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.
You all do realize its not just republicans against this bill right?
This poll shows that 41% democrats want republicans to fight the bill.
Why is Obama not listening to the citizens of this country do you think Rham and David are shielding him?
He is not listening because he is arrogant. He wants us to be dependent on the government for EVERYTHING. He wants us to go crawling to him and his democratic posse for a HANDOUT. Why else would he skip on doing anything about the UNEMPLOYMENT crisis for an entire year? His jobs(a.k.a stimulus) bill was a load of wasteful government spending. Stimulus bills have had no effect on the unemployment situation and won't bring down unemployment.
The ONLY bipartisan part of the bill was the people who voted no.
By the way I think Obama is arrogant because a good president would have reached across the aisle and worked with Republicans. I saw the summit, he refused to even listen to the ideas Republicans offered. When John McCain questioned the despicable process of this bill, he blew him off.
So if I were rich and had lots of cash laying around it would be my best interest that I am mandated to have health insurance, and i receive a fine or jail if i don't have health insurance?
How can that happen? If the constitution is in your best interest (as I stated it is first above the will of the people) and it specifically protects your inalienable rights to which no man has authority to dictate, then how could I serve your best interest by doing so?
The constitution protects from others infringing on your freedoms. If the will of the people come first, then what is to stop the majorities or the obnoxious individuals from disregarding the protections of the Constitution? It must come first in order to insure those protections, regardless of the will of the people.
How can that happen? If the constitution is in your best interest (as I stated it is first above the will of the people) and it specifically protects your inalienable rights to which no man has authority to dictate, then how could I serve your best interest by doing so?
The constitution protects from others infringing on your freedoms. If the will of the people come first, then what is to stop the majorities or the obnoxious individuals from disregarding the protections of the Constitution? It must come first in order to insure those protections, regardless of the will of the people.
the government choosing how i deal with my health is not constitutional
He is not listening because he is arrogant. He wants us to be dependent on the government for EVERYTHING. He wants us to go crawling to him and his democratic posse for a HANDOUT. Why else would he skip on doing anything about the UNEMPLOYMENT crisis for an entire year? His jobs(a.k.a stimulus) bill was a load of wasteful government spending. Stimulus bills have had no effect on the unemployment situation and won't bring down unemployment.
The ONLY bipartisan part of the bill was the people who voted no.
By the way I think Obama is arrogant because a good president would have reached across the aisle and worked with Republicans. I saw the summit, he refused to even listen to the ideas Republicans offered. When John McCain questioned the despicable process of this bill, he blew him off.
Thats true if they really cared about getting Americans back to work they wouldnt have the majority of the stimulus bill set aside to be spent a year later.
Now now now.. That makes no sense when one decides to dwell into your argument further. Isnt the whole point behind mandating insurance is that those who dont pay their hospital bills screw everyone else? I could have a credit score of 500 and obtained my money because I screwed everyone I ever entered into business with.. Does this now make me a good "exemption" to the policy?
Just become one has the ability to pay, doesnt mean they WILL pay. Some NOW have the ability to make payments or throw their doctors visits on a credit card, but yet the government mandates that insurance companies provide these as part of coverage.. You dont NOW support allowing individuals to pay out of pocket, but odd that you would change your stance when one starts to throw in other parameters...
I haven't changed my mind on that part of the mandate. Since only about 5% of the population could satisfy that requirement, what would be the purpose of forcing them to pay someone else to do what they themselves, can do. If there are sufficient financial resources designated for a persons health care, similar to Ins Co requirements, where would there be a problem of people not using that, when the time comes. Also, forgive me, if I don't trust you to pay out of pocket, if you encounter a very significant care need.
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.
