The party of NO?

C

Cancel 2018. 3

<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
Senate Votes Down House Budget Plan

Five Republicans joined every Democrat in killing the measure, which calls for transforming Medicare into a program in which future beneficiaries -- people now 54 years old and younger -- would be given a subsidy to purchase health insurance rather than have the government directly pay hospital and doctor bills.



Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/25/senate-votes-house-budget-plan/#ixzz1NPE3UaT1

i thought dems didn't walk in lock step and that republicans do :awesome:

oooops
 
"Lockstep" is generally measured by more than one initiative; naturally, there will be legislation that all members of one party agree on.

It's measured more according to trends...are you familiar w/ that word?
 
Onceler said:
"Lockstep" is generally measured by more than one initiative; naturally, there will be legislation that all members of one party agree on.

It's measured more according to trends...are you familiar w/ that word?
Click to expand...

funny....i don't recall you ever saying that to single dem, evince etc....who run around claiming the pubs are in lockstep....interesting how it all of a sudden requires more than one bill when it is the dems....how "convenient" for you

i see you are now going to spam the board with your ignorance regarding trends....have at it
 
Onceler said:
Well, it WAS kind of hilarious that you had no idea what the word "trending" meant...
Click to expand...

really? so citing three months of data and six months of data means i have no idea....and thanks for trolling this thread. i figured you were too cowardly to actually discuss the issue in the proper thread, afterall, then you would have to answer if you have ever admitted you're wrong on this board.

no surprise onceler trolls up another thread
 
Return of Dune said:
I am pretty sure I don't think healthcare is evil. I am from Mass after all.
Click to expand...

but you see....the pubs did not like the bill

and your failure to answer in the affirmative proves you're hypocritical.....it is ok for the dems to be the party of no, when it suits your beliefs, but when it doesn't....well then....

try some intellectual honesty for once dune.
 
29685_cartoon_main.jpg
 
Yurt said:
but you see....the pubs did not like the bill

and your failure to answer in the affirmative proves you're hypocritical.....it is ok for the dems to be the party of no, when it suits your beliefs, but when it doesn't....well then....

try some intellectual honesty for once dune.
Click to expand...

wut?
 
This thread is a real head-scratcher. Near as I can tell, we have bipartisan opposition to the House Republican budget. What's the problem?
 
Return of Dune said:
When a bill is rediculous and evil they do.
Click to expand...

that's silly. Plus, it's spelled ridiculous... ridicule is the root.
There are bought and paid for politicians on both sides of the aisle. Let's work together to get rid of them instead of focusing on the supposed difference (which you know as well as I do, there is none)

I don't like that they want to route the funds through the insurance company instead of direct payments. But I can see where there could possibly be less chance of fraud making it past people employed by the insurance company as compared to a government employee who couldn't CARE LESS ABOUT EFFICIENCY (oops caps lock)
 
I think we all agree that it serves no purpose other than to enrich the insurance industry. Yet another gift to moneychangers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top