also has to have waived their rights to social security & medicare, which muslims don't have a history of doing. But, I'm sure you know all this since you've read enough of the bill to form a pretty good conclusion.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Mar 8, 2011 14:19:38 GMT -5
You do realize that when the Republicans take control of the Senate and White House in 2012, they are going to do exactly the same thing with omnibus bills to repeal Obamacare and to try to reverse the damage Obama and the Dems have done, and you (and the other libs) are going to scream holy hell about it...I can't wait! They are going to do what exactly? Debate bills & amendments over a period of months with transcripts & copies of all proposed legislation available on the web? Yes, I'll be sure to scream holy hell when our govt system continues to work like it has been. Only the uninformed & misinformed scream holy hell about this stuff. Look how many on here said the bill was unavailable to the public - funny, because I managed to find it & read it before the senate ever voted. While, I'm sure there will be liberals that will make the same complaints, rest assured that they will be making incorrect & uninformed statements, just as many of you are doing now.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 8, 2011 14:20:09 GMT -5
Again, it really doesn't matter. The bill is dead for legal reasons which will not be overcome. The inevitability of the scrapping of ObamaCare is creeping up on the Obama regime, and nothing like this law will ever see the light of day again in my lifetime.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 8, 2011 14:25:39 GMT -5
It is sad that so many of you are against the bill, but apparently have never even seen itI saw enough of it to form a pretty good conclusion - that it was rife with liberal bs like the part about Muslims being exempt from forcibly having to buy insurance, like real Americans are forced to do. If you read it, then you should know it doesn't specify muslims. If you read it, then you should know that it probably won't apply to most muslims because most sects don't have a history of objecting to medical insurance, which would be required to get out of this. Also, any person who abstains from the required health insurance also has to have waived their rights to social security & medicare, which muslims don't have a history of doing. But, I'm sure you know all this since you've read enough of the bill to form a pretty good conclusion. To expect to get the full fact, not just sound bytes by some here to push what ever their agendas are rather then good discussions and debate betwenn posters is asking a bit ..for some reason, they feel that they can influence others by their leaving out all the facts. Since i beleive we have no more then 40 readers here , spresd throughout he country, ok lets double it , and that is such a stretch, as if 100 people are going to mean anything in a election, to not just discuss honestly here to me is just ka, ka..in not doing so.
|
|
burnsattornincan
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 23:05:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,398
|
Post by burnsattornincan on Mar 8, 2011 14:26:50 GMT -5
If you read it, then you should know it doesn't specify muslims.
And if you knew anything about Muslims you would know they are the only faith that (conveniently) declares that buying insurance is against their religion so when the bill states people can opt out for "religious" reasons any person with an ounce of common sense could deduce this would pertain to Muslims only.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Mar 8, 2011 14:27:26 GMT -5
Again, it really doesn't matter. The bill is dead for legal reasons which will not be overcome. The inevitability of the scrapping of ObamaCare is creeping up on the Obama regime, and nothing like this law will ever see the light of day again in my lifetime. I love you WCP. When you are proved wrong about something, you just say that it doesn't matter. If it didn't matter, then why did you feel the need to make that (incorrect) point in the first place. Anyway, this thread wasn't about the potential scrapping of the law, but rather Bachmann's statements about how the democrats "snuck" this stuff in.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Mar 8, 2011 14:31:20 GMT -5
If you read it, then you should know it doesn't specify muslims.And if you knew anything about Muslims you would know they are the only faith that (conveniently) declares that buying insurance is against their religion so when the bill states people can opt out for "religious" reasons any person with an ounce of common sense could deduce this would pertain to Muslims only. Actually, for the most part this wording only pertains to the amish. They don't buy insurance & already opt out of SS & medicare. Although the Koran does have wording that could be interpretted as buying insurance is unacceptable, most sects are ok with muslims buying car insurance & health insurance. To get out, an individual would have to prove they have a history of being against health insurance & they would have to opt out of SS & medicare. This would be a small minority of muslims, if any did this.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 8, 2011 14:31:53 GMT -5
You do realize that when the Republicans take control of the Senate and White House in 2012, they are going to do exactly the same thing with omnibus bills to repeal Obamacare and to try to reverse the damage Obama and the Dems have done, and you (and the other libs) are going to scream holy hell about it...I can't wait! Ed , you are treating this as a Foot Ball game , you lost this year , but just wait till next year, you have fraduated 50 % of your team, and we have 99% of our team coming back, so lets get it on. If so, just to go back to what was is not going to happen, there is to much in it now that both sides want, their constituents want, both sides, possible even you, but if not, then you don't count. it is not a football game ed..it is a bit more then that. Personally, I can live with what I have very nicely, in fact I am going to see less benefits personally as I have now yet I am in favor of it feel all should have the right to the same coverage I have, a right ...that's were we are different .
|
|
|
Post by Mkitty is pro kitty on Mar 8, 2011 14:34:49 GMT -5
And I stopped right there. This is the same person who thought the Obama's trip to India was costing $200 million a day because an Indian newspaper said so. Just another one of her "Bachmannerisms" that people dedicate whole websites to her nuttiness. Thanks to whoever for beginning the article with her, you saved me a lot of wasted time. *whew* I have at least a small way to fix the budget. We can fire all the halo shiners because said halos don't even exist.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 8, 2011 14:43:38 GMT -5
Stay Put - you can't post 13 unrelated posts in a row & expect everyone to read them all. Especially when it doesn't seem to have anything to do with the 105 billion that you started this thread about. What I don't understand - I can't find anything where she said what this 105 billion was going to be spent on. Also, it was either in the bill or it wasn't. They can't hide it somewhere where no one will read it. Now maybe people reading it didn't understand it, but I'm sure the CBO has this included in their analysis of the bill. Bottom line - she is railing against something without really explaining what the spending was for & ultimately the spending couldn't have been hidden because it had to be written in the bill that all of congress (and the american people) had an opportunity to read. If anything I think her rants only speak to her own ignorance since she has been talking about this bill for over a year now & just figured some of it out. "]Stay Put - you can't post 13 unrelated posts in a row & expect everyone to read them all. Especially when it doesn't seem to have anything to do with the 105 billion that you started this thread about ----------------------------------------------------------- I read all the posts, or almost all of them, but here, I just scrolled. not because of the content, have no clue as to what it was...just the way presented , to much. You, stayput, might come back and say, "I don't care if you read them ". If so, then why put them up. I put a post up, I try to make as clear as possible either my personal thought on the article, go ahead and debate my thoughts, I want that, and try to post petinent facts of the articles, few paragraphs, and a link to them as I WANT posters to read them and discuss. I know this is not going to always happen, see Mr. Burns reaction, but then regarding Burns reaction, nough said? However, I do WANT posters as much as possible to read them so I am assuming you too Stayput want the same so possible listen to Angels recommendation in the future, she said it right on.
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Mar 8, 2011 14:47:39 GMT -5
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 8, 2011 14:58:10 GMT -5
Don't know why ed, I think , not sure here, the waivers are temporarily and if granted after a few years the waivers are over and all havre to be covered under the bill..opossible the waives are so these groups can gt all the effs lined up to be able to participate, not sure here. There will be tweaking of the bill , already has started and don't think there is real objection from those who are in support of it, including the POTUS. {Is it really necessary to call the posters thoughts BS. Why not , "respectfully disagree with your premise", so much more civilized. Just a thought. ??
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Mar 8, 2011 15:01:34 GMT -5
They aren't getting out of it. These are 1 year waivers for companies that will have trouble meeting the initial requirements. The govt. isn't looking to cause huge hardships in meeting some of these requirements, so they are giving some companies extra time to get their shit together. I don't see what is bad about that, better than complaining that the govt has unrealistic expectations in the ability for everyone to meet the requirements immediately.
|
|
dancinmama
Senior Associate
LIVIN' THE DREAM!!
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 20:49:45 GMT -5
Posts: 10,659
|
Post by dancinmama on Mar 8, 2011 15:35:43 GMT -5
It's not $105 million; it's $105 BILLION with a "B"!! OOPs. yeah a little difference...isn't this the cost of the health intuitive program, at least the initial costs of to get in the kitty to have on hand when it is all in effect , programs, in I think 2014 or when ever, not sure anymore , and these $ are fees on Insurance companies and where ever..as well as revenues that are now used from the federal on Medicaid, Medicare. From her post, the Representative, she is insinuating that is $105 Billion snuck into as a expenditure, secretly, no revenues to pay for , say a Bridge to no where " , as a pork barrel expenditure and it's suppose to just sneak through. I don't believe that is the fact and yet that is what sh is alluding to, which is not true,you don't get $105 Billion pork barrell toys, then she really is a douche bag as a representative and we have enough of them there. Some honesty is needed, not just people who have political agenda's. By so doing, all they, the douche bags are doing is playing the emotions of good folks like us who really just read the headlines, rarely reading the small print and if we do , understanding what it , small print, is saying. I am hoping that the facts come out about this. It seems to me that there would have been a lot of screaming and yelling and jumping up and down about this by the opposition party had they known about it. I don't remember a single word about it prior to the vote or after it was passed until now. As a matter of fact, I do remember a lot of talk regarding "not funding" the bill to block its implementation (after it passed); kind of hard to do when it's partially funded within.
|
|
dancinmama
Senior Associate
LIVIN' THE DREAM!!
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 20:49:45 GMT -5
Posts: 10,659
|
Post by dancinmama on Mar 8, 2011 15:40:12 GMT -5
They aren't getting out of it. These are 1 year waivers for companies that will have trouble meeting the initial requirements. The govt. isn't looking to cause huge hardships in meeting some of these requirements, so they are giving some companies extra time to get their shit together. I don't see what is bad about that, better than complaining that the govt has unrealistic expectations in the ability for everyone to meet the requirements immediately. If that's the case, then they should just delay the implementation of what is being waived for a year for every company/organization instead of making companies/government go through the administrative BS to get a waiver. Just more time and money wasted if you ask me.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 8, 2011 15:41:29 GMT -5
They aren't getting out of it. These are 1 year waivers for companies that will have trouble meeting the initial requirements. The govt. isn't looking to cause huge hardships in meeting some of these requirements, so they are giving some companies extra time to get their shit together. I don't see what is bad about that, better than complaining that the govt has unrealistic expectations in the ability for everyone to meet the requirements immediately. Again another point brought out by one with out a full explanation just to get a reaction , it is as you said, a temporary thing for reasons you so well describbe and what i thought were presented, why do we always have to get the half, partial favrs by so many here. A waste of time by so many, that takes away from a real discussion of the merits good or bad and always it seems by the ones from the conservative side, ok, i can think of one from the other but they seem to have been silent for a long time..correct , the one who pointed it out to me privatly?{ no answer needed }{sheesh}
|
|
burnsattornincan
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 23:05:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,398
|
Post by burnsattornincan on Mar 8, 2011 16:32:06 GMT -5
most sects are ok with muslims buying car insurance
You're hilarious. Car insurance is a completely different matter as it is not a right to drive a car, it is a privilege which must be attained by following certain rules. With Obamacare though, they wrote it in that Muslims can avoid those rules all other real Americans must follow. You see, even if it were a "small" percentage of Muslims whom opted not to buy insurance, the fact that your government pandered to a group that had no hand in the creation of the (once) great country yet force all real Americans (whose ancestors built the country everyone seems to want to flock to) to buy insurance or face fines and eventually go to jail. It is incredible logic that defies any explanation. This kind of bullshit must and will be stopped as people are becoming extremely irate at this and the myriad of other assaults on the hard working real American taxpayers.
Dalton McGuinty Burns III
|
|
|
Post by stayput on Mar 8, 2011 16:59:29 GMT -5
Ed , you are treating this as a Foot Ball game , you lost this year , but just wait till next year, you have fraduated 50 % of your team, and we have 99% of our team coming back, so lets get it on. Read more: notmsnmoney.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=politics&action=display&thread=4443&page=2#ixzz1G307MzXidez, actually you must be suffering from "sometimers" (sometimes you remember and sometimes you don't). The GOP had an historic victory in this last Nov. 2010 elections, and is slated to annihilate the Dems next year. You people argue, out of one side of your mouths how the unions make up only a small percentage of the whole population. To that argument alone, you are quite correct. With that said, however, that is your voting block come the 2012 elections. America just showed all Libs that we are going to replace all of the scum with 100% Constitutional candidates. Even when it comes to replacing the scum in the GOP. You people are going to LOSE, and lose badly. So, hold on to your panties, and don't let them get all twisted up when you hear the election results in Nov. 2012. ;D
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Mar 8, 2011 17:18:34 GMT -5
You're hilarious. Car insurance is a completely different matter as it is not a right to drive a car, it is a privilege which must be attained by following certain rules. With Obamacare though, they wrote it in that Muslims can avoid those rules all other real Americans must follow. You see, even if it were a "small" percentage of Muslims whom opted not to buy insurance, the fact that your government pandered to a group that had no hand in the creation of the (once) great country yet force all real Americans (whose ancestors built the country everyone seems to want to flock to) to buy insurance or face fines and eventually go to jail. It is incredible logic that defies any explanation. This kind of bullshit must and will be stopped as people are becoming extremely irate at this and the myriad of other assaults on the hard working real American taxpayers. Dalton McGuinty Burns III Ok, first - why is car insurance irrelevant? You claim muslims will get out of this because they are not allowed to purchase insurance, yet I point out only a minority of muslims follow that & many do purchase insurance (car & health) & somehow that is irrelevent. Second - this part of the law mimics an existing law which allows people to opt out of SS & medicare, yet I don't hear people up in arms about that. Most amish don't pay into these (knowing they can also get nothing back), yet I haven't heard 1 person complain about that. Third - You are saying only real americans must follow these rules? The amish aren't real americans to you? A larger % of amish are going to opt out with this clause than muslims. Are no muslims real americans to you? Larry Johnson, Shaq, Muhammed Ali, Mos Def, Everlast, etc - all not real americans? Fourth - I am tired about hearing the go to jail thing. You don't pay your taxes, then you could go to jail. This is nothing new. That is like saying if they let the bush tax cuts expire, then people could be facing jail.
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Mar 8, 2011 17:31:19 GMT -5
So you agree that Obamacare is nothing more than just another tax, with the same penalties as income tax evasion...
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 8, 2011 17:31:45 GMT -5
most sects are ok with muslims buying car insurance You're hilarious. Car insurance is a completely different matter as it is not a right to drive a car, it is a privilege which must be attained by following certain rules. With Obamacare though, they wrote it in that Muslims can avoid those rules all other real Americans must follow. You see, even if it were a "small" percentage of Muslims whom opted not to buy insurance, the fact that your government pandered to a group that had no hand in the creation of the (once) great country yet force all real Americans (whose ancestors built the country everyone seems to want to flock to) to buy insurance or face fines and eventually go to jail. It is incredible logic that defies any explanation. This kind of bullshit must and will be stopped as people are becoming extremely irate at this and the myriad of other assaults on the hard working real American taxpayers. Dalton McGuinty Burns III "This kind of bullshit must and will be stopped as people are becoming extremely irate at this and the myriad of other assaults on the hard working real American taxpayers." ----------------------------------------------------- Possible , and possible most likely not , but what ever, since a "hard working real American taxpayers. " you are not, your opinion is like a f on the wind, just more hot air to be blown away in the breeze.
|
|