Healthcare

[Christine777]

It’s clear enough that majority of Americans don’t support this bill, (cnf. News and Polls) why is it still pressed on?

Obama must have something in mind or NOTHING AT ALL. :whistling:

 

No such thing is clear at all.

 

It's very clear that the majority of Americans do want healthcare reform, so I would like to see your sources for that claim.

Sorry for late reply, 'just get invited by friends for lunch in the funfair next town.

 

I maybe too haste to say “Majority” – but this is what we are seeing here in the other point of the globe.

These, I read from news and had watched those rallies on television. Perhaps the media is throwing the contrary. It’s also the same on random polls and opinions in the internet. Mostly disagree on these “huge wasteful reform”, if I may quote it.

 

But I have some key-polls for you. Sorry i dont know how to post link in here, so i do it the old fasion way. :) (please read if you have time).

 

News (Rally)-

http://www.startribune.com/politics/local/87593572.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUr

 

Business Group -

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_overhaul_business_opposition

 

Wikipedia -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_reform_in_the_United_States

(And please don’t forget to read Public Opinion I this article)

 

And this is what our (top)national news paper is saying:

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/world/view/20090809-219396/Obamas-US-health-care-reform-evilPalin

Let me quote the title: “Obama's US health care reform ‘evil - Palin”

 

I am not against these health care reforms nor am I against Obama.

All I want to say is – with the magnitude of opposition such as this is not good to pressed on. And the president should think and rethink otherwise…

Health care issue is just but an aspect here. But if the whole country goes far worsen, because of the many constituents' disapproval from its goverment, would be very counter productive. :rolleyes:

[myrmaad]

The opposition in the media is being overplayed. No matter what country you are from you can get CSpan on the computer or on cable television news feeds. I suggest watching Washington Journal every morning for a sustained period and you will hear a mix of people vociferously both opposed to and supporting the healthcare reform issue.

 

However, nearly all people who are presented with the current facts in a non-partisan manner agree that the current situation cannot continue.

 

The disagreement and accompanying rhetoric is regarding 'what to do' about it.

 

From my point of view, I can see very clearly that we have had republican majorities in the house and senate since the late 60s early 70s when this problem began to percolate. There have only been short periods of democratic majorities during all those decades. The way government works is that you have to stop the velocity before you can make real changes, and that takes sustained periods of power in the majority.

 

So who's responsible for what we have now? I know my conclusion. I can also tell you that Clinton was not leftist nor progressive, and was very center in his approach to governing, basically giving the Right whatever they wanted from my extremely disappointed point of view. On top of that his legal and personal problems made for an ineffectual leader. So again, from my point of view, who's to blame?

 

People say you shouldn't cast blame but that is both irresponsible and stupid when you're deciding on your path forward out of a disaster.

 

Your links.. I'll start by saying Palin's credibility is zero except for a small faction of extremists; they aren't even taken seriously by their own republican party, and it's actually not even a true grass roots movement, since it's been engineered with corporate money by Díck Armey.

 

Your story from the Minneapolis Star Tribune is either biased or misinformed, because I saw CSPAN reporter speaking about the same event, and I'll even find the footage for you, he characterized it quite differently, it was not any definitive "march on Washington" by any measure. It was a handful of protesters, less than the number that protested going into the war in Iraq, even less than the number who protested the Supreme Court ruling in Bush v. Gore. (The one that gave GWB the presidency.) Notice those were ignored by the party in power at the time because they were inconsequential number.

 

Your Business group ad buy story should come as no surprise to anyone. Of course business is against any sort of regulation, they are in the business of profiteering, and healthcare is in trouble because of profiteering.

 

If you're still in high school or college, I hope they've taught you to vet your sources and that one should never rely on Wikipedia as a source.

 

If your nation's "top newspaper" is quoting Palin as an authority, I have some very dire concerns about your own situation, :) Maybe that was a fluke though.

 

Here are some less partisan news resources, there are some partisan viewpoints so reading them all is helpful to aid you in your process.

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/

http://www.businessweek.com/

http://www.thenation.com/

http://www.factcheck.org/

http://www.csmonitor.com/

http://themoderatevoice.com/

 

I suggest you may want to read this fellow's editorial and the discussion that follows to set your compass.

 

Notice what states are doing on their own:

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0310/How-to-beat-partisan-politics-Ask-your-state-government

 

And while there is much contention over this particular issue, there is generally still a decent approval rating of the president from the most reputable polling sources.

 

 

Recommended for thoughtful thinkers:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Money/Robert-Reich-s-Blog/2010/0216/A-Thought-on-Evan-Bayh-and-Partisan-America

http://themoderatevoice.com/66221/a-moderates-view-of-health-care-reform/

 

Let's discuss "Deem and Pass":

"More recently, Grim notes that deeming resolutions were used by Republicans "36 times in 2005 and 2006," and by Democrats "49 times in 2007 and 2008."

It was used to pass the enormous Bush Tax Cuts, in fact.

Doesn't that seem a bit desperate of the Republican Strategists?

 

The first time that the chamber used what's known as a "deeming resolution" was March 16, 1933. Back then, as now, it was over a bill that had little support among individual Democrats but all of them knew they had to pass it. Very few Democrats want to vote for the current Senate version of health care reform but most are okay with it as long as it gets cleaned up through reconciliation. Deeming resolutions have been used by Republicans 36 times (since 2005-06), and by Democrats 49 times (in 2007-08). Sounds to me like a precedent.

 

Everyone knows that 100 percent of the people who like the underlying health care bill will approve of the use of whatever procedural mechanisms are necessary to enact it. And 100 percent of the process-objectors will turn out to be the same people who don't like the bill.

 

It stands to reason that if all the majorities were flipped and the GOP was about to use "Deem And Pass" to get something they wanted passed, they'd pull the trigger and never look back.

 

There's no doubt at all that this legislative double-talk is confusing. But it's not impossible to explain. Unfortunately, the news media isn’t up to doing a very good job of that, probably because they don’t understand the process themselves. If conservative obstructionists actually think this well-established process of Deem and Pass is unconstitutional, they ought to be deliriously happy, because now they can have the courts nullify the entire law as illegitimate. But they’re worried. They know it’s legit.

 

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/03/17/hoyer-cantor-deem/

http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2010/03/deem-and-pass-so-what.html

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/03/the_arms_race_of_rules.html

 

According to economists Ettlinger and Linden, Bush's policies account for 40% of the deficit, the economic turndown for 20%, financial rescues begun by Bush and his admin, 12% and Obama's policies 16%.

 

And here's a couple of relevant quotes for you.

 

Ronald Reagan: I am not worried about the deficit. It is big enough to take care of itself.

D. Cheney: "Reagan proved deficits don't matter."

 

I don't buy that the GOP has suddenly become a party of born again deficit virgins. It'll last only as long as the Dems are in power.

Edited March 18, 2010 by myrmaad
fixed a link

[Christine777]

@ Myrmaad

“The opposition in the media is being overplayed. No matter what country you are from you can get CSpan on the computer or on cable television news feeds.” –

Well, I can also return state this lines to you if I would. But that would be boring. We all read/watch the news, and we can sense if it's overplayed. But we all have to agree that - "it is the news."

 

I am not in argument with you regarding views/standpoints of these people/news/polls etc… You ask me to support my claims, and I humbly and hurriedly take some (as far as I can remember from what I’ve read).

And please don’t presume that I’ve not browse/read the “other side”. In fact, I may already have read the National Review you refer to, before I post those two little sentences in this debate (‘coz the graphics and the standpoint seems to be very familiar the time I open it here in your post). But don’t you worry, I really take a thorough reading (the second time) as you suggested. And by the way, the view is not “less partisan” it is “very partisan”.

 

Since you started this “refute-ignore” argument approach, I indulge you to please stop it. Given that I am also capable of doing so. And we will be rounding in circles refuting and ignoring our own citations ‘till the whole world was wrong and we are the ones left with the correct analysis. (I’m not going to repeat this again).

 

All I’m saying is that there is a “significant number” (since we don’t agree with the term majority) of Americans who opposed this “OBAMACARE”. And please, I really don’t care if the number of those protesters (I supposed not all who opposed was there) I’ve seen in the cable TV is lesser than the number of your marines who goes to war in Iraq. I even don’t care if they less the number of those who went to my birthday party last year.

All I care about is that this “number” catches the world’s attention, catches America’s attention. And with the enormity of opposition such as this is not good for the country. It could eventually create “higher” degree tensions.

 

I do agree with you that “the disagreement and accompanying rhetoric is regarding 'what to do' about it.” And it is the best thing to do, I might add.

And in fact, you said it yourself that; “nearly all people who are presented with the current facts in a non-partisan manner agree that the current situation cannot continue.”

I hope I haven’t misinterpreted you in this statement, for this is what I’m exactly pointing out.

 

I read your new edit, and yes you're right, that the people who support it (before) is the same people now against it. It is not only confusing - it is "self confusing". And I would to go back to your statement - "What to do about it?" and a process that would'nt explode greater tensions so that everybody win.

 

I hope I havent flame you.

I really dont like arguing with staff.

 

Peace... :happy:

[myrmaad]

Unless I'm typing in yellow, I'm just a member.

 

I'm very surprised that the National Review is considered "very partisan", because although it's a moderate publication, it's also a right wing slanted organization, in which today's lead story is on how the democrats are throwing the rank and file under the bus, hardly a progressive view.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by your term "Refute|Ignore", I'll have to conclude that my objection to Palin is what troubles you, because by "less partisan", I meant less partisan than any newspaper that would accept the extremist views of those of Palin.

 

And in fact, you said it yourself that; “nearly all people who are presented with the current facts in a non-partisan manner agree that the current situation cannot continue.”

I hope I haven’t misinterpreted you in this statement, for this is what I’m exactly pointing out.

 

I'm beginning to suspect there may be a communication breakdown of sorts here, because the current situation that cannot continue to which I referred is the overinflationary rate of insurance premiums vs the flat wages and salaries since the 1990s. Not the debate or the method or the bill that will pass in a few days.

 

 

I read your new edit, and yes you're right, that the people who support it (before) is the same people now against it.

 

I don't recall saying this, and I can't find what you meant except possibly as story in one of the moderate ergo less biased, less partisan news sources I suggested.

 

I do want to say that I appreciate talking with you, even though we disagree.

Edited March 18, 2010 by myrmaad
I can never leave a comma unscathed.

[Aurielius]

And here's a couple of relevant quotes for you.

 

D. Cheney: "Reagan proved deficits don't matter."

 

I don't buy that the GOP has suddenly become a party of born again deficit virgins. It'll last only as long as the Dems are in power.

 

If you are going to quote conservatives on finance at least pick responsible ones with a track record of fiscal responsibility such as Goldwater or Buckley. It's easy to cherry pick the nimrods from the other side of the isle, I could just as easily quote Reid, Pelosi, or Durbin's questionable statements but that's too much like shooting fish in a barrel. Republican conservatives are not one homogeneous group, no more than the democrats are all the same shade of liberal. Mark Twain once said that "if you were not liberal when young, you had no soul, and if not conservative when old, you had no brain". The man had a good sense of humor and dichotomy.

[myrmaad]

Twain's always a favorite of mine.

 

Cherrypick all you need to make your point, to tell your story. It takes all kinds to make the world go round, doesn't it?

 

As for Mr. Clemens, my own favorite of many is

 

 

 

Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions. Small people always do that, but the really great make you feel as if you, too, can become great.

[Aurielius]

Twain's always a favorite of mine.

 

Cherrypick all you need to make your point, to tell your story. It takes all kinds to make the world go round, doesn't it?

 

As for Mr. Clemens, my own favorite of many is

 

 

 

Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions. Small people always do that, but the really great make you feel as if you, too, can become great.

 

Catullus once replied after being asked why he did not respond to remarks by Octavian..."I find it best not to inscribe about somone who has the ability of proscription."

[myrmaad]

Let's not veer too far offtopic but I think this is an important point before we leave it:

 

To inscribe upon, at least figuratively, suggests the act of ad homonym attack, and most other threads on these type subjects devolve into that very quickly. I strongly urge everyone to remember we are debating our friends by attacking their ideas here, not the man or woman themselves. This thread has been delightfully civil, especially in view of what is often incendiary subject matter, and I appreciate that. You all deserve a Kudo, if only I could give you each one.

 

 

Back to topic,right?

Edited March 18, 2010 by myrmaad

[Retribution]

You all deserve a Kudo

It's kudos, and it's not capitalized. Perhaps before you act condescending towards others, you could learn some things yourself.

 

Back to the topic.

 

While I agree that health care reform is needed (specifically because of what Myrmaad said), the way to do it definitely isn't the current bill. We don't need any more debt. Also, while I somewhat agree with you about Palin not being a very good authority on health care, she definitely knows more about what to do about it than every single foolish liberal in the senate now. Do you just hate Republicans in general, or do you hate them because they won't stand for the destruction of the basic values of the U.S.?

[myrmaad]

You must not have seen today's CBO report. :thumbsup: