Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-11-2009, 03:59 PM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,878,374 times
Reputation: 14345

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucidus View Post
Using this example, wouldn't this situation be more like God coming down from Heaven to criticize Jesuits for claiming that there are inconsistencies in the Bible. God then states that there are no inconsistencies in the Bible and a Jesuit says "you lie" to God. Then God and his angels and all of his worshipers claim that the Jesuit is the one who is actually lying. Then God's angels change the Bible to remove the inconsistencies?
So you are saying that the President went to Congress for the express reason to criticize Republicans????

That's a stretch, isn't it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-11-2009, 04:00 PM
 
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
17,531 posts, read 24,698,072 times
Reputation: 9980
You mean the Senate has a Bill, last I heard they had none. The only existing Bill is the House Bill. But then again it's FOX and they have NO CREDIBILITY

Fox News gets okay to misinform public, court ruling | Media Reform | CeaseSPIN.org
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2009, 04:17 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,481,831 times
Reputation: 27720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boompa View Post
You mean the Senate has a Bill, last I heard they had none. The only existing Bill is the House Bill. But then again it's FOX and they have NO CREDIBILITY

Fox News gets okay to misinform public, court ruling | Media Reform | CeaseSPIN.org

Actually there were about 5 different versions of bills floating around Washington. Only one was posted on OpenCongress though for us to read.
The others were from "committees".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2009, 04:20 PM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,419 posts, read 20,306,967 times
Reputation: 8958
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
Every liberal on this forum should come to this thread and admit they were wrong.

Afterall, House Democrats are working to close the loophole that would have allowed illegals to obtain federal coverage. Barrack Obama either didn't know the truth, or blatantly lied. Either way, liberals defended him and they were wrong.

So, how about it? We'll be waiting.
It does not matter what they do. They cannot bar illegals, according to Judge Andrew Napalotano. If The Federal government provides health care, they cannot deny it to a certain class (illegals). This he explained on Fox's Neal Cavuto last night. This is because the Supreme Court refused to hear a case involving the California Proposition to deny health care to illegals, which was overturned by the courts.

He said, if they try to deny illegals coverage, it will be declared unconstitutional.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2009, 04:29 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,481,831 times
Reputation: 27720
So that means ANY Federal plan by default, will allow illegals to join ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2009, 04:40 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,026 posts, read 44,824,472 times
Reputation: 13711
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Actually, no, just because something, anything, is added to one bill on a certain issue, does NOT mean there is an expectation that that addendum will become part of any and all bills brought before Congress for a final vote.
In this case there is - you can bet on it!

Quote:
The give and take that is part of this legislation has always had citizen verification on the table as a possible part of this bill.
How very odd... Obama didn't say it was up for 'give and take.' He insisted that, "The reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally." How is that going to be true if there's no citizen verification requirement?

Quote:
Wilson's outburst didn't put it on the table. It may have upped the value of it as a bargaining chip. But Wilson's outburst was only the cherry on top of the sundae, as it were, because the Republicans have been toying with this chip for weeks and weeks. Wilson didn't bring a new issue to the table. He behaved odiously, and put a spotlight on one issue.
Wilson's outburst was rude, but it forced Obama and the Dems to live up to Obama's word.

Quote:
And I don't even know what you were intending with your remark about health care reform (why did you call it "health insurance reform"----is that what we're calling it if the public option isn't a component?) falling off the table.
What remark about falling off the table???

And which is it really? Health care reform or health insurance reform? Obama keeps changing his mind:
Health Insurance Reform? - Swampland - TIME.com

Quote:
As for the Blue Dog Dems that are fearing for their re-election chances. I don't think Health Care Reform is going to make much difference. How their constituents are weathering the economy is going to decide their fates.
Exactly - their constituents don't want to pay for 10+ million illegal immigrants' health insurance when they're struggling to pay their own bills. You can bet they'll be looking for that citizen verification requirement.

Quote:
They can dance around this issue, but when they start stumping on their home ground, this issue will fall off the table. If their constituents are still hurting, the Blue Dogs will be hurting in the polls.
If the Blue Dogs vote for a reform that ends up giving more freebies to illegal immigrants, you can bet they'll be hurting in the polls. They know that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2009, 04:43 PM
 
Location: Midessa, Texas Home Yangzhou, Jiangsu temporarily
1,506 posts, read 4,280,302 times
Reputation: 992
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
So you are saying that the President went to Congress for the express reason to criticize Republicans????

That's a stretch, isn't it?
I don't think its a stretch. The speech was intended to critisize Republicans and Blue Dogs who opposed the plan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2009, 04:46 PM
 
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
17,531 posts, read 24,698,072 times
Reputation: 9980
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy View Post
It does not matter what they do. They cannot bar illegals, according to Judge Andrew Napalotano. If The Federal government provides health care, they cannot deny it to a certain class (illegals). This he explained on Fox's Neal Cavuto last night. This is because the Supreme Court refused to hear a case involving the California Proposition to deny health care to illegals, which was overturned by the courts.

He said, if they try to deny illegals coverage, it will be declared unconstitutional.
IF that is true, then any law Congress enacts would be unconstitutional.
Then someone needs to take it to the Supremes

The IF is still because FOX can not legally be used as a credible source of NEWS

Makes you wonder why President Reagan gave them Medical Coverage in the first place
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2009, 04:51 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,481,831 times
Reputation: 27720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boompa View Post
IF that is true, then any law Congress enacts would be unconstitutional.
Then someone needs to take it to the Supremes

The IF is still because FOX can not legally be used as a credible source of NEWS

Makes you wonder why President Reagan gave them Medical Coverage in the first place
LA times good enough for you ? Last sentence of linked article:
Prop. 8 gay marriage ban goes to Supreme Court - Los Angeles Times
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2009, 04:54 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,026 posts, read 44,824,472 times
Reputation: 13711
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/11/us...er=rss&emc=rss

Quote:
“Yeah, it was rude, but somebody needed to say it,” said Susan Wahl, 41, a homemaker in this town of 800 outside Columbia. “Ordinary people can’t just get up and tell Obama he lied. He said something we all wanted to say.”
Susan Wahl nails it!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:10 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top