U.S. passes "historic" healthcare bill

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Ah, but when you first blamed only "Repugnican" politicians, and you didn't mention the Demonrats.

Okay, you caught me doing what you do. I should be abashed. Are you?

[Coito ergo sum]

Ah, but when you first blamed only "Repugnican" politicians, and you didn't mention the Demonrats.

Okay, you caught me doing what you do. I should be abashed. Are you?

I don't do that. I criticize both sides when warranted, and support both sides when warranted. I criticize the pro-Life elements of the Republican Party, and loathe the religious right, for example. I see no reason why I am not allowed to oppose the health care bill/law - that doesn't make me inconsistent. It's the politicians who are inconsistent, because their views change like the wind based on political expediency.

I don't hate everything Obama has done, for example. I like the surge in Afghanistan. I like his pro life stance, and the work he's doing toward getting rid of don't ask/don't tell in the military. We can talk about a number of issues and I'll support him where I think he's right.

I don't see that at all from most of my left-leaning friends and acquaintances. Once they oppose someone, they seem to oppose everything they say or do. George Bush, for example, couldn't say the "sky is blue" and have folks take his word for it. That's why there are lot more stupid and juvenile little nick-names fired from the left to the right - we get nonsense like "Amerikkkans" and "Republikkkans" and "Repugnicans" and just "Repugs." And, others were General Be-tray-us, and stuff like that. Not as much of that goes the other way. I used "Demonrat" but I've never seen that used commonly.

If Bush went to church or supported a "faith based initiative" my left leaning friends would call him to task for it. If Obama goes to church, even an anti-semitic one, and INCREASES Bush's faith based initiatives, I here ZERO criticism from the left on that point. On RDF, the forums were riddled with discussion of Bush's faith based initiatives and how it's bringing on a theocracy. Obama expanded those same programs, and there was zero concern about it from the same people who were up in arms a year or two previously.

In any case, the point is - that I do not play favorites. Nor is there any evidence of me doing so here.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

In any case, the point is - that I do not play favorites. Nor is there any evidence of me doing so here.

Ah, "no evidence"?

[Coito ergo sum]

Oh, the dumbass level.

Those are different people, first of all, and it's entirely possible that the two in the top picture also don't support Medicare.

It is also not unreasonable to support Medicare, but not support cap and trade or socialized medicine in general.

[Coito ergo sum]

In any case, the point is - that I do not play favorites. Nor is there any evidence of me doing so here.

Ah, "no evidence"?

Well, right. There is evidence that you do, because you jumped right on "Repugnicans" (and later backtracked to claim you blamed "all politicians"). I don't do that.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

In any case, the point is - that I do not play favorites. Nor is there any evidence of me doing so here.

Ah, "no evidence"?

Well, right. There is evidence that you do, because you jumped right on "Repugnicans" (and later backtracked to claim you blamed "all politicians"). I don't do that.

I blame Repugnicans primarily, but I've never implied Democrats were blameless.

And you do, you just don't realize it. De Nile is not just a river in Africa.

[Coito ergo sum]

In any case, the point is - that I do not play favorites. Nor is there any evidence of me doing so here.

Ah, "no evidence"?

Well, right. There is evidence that you do, because you jumped right on "Repugnicans" (and later backtracked to claim you blamed "all politicians"). I don't do that.

I blame Repugnicans primarily, but I've never implied Democrats were blameless.

You can't blame Repugnicans for the Lyndon Johnson "remove the trust fund and put it in the general fund" switcheroo - that shit was done by a firmly ensconced Demonrat President and majority in Congress.

And you do, you just don't realize it. De Nile is not just a river in Africa.

Nope, I just don't. I've told you - on many issues, I am in agreement with Obama and liberal positions. Heck, I'll agree with Communists on some issues, such as religion.

[MissingNo.]

I'm referring to America's healthcare system specifically. You know, the subject that we've been discussing for 300 posts? But since we're on the subject, what steps back do you believe America would have to take to match pace with the rest of the world? Certainly not in education. Your economy is in pretty rough shape as well. Social welfare? Considering the subject, that would be worth a laugh. Your constitution is pretty solid but besides a few grating censorship laws, Canada is getting by pretty well without one, as are most Western countries. Maybe you mean America's military?

I'm not going to get into a discussion of which country is better, because I've never claimed the US to be "better."

The "rest of the world?" Do you mean Europe? Because if we look at Asia, Africa, and South America, well, I think the US would have to take a few steps back, in comparison to most (but not all) places on those continents. -snip-

Well, yes, it seemed implied that the comparison was being made to Europe and Canada. Either that or you were treating the rest of the world as one entity, in which case, I think it's reasonable to compare America to the best that the rest of the world has to offer. I'm not trying to start mudslinging either. I don't hate America and I certainly don't hate Americans. There are some great places in America as well. But you claimed that America has been ahead of the rest of the world since WWII and that is not the case.

In regard to your derail: that is exactly what is wrong with our censorship laws.

[Coito ergo sum]

I'm referring to America's healthcare system specifically. You know, the subject that we've been discussing for 300 posts? But since we're on the subject, what steps back do you believe America would have to take to match pace with the rest of the world? Certainly not in education. Your economy is in pretty rough shape as well. Social welfare? Considering the subject, that would be worth a laugh. Your constitution is pretty solid but besides a few grating censorship laws, Canada is getting by pretty well without one, as are most Western countries. Maybe you mean America's military?

I'm not going to get into a discussion of which country is better, because I've never claimed the US to be "better."

The "rest of the world?" Do you mean Europe? Because if we look at Asia, Africa, and South America, well, I think the US would have to take a few steps back, in comparison to most (but not all) places on those continents. -snip-

Well, yes, it seemed implied that the comparison was being made to Europe and Canada. Either that or you were treating the rest of the world as one entity, in which case, I think it's reasonable to compare America to the best that the rest of the world has to offer. I'm not trying to start mudslinging either. I don't hate America and I certainly don't hate Americans. There are some great places in America as well. But you claimed that America has been ahead of the rest of the world since WWII and that is not the case.

The US has been the "leader of the free world" since WW2. I don't think that's really debated, is it? The Soviet Union was a "superpower" and the US was a "superpower." After the cold war, the US was the last superpower standing. We contributed quite a bit to the defense of Europe after World War 2, and the US has been front and center in the middle of most major events of the last 70 years. We've been looked to to assist in peace negotiations in Israel (that have mostly failed, of course, but not for the want of trying). We've been looked upon as an economic powerhouse, usually outstripping most countries in the world for productivity, manufacturing, etc.

Naturally, other countries aren't chop liver either. I don't imply that. Like I said, I consider Europe, Canada, etc., friends, and I wish that we would bury our differences and turn our mutual sites on the true threats - Islam and China.

[ginckgo]

[SamanthaJane]

ROFLMAO!!!!

[ginckgo]

ROFLMAO!!!!

Another example of Rule #34 of the interwebs

[FBM]

ROFLMAO!!!!

Ah ha!! I finally put it together!!


+1

[Coito ergo sum]

Merkel Government to Raise Health-Insurance Premiums in Bid to Cut Deficit
By Rainer Buergin - Jul 6, 2010
Email Share Print
Chancellor Angela Merkel’s coalition backed higher health-insurance premiums, a move some critics from her own party said will fail to curb rising health-care costs and might undermine the German economic recovery.

Coalition leaders meeting in Berlin today agreed to raise health premiums to 15.5 percent of gross pay from 14.9 percent, Health Minister Philipp Roesler said. Employers will contribute 7.3 percent with 8.2 percent paid by employees.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-0 ... ficit.html
Can't wait till I get to pay 15.5% of my income for health insurance! Wow! It'll be nice to have that "right." Gotta get us some o' that over here in Ameriland.

[drl2]

Can't wait till I get to pay 15.5% of my income for health insurance! Wow! It'll be nice to have that "right." Gotta get us some o' that over here in Ameriland.

As the only wage earner for a family of four, I already do. And that's if I don't actually use it. That's before deductibles and co-pays and assuming the insurance company doesn't reject any treatments. There's dental coverage but it only pays 50-75% of the cost of a dental visit. I'll probably need to add vision coverage this year as my eyes aren't what they used to be, so bump that % up a little more just to get a discount on eyewear. Yay, free market.