Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They didn't have the 60 votes to survive a filibuster that the Republicans were threatening with. Did you not pay attention while all of this was going on?
SO basically what I'm getting from the left is some physco babble BS, twist talking.
You lefties can say all day long, that obama really did not mean it like that “My plan begins by covering every American." If he did not mean it like that then why not come back and say that?
Or you get stupid comments like:
Quote:
Originally Posted by bUU
Or you're just choosing to ignore the qualifications, but go on ranting and raving and refusing to admit how you're corrupting the totality of what was presented by fixating on individual words. I'm done with you.
What qualifications are you talking about, it was never put to us like that, it was sold to us as “My plan begins by covering every American."
If that's the way it was supposed to be, then why not say it like that? Or is this the part of "we have to pass it to know what's in in" BS......
Actually we pay more for healthcare and cover less than any other country. We are currently running an inefficient system that you are supporting.
There are many definitions of ineffiencies.
If USA citizens and residents want to leave with social healthcare drawbacks. U know. The longer waits. The extreme restrictions of which doctors they can see. Than so be it.
Americans basically want to have their cake and eat it also.
Go spend some time at the VA system and than spend some time at a private system.
Let me know how "efficient" the government system is. It's cheaper u know. I will give you that.
you do understand as a taxpayer...YOU CANT AFFORD SINGLE PAYER
You currently pay more than you should for less having healthcare tied to employment. To pay for Public Option would be through a tax based on your income level, and your employer wouldn't have to deduct money from your pay check to pay for a weaker healthcare insurance.
Thus is why we currently have an inefficient healthcare system.
You currently pay more than you should for less having healthcare tied to employment. To pay for Public Option would be through a tax based on your income level, and your employer wouldn't have to deduct money from your pay check to pay for a weaker healthcare insurance.
Thus is why we currently have an inefficient healthcare system.
Sounds all nice on paper doesn't it ?
How's the current government run healthcare systems doing today ?
Medicaid and medicare are the shining examples of what would be in store.
so you admit the senate was FILIBUSTER PROOF as all 60 of those votes were dumbocrats
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
