(02-12-2013 09:16 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(02-11-2013 09:28 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Tom, your statement is inaccurate in many other ways as well, but that's enough for now. You are either poorly informed or lying. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are poorly informed.

He always starts poorly informed. Then he goes to lying once you point it out.

Libs start from the mistaken premise that Obamacare was about making the health care system better. It wasn't. It was from the beginning about moving us toward a single payer system.

Mach's fantasy about how republicans refused to work with Obama is laughable. Dems didn't need to work with them and didn't want to. Republicans would have hindered their goal of getting us closer to single payer.

Obamacare is about controlling the electorate and controlling an industry that accounts for a few trillion of our GDP. It's about control. No more, no less.

There were republicans working with the democrats initially. One reason single payer was dropped, mandate was added (although in hindsight you almost need one to make it work), and a national exchange was dropped to allow states to run their own.

The GOP backed out at the lend for political reasons to vote against it. Overall I think Obamacare was a needed step.

(02-13-2013 08:57 PM)dcCid Wrote:  There were republicans working with the democrats initially. One reason single payer was dropped, mandate was added (although in hindsight you almost need one to make it work), and a national exchange was dropped to allow states to run their own.
The GOP backed out at the lend for political reasons to vote against it. Overall I think Obamacare was a needed step.

There were republicans working with democrats until Obama and the democrat leadership made it clear that they were not interested in any serious input from republicans. It was going to be their bill, and republicans had only the option of supporting it or not. So republicans withdrew en masse. Republicans wanted tort reform, an extension (rather than effectively the outlawing) of health spending accounts, and meaningful measures to control costs, all of which Obama and the democrats refused to consider (there are some lip service provisions in the bill, but they do more to hurt those causes than help them, just one more set of lies).

The mandate was added because (as you note) it is needed to make it work. The single payer and national exchange were dropped because there weren't enough DEMOCRAT votes to pass those things. Yes, Obama compromised, but it was with is OWN party and not the republicans.

If paying more to wait longer for worse health care, then Obamacare is a step in the right direction. The best hope is that it's such a disaster so quickly that we move on to something else in a hurry. The democrats plan for that something else to be single payer. If it works out that way, then the US ceases to become a livable country.

Hard to think of the US as not being a livable country, but that unfortunately does seem to be what is happening.

(02-14-2013 12:17 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Hard to think of the US as not being a livable country, but that unfortunately does seem to be what is happening.

It's all relative. People like to bash and say the country is going to hell in a handbasket but in reality the US is still one of the best places to live in the world. All one has to do is travel globally to see that.

(02-14-2013 10:21 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 12:17 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Hard to think of the US as not being a livable country, but that unfortunately does seem to be what is happening.

It's all relative. People like to bash and say the country is going to hell in a handbasket but in reality the US is still one of the best places to live in the world. All one has to do is travel globally to see that.

It is today. That's why I'm still here (and that is arguable, but there's really no place that's better enough to justify the cost and disruption of moving, for me at least).

But the main reason we are is because most other places have gone further down the road that Obama wants to follow than we have. If Obama catches us up and moves us further down that road, those places that aren't as far along will become better places to be.

The fact that we are the best place today does not mean that we will remain so in the future. Things change, and the changes on tap for us are in the wrong direction.

(02-14-2013 12:24 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 10:21 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 12:17 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Hard to think of the US as not being a livable country, but that unfortunately does seem to be what is happening.

It's all relative. People like to bash and say the country is going to hell in a handbasket but in reality the US is still one of the best places to live in the world. All one has to do is travel globally to see that.

It is today. That's why I'm still here (and that is arguable, but there's really no place that's better enough to justify the cost and disruption of moving, for me at least).

But the main reason we are is because most other places have gone further down the road that Obama wants to follow than we have. If Obama catches us up and moves us further down that road, those places that aren't as far along will become better places to be.

The fact that we are the best place today does not mean that we will remain so in the future. Things change, and the changes on tap for us are in the wrong direction.

Good point.

It's just of these type comments remind me of folks that argue how bad off the poor have it in the States. Being destitute is bad, don't get me wrong, but compared to other coutries, the poor in the US live like kings. I just take that and upgrade it to talking about the country as a whole.

(02-14-2013 01:44 PM)VA49er Wrote:  It's just of these type comments remind me of folks that argue how bad off the poor have it in the States. Being destitute is bad, don't get me wrong, but compared to other coutries, the poor in the US live like kings. I just take that and upgrade it to talking about the country as a whole.

The average American on welfare lives in larger dwelling quarters than the average European, on or off welfare.

(02-14-2013 01:55 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 01:44 PM)VA49er Wrote:  It's just of these type comments remind me of folks that argue how bad off the poor have it in the States. Being destitute is bad, don't get me wrong, but compared to other coutries, the poor in the US live like kings. I just take that and upgrade it to talking about the country as a whole.

The average American on welfare lives in larger dwelling quarters than the average European, on or off welfare.

So?

What does the dwelling size have to do with anything?

(02-14-2013 01:57 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 01:55 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 01:44 PM)VA49er Wrote:  It's just of these type comments remind me of folks that argue how bad off the poor have it in the States. Being destitute is bad, don't get me wrong, but compared to other coutries, the poor in the US live like kings. I just take that and upgrade it to talking about the country as a whole.

The average American on welfare lives in larger dwelling quarters than the average European, on or off welfare.

So?

What does the dwelling size have to do with anything?

Just pointing out that "poor" in the US in no way compares to "poor" in other countries. It's like night and day.

(02-14-2013 01:59 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 01:57 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 01:55 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 01:44 PM)VA49er Wrote:  It's just of these type comments remind me of folks that argue how bad off the poor have it in the States. Being destitute is bad, don't get me wrong, but compared to other coutries, the poor in the US live like kings. I just take that and upgrade it to talking about the country as a whole.

The average American on welfare lives in larger dwelling quarters than the average European, on or off welfare.

So?

What does the dwelling size have to do with anything?

Just pointing out that "poor" in the US in no way compares to "poor" in other countries. It's like night and day.

Maybe so, but it's the cost per sq. ft. that is really relevant...not the overall size. Pretty much everything is smaller in Europe mainly because of how the cities were designed.

(02-14-2013 02:03 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 01:59 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 01:57 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 01:55 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-14-2013 01:44 PM)VA49er Wrote:  It's just of these type comments remind me of folks that argue how bad off the poor have it in the States. Being destitute is bad, don't get me wrong, but compared to other coutries, the poor in the US live like kings. I just take that and upgrade it to talking about the country as a whole.

The average American on welfare lives in larger dwelling quarters than the average European, on or off welfare.

So?

What does the dwelling size have to do with anything?

Just pointing out that "poor" in the US in no way compares to "poor" in other countries. It's like night and day.

Maybe so, but it's the cost per sq. ft. that is really relevant...not the overall size. Pretty much everything is smaller in Europe mainly because of how the cities were designed.

I get what you are saying, but I think his post was referring to a larger point, that point being what I said above which is poor here doesnt' equal poor over there. Maybe he could have used a different example.

http://news.yahoo.com/dr-ben-carson-pres...itics.html

Quote:"I don't think it was particularly political," Carson, the director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins, told ABC's Chief White House Correspondent Jonathan Karl during an interview for " This Week." "You know, I'm a physician. I like to diagnose things. And, you know, I've diagnosed some pretty, pretty significant issues that I think a lot of people resonate with."

With an audience that included President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden, Carson spoke out about political correctness, health care and taxes at the breakfast. In his roughly 23-minute address, Carson called for a private health care savings plan and a flat tax for all Americans. His address has since gone viral, racking up more than two million views on YouTube.

On Sunday, Carson criticized some of President Obama's policies but also called him a "very talented politician."

"There are a number of policies that I don't believe lead to the growth of our nation and don't lead to the elevation of our nation," Carson added. "I don't want to sit here and say all of his policies are bad."

He also offered his diagnosis for today's political environment.

"What I would like to see more often in this nation is an open and intelligent conversation, not people just casting aspersions at each other," Carson said on "This Week." "I mean, it's unbelievable to me the way people act like third graders. And if somebody doesn't agree with them, they're this and they're that and, you know - it comes from both sides. And it's just so infantile."

As for his own ambitions, Carson, 61, is retiring from practicing medicine this summer. But he told Jonathan Karl he's not ruling out a future bid for political office.

"That's not my intention," he said. "But I always say, 'I'll leave that up to God.'"

The man is quite articulate. Hate to compare but so is Obama. Seems to have his head on straight, but some might have thought the same thing about Obama. Just do not know enough about Dr. Carson to make a judgment as to how good he could be for the country.

He hit this nail right on the head...

Quote:"I mean, it's unbelievable to me the way people act like third graders. And if somebody doesn't agree with them, they're this and they're that and, you know - it comes from both sides. And it's just so infantile."

If you watch his entire speech, it really gives you a pretty good idea about him... he would have been a better pick than either choice last year IMO.

There's plenty about him online, and after extensive research my only negative feel is his 7th Day Adventist faith... I wouldn't call it a cult, but they have some really strange beliefs.