Going over the Cliff

[Rajvik]

yes i do, its insanity, its also insanity to think that if you dont stand your ground at some point and stand on principle, that your not going to get walked over for the rest of your existance. If the republicans dont stand their ground then there might as well not be a house, let it just be the senate, or for that matter get rid of the lower and upper houses all together, just let Obama be Emperor of the new American Socialist Empire, because thats what it will be, a liberal socialist pile of drek that will make the Soviet Union look like a McDonalds Playland.

telling is how the media played the game around here during the 2012 election cycle, funny how Cain, the only black republican with a snowballs chance in hell of getting elected suddenly had philandery issues when he was working a potential run, yet as soon as he decided not to run everything dissapeared.

Rob, i'm sorry i heard it on a talk radio program and cant remember or find their source
 

[Dartz]

yes i do, its insanity, its also insanity to think that if you dont stand your ground at some point and stand on principle, that your not going to get walked over for the rest of your existance. If the republicans dont stand their ground then there might as well not be a house, let it just be the senate, or for that matter get rid of the lower and upper houses all together, just let Obama be Emperor of the new American Socialist Empire, because thats what it will be, a liberal socialist pile of drek that will make the Soviet Union look like a McDonalds Playland.

What?

What?

What?

Just flat what?

The United States is in no danger of turning Soviet. Quite frankly, that statement is rediculous - to the point where I'd almost call it a joke. There're many flaws with the ACA, but SOCIALISM isn't one of them. It's almost anti-socialist, but specifically requiring people to buy a privately sold product.

Finally. The first duty of a Government is not to blindly stick to their guns to the bitter end - it's to do what's necessary to actually govern the bloody country and keep the whole edifice ticking over. Ideology is a nice thing to have, but the reality of governance is that the basic interests of the country should come first. The houses are 2-1 against them... arguably this is a fair mandate against their position.

Also. 40% in favour?
How many outright disfavour.... I doubt it's 60%
How many don't know's are in there? Taken in that context, it makes more sense. Never mind that a lot of these questions are crock anyway - they're always leading.
________________________________
--m(^0^)m-- Wot, no sig?

[Black Aeronaut]

*Snorts* Next thing you know it the tea party will be demanding that we no longer have to buy car insurance because it's socialism.

[ordnance11]

Well, here is my status right now:
1. I have brought all my gear into the office. Check my status. Intermittent excepted. Which means in the event of a catastrophe, I get called back to work. with no pay. I (And everyone else) have no idea who long were locked out. My best guess is NLT 10/17/13. Though getting paid for lost time is another matter. Though I can see the political consequences of not doing that. Especially Northern Virginia and the neighboring states around D.C. The good news is that the VA is still operating because they're funded every 2 years rather than annually. Though their IT is affected since they're funded annually.
Why do I say Oct 17? That's when financial Armageddon rears it's head. So...it's a game of chicken right now.
Quote:

Within the next few days, if House Republicans don’t accept a Senate
plan to open the government until mid-November, Reid is highly unlikely
to accept a budget deal if it does not increase the debt ceiling,
Democratic sources said Tuesday. If the House GOP won’t back the
Senate’s stopgap plan by later this week, Democrats are prepared to
argue that it makes little sense to agree to a short-term spending bill
if Congress is forced to resolve another fiscal crisis in just a matter
of days.

Link to article
From a tactical view, asking to gut the President's signature first term achievement wasn't going to happen. If he had gone alone with it, he might as well hand in his resignation as well.  Had they followed Boehmer's idea,  that is to pick the fight at the debt limit, they would have had better leverage. To my mind, they've lost that leverage. 20-30 Tea Partiers and their allies might have safe districts (until 2020 anyway), but the rest of the RINO's and squishes aren't. Now their have to worry about weathering a Tea Party challenge because they're not "pure" enough (witness the Senate fight in Wyoming) as well as the outrage n their districts. The GOP may have solidified their hold on their districts, but at the cost of not becoming a national party. And I have noted the the GOP keeps lurching to the right every time they lose at the national level. 
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[chibipoe]

Dartz wrote:

---

What makes it silly - and what I'm trying to find - is the video where the majority of people say they aren't in favour of 'Obamacare', but have no problem with the Affordable Care act. I can't find it anymore, which is annoying....

I wouldn't say it's been passed unmolested either. There's a point however where you have to stop fighting..... and it's one house against two in that regard, facing a president who was elected by people who wanted the ACA to happen. Arguably both can say they have the popular mandate in that regards.

Telling is the fact that the president was elected after the act was passed - suggesting voters were pleased. And getting the act passed was already a compromise.

Dartz, it probably isn't what you meant, but there is this:
http://www.youtube.com/v/sx2scvIFGjE&ve ... tube_gdata
"This hand of mine glows with an awesome power. Its burning grip tells me to defeat you....
Shining FINGER!" -Domon Kashuu, Mobile Fighter G Gundam

[Dartz]

I could've sworn it was different, but that seems to be it.

Though the point I wanted to make with it is that most people answering those questions don't really know what they're being asked.
________________________________
--m(^0^)m-- Wot, no sig?

[robkelk]

yes i do, its insanity, its also insanity to think that if you dont stand your ground at some point and stand on principle, that your not going to get walked over for the rest of your existance. If the republicans dont stand their ground then there might as well not be a house, let it just be the senate, or for that matter get rid of the lower and upper houses all together, just let Obama be Emperor of the new American Socialist Empire, because thats what it will be, a liberal socialist pile of drek that will make the Soviet Union look like a McDonalds Playland.

What?

What?

What?

Just flat what?

The United States is in no danger of turning Soviet. Quite frankly, that statement is rediculous - to the point where I'd almost call it a joke. There're many flaws with the ACA, but SOCIALISM isn't one of them. It's almost anti-socialist, but specifically requiring people to buy a privately sold product.

Canada has had universal health care for decades (funded and run by the government, not private insurance companies), and we're not socialist. Equating the two is not only fear-mongering, it's demonstrably false.

“Every man has a right to his own opinion, but no man has a right to be wrong in his facts.”
– Bernard Baruch, Deming (New Mexico) Headlight, 6 January 1950

Let's keep the facts right and argue only about the opinions, okay?
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[ordnance11]

The situation here is similar in 2012 elections. President Obama, the Democrats and most pollsters believe that the democrats would win the 2012 presidential election. Mitt Romney, the GOP and Karl Rove believe in their hearts they would win. We all know how that turned out. So now we have a similar experiment.The Democrats believe that they can win this fight. The Tea Party wanted a fight now and they got it. And they believe they are winning.. Let's see how this particular scenario plays out.
I have good reason to believe that Boehner will not be the Speaker of the House come the 2014 elections, no matter what the outcome now. He barely had the majority of votes to become speaker after the 2012 elections. The President believes he cannot work with him. The Tea Party doesn't trust him. And now he's facing a revolt of the moderates against him. So the question is if Boehmer does not become the speaker, who is? A lot of that would depend on the make-up of the House after 2014. If the moderates (i.e RINO's and squishes to the Tea Party) lose seats (by how many, no idea. So let's say 6-10 seats in the low side.), that means that the Tea Party will gain more dominance (not that they haven't already).  Maybe it will be Ted Cruz.
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[khagler]

ordnance11 wrote:

---

I have good reason to believe that Boehmer will not be the Speaker of the House come the 2014 elections, no matter what the outcome now. He barely had the majority of votes to become speaker after the 2012 elections. The President believes he cannot work with him. The Tea Party doesn't trust him. And now he's facing a revolt of the moderates against him. So the question is if Boehmer does not become the speaker, who is? A lot of that would depend on the make-up of the House after 2014. If the moderates (i.e RINO's and squishes to the Tea Party) lose seats (by how many, no idea. So let's say 6-10 seats in the low side.), that means that the Tea Party will gain more dominance (not that they haven't already).  Maybe it will be Ted Cruz.

Thanks, that was really funny.  I think you've pretty neatly summed up the intellectual level of this thread in just that last sentence.
(For the foreign readers: Ted Cruz is a Senator. That means he can't be Speaker of the House, because he's not in the House.)

[Foxboy]

Unfortunately political debate isn't so much debate anymore as emotional responses firing off haphazardly.
''We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat
them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.''

-- James Nicoll

[ordnance11]

khagler wrote:

---

ordnance11 wrote:

---

I have good reason to believe that Boehmer will not be the Speaker of the House come the 2014 elections, no matter what the outcome now. He barely had the majority of votes to become speaker after the 2012 elections. The President believes he cannot work with him. The Tea Party doesn't trust him. And now he's facing a revolt of the moderates against him. So the question is if Boehmer does not become the speaker, who is? A lot of that would depend on the make-up of the House after 2014. If the moderates (i.e RINO's and squishes to the Tea Party) lose seats (by how many, no idea. So let's say 6-10 seats in the low side.), that means that the Tea Party will gain more dominance (not that they haven't already).  Maybe it will be Ted Cruz.

Thanks, that was really funny.  I think you've pretty neatly summed up the intellectual level of this thread in just that last sentence.
(For the foreign readers: Ted Cruz is a Senator. That means he can't be Speaker of the House, because he's not in the House.)

It just means you do not have a sense of irony or sarcasm. I don't have a problem with that. Considering that the Tea Parties are following whatever Cruz suggests. Witness the latest gambit. Passing a series of mini-cr's that required a 2/3 majority. I call it "We are releasing the hostages one at a time plan." Cruz floated that plan the other night and, presto! The House decided to go thru with it. I have noticed Boehmer didn't announce it. And Cruz has been pushing for this fight since last recess. Boehmer did not. so..who is leading the house?
http://www.npr.org/2013/10/02/228376346 ... down-drama
Khagler, face it. The Tea Party has a lousy sense of tactics. First, it's the timing of the fight. If you want to pick a fight, pick it at a time when you have the most leverage. That would had been at the debt ceiling debate. 2nd, you do not force the President to defund his signature 1st term achievement. It's like this threat:
If you we don't do want we want, we'll hit you in the nuts.
If you do want we want we'll hit you in the face.
So now the Party has their fight, and we have a shutdown. So, what's the Tea Party end game? Threaten the Senate Democrats in Red States?  So, they reverse their votes and they get hammered at re-election time for being flip-floppers? So what is the benefit for them for doing that?   Hope that public opinion goes against the democrats? Better start doing some fast talking to the majority of the country that suggests the Tea Party is in the right. Because of right now it's 70-30 against that position.
If the Tea Party is dead set at repealing Obamacare, the best chance was the 2012 elections. The next shot after that would have been super majorities in the house and Senate in 2014. The last slim hope would had been capturing all 3 branches with a majority in 2016.  Can the GOP accomplish that?
And when we get to the debt ceiling fight...which is now going to be one one and the same fight. The GOP opening bid, we've already discussed.
So, what we have now is a waiting game, for which the Democrats have a better hand. 
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[ordnance11]

A sampling of the nation's op-ed newpaper pages. Most blame the GOP, some say "A pox to both houses.
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[Rajvik]

you know i was actually going to come in here and appologize for loosing my temper yesterday, but considering how you have mistaken what i wrote i wont bother.

I was not saying that the ACA was a step toward socialism. I do believe that socialized medicine in the US is wrong and will not work, partially because i have already found out what my insurance costs for next year are going to be and its approximately 3 times as much as i'm paying now, and partially because having been in the military in a retirement town i know how the hospital gets backed up when no body has to worry about paying. This is just the VA so i worry what its going to be like when EVERYONE is doing it. I already wait 3 months for an appointment, how much worse is it going to get.

My comment about devolving into another soviet union was a matter of turning the house into a rubber stamp for the president and the senate. As Aaron Tippin said in his song, "You have to stand for something, or you'll fall for anything." quite frankly this probably isnt the best fight for the republicans to stand on, however, if not this then what. They have sent budget after budget after budget since the 2010 election got them control of the house and the "Purse strings" and each and everyone of them has been denied. Until now they have gone along with the democrats in the senate with continuing resolutions like they have since the Democrats took control in 2006, (note thats 2 years of Bush, and 5 years of Obama that there hasnt been an actual budget) Finally someone has grown a pair and is standing their ground, and if its still shutdown come the 17th more power to them, force Obama to pay those notes out of the actual treasury.

but i digress, lets assume for a moment that the house simply becomes a rubber stamp on the current administration, first this would only last until the next election when they get replaced by someone else who is probably even more hardline than the current crop of young bloods. Boehner would no longer be speaker, and many of the older, "Waiting my turn at the power" type RINOs would be gone as well since the house is a 2 year cycle and one of the current young bloods would be promoted. Now I'm a cynic when it comes to people in power, this is not the old days when people became representatives and senators because the people convinced them to (ala Jimmy Stewart "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance"), no the people who seek office now are in it for what they can gain from it, be it prestige, control or money. The difference between the young bloods of the TEA Party republicans and the RINOs is that the young bloods are impatient and want to cut as many politcal throats as they must to get what they want NOW. They arent going to wait like the old men have for it to be their turn. because of that their going to do whatever it takes to politically castrate the liberal groups out there and take their places. they see three things as their leverage, The debt ceiling and budget, Employment and taxation, and Big government and socialized Healthcare

the bad thing is i dont see where they are necesarily wrong
 

[ordnance11]

Rajvik wrote:

---

you know i was actually going to come in here and appologize for loosing my temper yesterday, but considering how you have mistaken what i wrote i wont bother.

I was not saying that the ACA was a step toward socialism. I do believe that socialized medicine in the US is wrong and will not work, partially because i have already found out what my insurance costs for next year are going to be and its approximately 3 times as much as i'm paying now, and partially because having been in the military in a retirement town i know how the hospital gets backed up when no body has to worry about paying. This is just the VA so i worry what its going to be like when EVERYONE is doing it. I already wait 3 months for an appointment, how much worse is it going to get.

My comment about devolving into another soviet union was a matter of turning the house into a rubber stamp for the president and the senate. As Aaron Tippin said in his song, "You have to stand for something, or you'll fall for anything." quite frankly this probably isnt the best fight for the republicans to stand on, however, if not this then what. They have sent budget after budget after budget since the 2010 election got them control of the house and the "Purse strings" and each and everyone of them has been denied. Until now they have gone along with the democrats in the senate with continuing resolutions like they have since the Democrats took control in 2006, (note thats 2 years of Bush, and 5 years of Obama that there hasnt been an actual budget) Finally someone has grown a pair and is standing their ground, and if its still shutdown come the 17th more power to them, force Obama to pay those notes out of the actual treasury.

but i digress, lets assume for a moment that the house simply becomes a rubber stamp on the current administration, first this would only last until the next election when they get replaced by someone else who is probably even more hardline than the current crop of young bloods. Boehner would no longer be speaker, and many of the older, "Waiting my turn at the power" type RINOs would be gone as well since the house is a 2 year cycle and one of the current young bloods would be promoted. Now I'm a cynic when it comes to people in power, this is not the old days when people became representatives and senators because the people convinced them to (ala Jimmy Stewart "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance"), no the people who seek office now are in it for what they can gain from it, be it prestige, control or money. The difference between the young bloods of the TEA Party republicans and the RINOs is that the young bloods are impatient and want to cut as many politcal throats as they must to get what they want NOW. They arent going to wait like the old men have for it to be their turn. because of that their going to do whatever it takes to politically castrate the liberal groups out there and take their places. they see three things as their leverage, The debt ceiling and budget, Employment and taxation, and Big government and socialized Healthcare

the bad thing is i dont see where they are necesarily wrong

And do you realize the collateral damage that would inflict on the nation, if the Tea Party don't get what they want? Or if they do get what they want? I mean right now there's a few thousand kids in the Talledega, AL area who are not getting lunches or decent daycare because the head start program shut down October 1st.
Head Start program shuttered
And these are either working parents or single mothers who cannot afford private health care. So, even if I am out of the job temporarily, there are people who are just as impacted by this, even more so.
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[robkelk]

I see the NASA website is down ... which is just petty, considering they have a replacement page to present to people.

I may be a civil servant, but I'm an IT civil servant. I know how many people it takes to run a static webpage once it's on the web, and that number is less than one. They could have left the site up until the server broke without spending any more money than they're spending now.
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[Dartz]

You could call it 'shutdown theatre', or you could call it a fair demonstration of what exactly the government is responsible for and how many things people take for granted come from the government in some way. Either, or, or both really.
________________________________
--m(^0^)m-- Wot, no sig?

[ordnance11]

They may had to shut down the server, since they can't pay the electric bill now.
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[ordnance11]

If no resolution is done by Friday, we will be seeing the debt limit fight begin, and if that becomes a stalemate, then the president will probably have to do this action:
Raise the debt limit himself
Then you will see the GOP issue articles of impeachment. Probably pass since it requires a simple majority. Where it dies in the Senate since it requires a 2/3 majority. Off course, it will take some spin to make their case, as to why they're trying to impeach a guy who just stopped national and global financial turmoil in the markets.
Why the Tea Party and the GOP are willing to go to such lenghts
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[ECSNorway]

The reason we don't like the ACA is because it is quite basically an incredibly bad law.

Take a look at the consequences: Health insurance costs for most of the population are doubling or tripling. Thousands of businesses are laying off workers or converting full-time positions to part-time in order to avoid their share of this cost increase. Even the big labor unions, traditionally Obaka's strongest supporters, are coming out against it.

What did you EXPECT when Congress was presented with a FIFTEEN THOUSAND PAGE bill and NOT GIVEN TIME TO REVIEW IT before voting on it? What would you do if someone dumped a 15,000-page contract on your desk and said "This is going to govern the rest of your life, sign it now, no you have to sign it now you can't read it first, no you can't get a lawyer either"? You'd throw it in their face, that's what you'd do.

You get exactly what we're getting now: CRAPPED UPON by a pile of steaming dung in the shape of an attempt to outright seize control of our economy.

It needs to be TRASHED and replaced with something that MAKES SENSE. I agree that the situation needs to be improved and healthcare needs to be more affordable and more accessible, but this is quite clearly NOT THE SOLUTION.

Take a hint from what's been happening with college tuition over the past 40 years. Government subsidies MAKE THINGS MORE EXPENSIVE.
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.

[ordnance11]

Oh great, now there's shooting in the Senate side.
Edit: Okay they said it started at the White House and ended at the Capitol.
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[ECSNorway]

What happened, as far as I can tell: Someone tried to ram her car through the barricade at the White House, there was a pursuit, one cop was injured (apparently some sort of street barrier rose up under his car, he was -not- shot.)

There was some form of gun battle at the end of the pursuit.

No further news is available at this time, the policeman I noted above is the only reported injury.
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.

[Jorlem]

Edit: Misread what was said, nevermind.
-----
Stand between the Silver Crystal and the Golden Sea.
"Youngsters these days just have no appreciation for the magnificence of the legendary cucumber."  --Krityan Elder, Tales of Vesperia.

[CattyNebulart]

yes i do, its insanity, its also insanity to think that if you dont stand your ground at some point and stand on principle, that your not going to get walked over for the rest of your existance. If the republicans dont stand their ground then there might as well not be a house, let it just be the senate, or for that matter get rid of the lower and upper houses all together, just let Obama be Emperor of the new American Socialist Empire, because thats what it will be, a liberal socialist pile of drek that will make the Soviet Union look like a McDonalds Playland.

What?

What?

What?

Just flat what?

The United States is in no danger of turning Soviet. Quite frankly, that statement is rediculous - to the point where I'd almost call it a joke. There're many flaws with the ACA, but SOCIALISM isn't one of them. It's almost anti-socialist, but specifically requiring people to buy a privately sold product.

Canada has had universal health care for decades (funded and run by the government, not private insurance companies), and we're not socialist. Equating the two is not only fear-mongering, it's demonstrably false.

“Every man has a right to his own opinion, but no man has a right to be wrong in his facts.”
– Bernard Baruch, Deming (New Mexico) Headlight, 6 January 1950

Let's keep the facts right and argue only about the opinions, okay?

Having healthcare funded by the government is socialist, just like having fire-fighters payed by the goverment is socialist, or having the police as a arm of the goverment instead of private security companies. As a side-note there are proper capitalist places inside the US where you do need to pay a yearly fee to the fire brigade... and if you don't then they won't put out the fire until it threatens your neighbor who did pay the firebrigade.... which immediately points out why this is a stupid idea as it gives me a vested interest in having my neighbours insured. Socialism in practice just means that soceity as a whole owns and controlls a sector of the industry.

In the same way I have an interest in everyone around me having up to date vacintations and being treated for various infectious diseases before they spread anywhere close to me or my childern that are too young to be vacinated,... and think of it this way, say you are in a carcrash, maybe the other driver was drunk, or whatever, the firefighters show up and you don't pay anything, the police show up, they are free too, the ambulance shows up you are bankrupt... the idea that healthcare should be private is as silly an idea as the idea that fire-fighters should be privately funded.
E: "Did they... did they just endorse the combination of the JSDF and US Army by showing them as two lesbian lolicons moving in together and holding hands and talking about how 'intimate' they were?"
B: "Have you forgotten so soon? They're phasing out Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

[Rajvik]

Warning: Wall O' Text

catty, once again i point out i lost my temper at that point and that you are misreading what i was saying, thats why i tried to clarify in a following post what i was saying, i will try to make it even clearer now. What i was saying is that when you have a Lower house that disagrees with both the upper house and the Executive branch as a whole it can be a good thing, in fact that it is there as a check to ballance the power of the other two. Remove that check because it refuses to kow tow to the other two and you start down a slope to totalitarianism.

Also Catty, there are things that are done at different levels of Government, you dont see the federal government running local firefighters, no its a city county and town issue and they charge specific taxes to fund them, or like where i live you have, (oh my gods,) Vollenteer Fire Departments where the equipment is paid for by donations, fundraising amongst the community, and other local things. Same goes for the police, the Federal Government has certain requirements and responsibilities, its when they step outside those bounds that they push the boundaries of big S Socialism.

The current healthcare law is severly flawed and the only reason it passed in the first place was that the democrats controlled all three houses. The smarter thing would have been to do an insurance version of Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac. Oh wait, they already did, its called MEDICAID, its for those people that cant afford any insurance. what this was was a power grab plain and simple, something to FORCE people to buy something they didnt necessary want or need, and be forced onto the government exchanges where the government could siphon the money off the fund other hair brained schemes.

Now i ask you all, WHY, why should the government step in and take control of health care, do you really think the politicians and their beurocrats can actually do a better job than the private sector? Where has that really ever happened and been cost effective. Tell me how well it works in Canada and Britain when the people who can afford it are coming to the US to have their operations done and those that cant suffer until the next budgetary year allows the hospitals to actually afford to do things for them. Those who have a coronary blockage and instead of getting a Bypass operation get a stent and a smile and told to come back at a later date. Personally i have to deal with the VA which is bad enough at times, thats GOVERNMENT RUN MEDICAL, i go in and tell them i need to see a doctor, they tell me that they will set me an appointment and inform me by mail when it is. I dont see a doctor that day, i dont even see a corpman, i get told after a 5 hour wait that they will set me an appointment and notify me when it is. I go to that appointment 3 months later, (i dare not miss it, and its at their convenience), and they decide i need an MRI (finally, not like i havent been telling them that for three years), another 3 months later i get scanned by the MRI and told they'll inform me when i can see the Orthopedist for the explanation, another 3 months down the road i finally see the Orthopedist, and he tells me that they wont work on my knees, (surgery of any kind or injections) that i'll be mailed a brace to wear, and that i need to find another job where i'm not having to be a human forklift.

9 months to be told something i already knew and told i'll be mailed a brace, (its been a month and a half and i havent seen it yet) in a shitty economy and a navy town where the employee exchange was 700% when the economy was GOOD, no thank you, let the private sector handle it, they'll at least tell you your screwed in a timely manner.

Now that i have that out of my system, Ordinance i've been trying to find a way to phrase my answer to the Talladega head start issue that didnt make me seem like a heartless son of bitch, unfortunately i've failed. Question for those parents and single mothers; Since your kid had to be three to go into head start, WHAT DID YOU DO BEFORE THEN? and for the program itself, get other funding, ask for the local churches to make donations, local businesses as well, Talladega Raceway is great about making donations for programs like that, dont base your entire budget on a government largess that might have to GO AWAY.

like i said, makes me seem like a cold hearted bastard, but its true.
 

[ECSNorway]

Now i ask you all, WHY, why should the government step in and take control of health care, do you really think the politicians and their beurocrats can actually do a better job than the private sector? Where has that really ever happened and been cost effective. Tell me how well it works in Canada and Britain when the people who can afford it are coming to the US to have their operations done and those that cant suffer until the next budgetary year allows the hospitals to actually afford to do things for them. Those who have a coronary blockage and instead of getting a Bypass operation get a stent and a smile and told to come back at a later date. Personally i have to deal with the VA which is bad enough at times, thats GOVERNMENT RUN MEDICAL, i go in and tell them i need to see a doctor, they tell me that they will set me an appointment and inform me by mail when it is. I dont see a doctor that day, i dont even see a corpman, i get told after a 5 hour wait that they will set me an appointment and notify me when it is. I go to that appointment 3 months later, (i dare not miss it, and its at their convenience), and they decide i need an MRI (finally, not like i havent been telling them that for three years), another 3 months later i get scanned by the MRI and told they'll inform me when i can see the Orthopedist for the explanation, another 3 months down the road i finally see the Orthopedist, and he tells me that they wont work on my knees, (surgery of any kind or injections) that i'll be mailed a brace to wear, and that i need to find another job where i'm not having to be a human forklift.

9 months to be told something i already knew and told i'll be mailed a brace, (its been a month and a half and i havent seen it yet) in a shitty economy and a navy town where the employee exchange was 700% when the economy was GOOD, no thank you, let the private sector handle it, they'll at least tell you your screwed in a timely manner.

And this is why we are violently uninterested in government-run healthcare. Because it applies all the inefficiencies of federal bureaucracy to a situation where time is very often literally life or death for the people involved.

Tell me, of the supposed millions of uninsured, how many are healthy young people who can afford it perfectly well, but have chosen not to pay for it because they feel they don't need it? (Answer: At least a third, maybe as many as half depending on whose statistics you believe.)

And Catty, have you answered any of the other questions I asked, or are you just (as libtards usually do) dismissing and ignoring them because you don't like the answers?

What's your answer to this little AP quote?

The AFL-CIO approved a resolution saying that President Obama's health care overhaul will drive up the costs of union-sponsored health plans to the point that workers and employers are forced to abandon them.

In a strongly worded resolution released Wednesday, the federation said that labor unions still support the Affordable Care Act's overall goals of reducing health costs and bringing coverage to all Americans, but added that the law is being implemented in a way that is "highly disruptive" to union health care plans.

Some individual unions have complained about the law's impact for months, but the resolution marks the first time the nation's largest labor federation has gone on record embracing that view. Unions were among the most enthusiastic backers of the law when it passed in 2010.

A labor official told The Associated Press that White House officials had been calling labor leaders for days to urge them not to voice their concerns in the form of a resolution. The official, who wasn't authorized to discuss the conversations publicly and requested anonymity, said many union leaders insisted that they wanted to highlight their concerns.

Asked about any efforts to discourage unions from passing the resolution, the White House said in a statement Wednesday night that officials "are in regular contact with a variety of stakeholders, including unions, as part of our efforts to ensure smooth implementation and to improve the law."

The AFL-CIO, one of the president's major boosters, approved the resolution just as the administration began rolling out a multimillion-dollar advertising campaign to encourage Americans to sign up for health care exchanges starting Oct. 1.

Harold Schaitberger, president of the International Association of Firefighters, said the intent of the resolution is to "point out the criticisms without being overly caustic."

"There have to be some changes made in the area that are giving a number of our unions great concern," said Schaitberger, who chaired the committee that hammered out the resolution's language.

The resolution was approved at the AFL-CIO's quadrennial convention in Los Angeles. It claims the new law will increase costs for health plans that are jointly administered by unions and smaller employers in the construction, retail and transportation industries. That could encourage employers to hire fewer union workers or abandon the health plans altogether and force union members to seek lower quality coverage on the new health exchanges.

...

The AFL-CIO resolution was toned down from a draft originally offered by Sean McGarvey, head of the AFL-CIO's Building and Construction Trades Department. The early draft said the AFL-CIO could no longer support the health care law and called for its repeal unless changes were made...

--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.