Sure, he'll riase your debt limit ...for a BBA?

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Of course there's people unhappy with the system. Just like people who curse the traffic going home from work every day. Why should they have to wait in traffic?

What the fuck, Apple? I didn't think people were going to have to wait anymore? I thought that was one of the problems this was going to fix? The availability of health care? You know, all these people who are dying in the streets due to lack of medical attention.... they weren't going to have to worry anymore with Obamacare, their lives were going to be saved! Now you tell us, they might have to wait..... how long do people dying in the streets have to wait for your health care fairy to provide services? What about all these people who are sick now, but could have been helped if they had 'preventative care' to treat their condition before they got sick? If the wait is unbearable for basic health care emergencies, what's the wait time for 'preventative care'? And with the government in charge, how can there possibly be areas where health care services are scarce?

Researchers from Harvard Medical School say the lack of coverage can be tied to about 45,000 deaths a year in the United States.....

Well, I will use the Liberal's argument on the stimulus money Obama blew through... things would be much worse otherwise! With Obamacare, we might expect to see 100,000 deaths a year, due to lack of medical coverage! That's not counting another 2-300,000 who'll die in the streets waiting for preventative care!

 

[Bonestorm]

The funniest thing about the debt ceiling shenanigans and the BBA is that the Ryan Budget passed by the House Republicans would require an increase in the debt ceiling and would violate the Senate version of the BBA.

Hilarious.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

The funniest thing about the debt ceiling shenanigans and the BBA is that the Ryan Budget passed by the House Republicans would require an increase in the debt ceiling and would violate the Senate version of the BBA.

Hilarious.

You are right, that gives you an idea of just how far in the red we have gotten with our spending under Obama. If you are speeding across the salt flats in a rocket car doing 700 mph, you can't go from 700 to 0... it's like you are complaining that Ryan wants to apply the brakes and slow us down, so he isn't stopping us!

You logic is hilariously warped.

 

[Bonestorm]

You are right, that gives you an idea of just how far in the red we have gotten with our spending under Obama. If you are speeding across the salt flats in a rocket car doing 700 mph, you can't go from 700 to 0... it's like you are complaining that Ryan wants to apply the brakes and slow us down, so he isn't stopping us!

You logic is hilariously warped.

What I find hilarious is that the Republicans are threatening not to raise the debt ceiling after passing a budget that requires the raising of the debt ceiling while demanding a balanced budget amendment that their budget violates.

And I'm not complaining about Ryan at all. I love the Ryan Plan. It's a beautiful thing that presents in no uncertain terms the priorities of the modern Republican Party: end Medicare and cut taxes for the rich.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

What I find hilarious is that the Republicans are threatening not to raise the debt ceiling after passing a budget that requires the raising of the debt ceiling while demanding a balanced budget amendment that their budget violates.

And I'm not complaining about Ryan at all. I love the Ryan Plan. It's a beautiful thing that presents in no uncertain terms the priorities of the modern Republican Party: end Medicare and cut taxes for the rich.

No one is threatening anything, doofus. DeMint says he will vote to raise it, on the condition we also vote on a balanced budget amendment. I agree with that, I am not threatening anything.... are YOU threatening to not raise the debt ceiling by not supporting a balanced budget amendment?

 

[Bonestorm]

No one is threatening anything, doofus. DeMint says he will vote to raise it, on the condition we also vote on a balanced budget amendment. I agree with that, I am not threatening anything.... are YOU threatening to not raise the debt ceiling by not supporting a balanced budget amendment?

According to the OP, DeMint says he will attempt to block any vote on raising the debt ceiling until Congress passes, not votes on, a balanced budget amendment. The debt ceiling should just be raised. No one really cares about it.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

According to the OP, DeMint says he will attempt to block any vote on raising the debt ceiling until Congress passes, not votes on, a balanced budget amendment. The debt ceiling should just be raised. No one really cares about it.

Well it's silly to say DeMint expects Congress to guarantee passage of anything, they can't do that... they can promise a vote, and perhaps DeMint understands there is sufficient support to pass a BBA at this time? But even a dunce like you should know Congress can't 'guarantee passage' of anything.

 

[Bonestorm]

Well it's silly to say DeMint expects Congress to guarantee passage of anything, they can't do that... they can promise a vote, and perhaps DeMint understands there is sufficient support to pass a BBA at this time? But even a dunce like you should know Congress can't 'guarantee passage' of anything.

It isn't silly to say that DeMint has threatened to filibuster the debt ceiling increase until a BBA is passed. That's exactly what he said:

I will oppose any attempt to vote to raise the limit on our $14 trillion debt until Congress passes the balanced-budget amendment,"

All this nonsense just obscures the point that no one really cares about the debt ceiling. The party in power always votes to raise it and the party out of power always makes noise about it. No one has taken a consistent position on it with the exception of maybe a handful in all of Congress.

They should all just STFU and pass the damn thing and move on to the 2012 budget and quit the whole charade.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...s-filibuster-debt-ceiling-vote/#ixzz1KHL8BZkK

 

[apple0154]

What the fuck, Apple? I didn't think people were going to have to wait anymore? I thought that was one of the problems this was going to fix? The availability of health care? You know, all these people who are dying in the streets due to lack of medical attention.... they weren't going to have to worry anymore with Obamacare, their lives were going to be saved! Now you tell us, they might have to wait..... how long do people dying in the streets have to wait for your health care fairy to provide services? What about all these people who are sick now, but could have been helped if they had 'preventative care' to treat their condition before they got sick? If the wait is unbearable for basic health care emergencies, what's the wait time for 'preventative care'? And with the government in charge, how can there possibly be areas where health care services are scarce?

Dixie, Dixie, Dixie. Sometimes you're as dumb as a box of rocks. People don't go for preventive care now. At least not the 45 million uninsured and probably not the folks who have a high deductible either so what is the concern about wait time? It's better to wait a month for a free medical check-up than never go at all because one can't afford it.

I can see a doctor anytime, 24 hours a day. I may have to wait 2 or 3 hours or even 4 hours for a non-emergency. A cold. A sliver in my finger. A sprained ankle. And if it's during the day, say, between 8 am and 5 pm most people in the city, including suburbs, are within one mile of a doctor.

Health care services are scarce in the country just like grocery stores are scarce and video shops and car dealers and everything else. Maybe people have to drive 10 miles to see a doctor. It all depends where they live. On the up-side there are doctors in remote areas because while the government subsidies doctor training newly graduated doctors are required to spend some time practicing in remote areas for a few years. You see, it's a win-win situation.

People who lack funds can train to be a doctor and the communities benefit. Pretty good idea, huh?

Anyway, let's see those links where Canadians are dying in the street. I posted a link showing 45,000 deaths, every year, can be attributed to lack of health care in the US. Of course, it's only Harvard Medical School saying that. Who are they???

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Dixie, Dixie, Dixie. Sometimes you're as dumb as a box of rocks. People don't go for preventive care now. At least not the 45 million uninsured...

You're letting your rhetoric get in the way of your argument here. You've claimed that nationalized health care would increase preventative care, but we see in Canada, people are dying while waiting for emergency care... you won't even answer me as to how long of a wait they have for preventative care, but if they are dying while waiting for emergency care, what can I rationally presume?

Now, I reject the thinking that providing health insurance will necessarily increase people's motivation to seek preventative care, because people just have a natural tendency to neglect what's best for their health. But even IF you had convinced me that providing health care will cause all these people to go get their blood pressure checked (a service routinely provided free in most communities), what good will it do if they have to wait for years to be treated? You tell me it takes you 3-4 hrs to be seen, but Canada is 1/10 the size of America in population, so might take 10x longer here. If I have so much as a splinter in my finger, I can go down to the Quack-in-a-Box about a mile from where I live, and get almost immediate assistance. If I have a headache from arguing with pinheads like you, I can go to the convenience store across the street and buy Tylenol... I don't have to go to the doctor and get a prescription. It costs me $5 instead of $55.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

People who lack funds can train to be a doctor and the communities benefit. Pretty good idea, huh?

Canada 33 million population.
US 350 million population + another 50 million illegals= 400 million people.

You are trying to compare having a few friends over for a dinner party, to hosting Woodstock on steroids. What will work in a relatively LOW population country, will NOT work with the US population, you simply can't service the needs with the system you have in place, it is overloaded and the ONLY option when you discover this, is to RATION health care service. This is the thing you don't seem to be comprehending, and I've repeated it 50 gazillion times now... America is HUGE... LOTS of people! What you are advocating, we can't accommodate, and it will ultimately destroy a health care system that is world renown for technology, innovation, discovery, and advancement of medicine as a whole. It works in small isolated areas, to have a socialized system, the "community" system. I get the concept, Apple, you've articulated it very well, I just don't think it can work in the United States as a whole, we're too large. You and your wife could invite a dozen people to your house and have a dinner party, but if the Rolling Stones showed up, and brought all their friends and the whole neighborhood was lined up around the block to get in... you couldn't feed them all... you couldn't give them all free drinks... what might be a really cool idea for a few people, is not something that works for a LOT of people. The same principles don't apply anymore, and you are in way over your head. ...Honey, we're totally out of ice!

 

[apple0154]

You're letting your rhetoric get in the way of your argument here. You've claimed that nationalized health care would increase preventative care, but we see in Canada, people are dying while waiting for emergency care... you won't even answer me as to how long of a wait they have for preventative care, but if they are dying while waiting for emergency care, what can I rationally presume?

What are you talking about? I told you I can see a doctor in a matter of hours. That means I can get a check-up and a request for a blood test and whatever else is necessary. Why don't you post a link to your "dying while waiting" nonsense. Gee, Dix, stop looking like a fool.

Now, I reject the thinking that providing health insurance will necessarily increase people's motivation to seek preventative care, because people just have a natural tendency to neglect what's best for their health. But even IF you had convinced me that providing health care will cause all these people to go get their blood pressure checked (a service routinely provided free in most communities), what good will it do if they have to wait for years to be treated? You tell me it takes you 3-4 hrs to be seen, but Canada is 1/10 the size of America in population, so might take 10x longer here. If I have so much as a splinter in my finger, I can go down to the Quack-in-a-Box about a mile from where I live, and get almost immediate assistance. If I have a headache from arguing with pinheads like you, I can go to the convenience store across the street and buy Tylenol... I don't have to go to the doctor and get a prescription. It costs me $5 instead of $55.

Again, you're not making sense. As soon as I see a doctor I get treated. What would be the point of seeing a doctor if he/she isn't going to treat me or refer me to a specialist, if necessary. Blood pressure does not require a specialist.

Why would it take 10 times longer to see a doctor in the US. If the US has 10 times the population of Canada it must have 10 times as many doctors. What are you smokin'?

 

[apple0154]

Canada 33 million population.
US 350 million population + another 50 million illegals= 400 million people.

You are trying to compare having a few friends over for a dinner party, to hosting Woodstock on steroids. What will work in a relatively LOW population country, will NOT work with the US population, you simply can't service the needs with the system you have in place, it is overloaded and the ONLY option when you discover this, is to RATION health care service. This is the thing you don't seem to be comprehending, and I've repeated it 50 gazillion times now... America is HUGE... LOTS of people! What you are advocating, we can't accommodate, and it will ultimately destroy a health care system that is world renown for technology, innovation, discovery, and advancement of medicine as a whole. It works in small isolated areas, to have a socialized system, the "community" system. I get the concept, Apple, you've articulated it very well, I just don't think it can work in the United States as a whole, we're too large. You and your wife could invite a dozen people to your house and have a dinner party, but if the Rolling Stones showed up, and brought all their friends and the whole neighborhood was lined up around the block to get in... you couldn't feed them all... you couldn't give them all free drinks... what might be a really cool idea for a few people, is not something that works for a LOT of people. The same principles don't apply anymore, and you are in way over your head. ...Honey, we're totally out of ice!

That's one of the lies the greedy keep telling. Again, do some research. There are small and large countries and rich and poor countries and capitalist and socialist and communist countries that have a government medical plan. The US may be exceptional but so is every other country when it comes to government medical.

The bottom line is you are saying the US can not look after it's ill citizens and that's just out and out nonsense. And, yes, I'd love a scotch with ice. Thanks.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

That's one of the lies the greedy keep telling. Again, do some research. There are small and large countries and rich and poor countries and capitalist and socialist and communist countries that have a government medical plan. The US may be exceptional but so is every other country when it comes to government medical.

The bottom line is you are saying the US can not look after it's ill citizens and that's just out and out nonsense. And, yes, I'd love a scotch with ice. Thanks.

It has nothing to do with greed, and common sense is not a lie. Sorry! There are NO examples of a successful government-run health care system in a nation of our size. The closest example to this, would be the former Soviet Union... their health care system was atrocious and barbaric.

The US already looks after it's ill citizens, it's been doing this since the beginning of the US, when Ben Franklin formed the first hospital in America. So yeah, that whole idea is pure nonsense, we've been taking care of the ill, we'll keep taking care of the ill... this isn't about taking care of our sick. You want to make it out to be something it's not, and that is where I call you on your dishonesty and lies. You can believe whatever bilge you want to, I can't do anything about that, but it's not passing here as fact, and no one else is going along with your stupidity, so why don't you just stop?

 

[Liberty]

That's one of the lies the greedy keep telling. Again, do some research. There are small and large countries and rich and poor countries and capitalist and socialist and communist countries that have a government medical plan. The US may be exceptional but so is every other country when it comes to government medical.

The bottom line is you are saying the US can not look after it's ill citizens and that's just out and out nonsense. And, yes, I'd love a scotch with ice. Thanks.

Yes, I'd love a scotch with ice right now as well.

Or maybe Crown on ice. Coke-a-Cola iisn't the same as it was 30 yrs ago.

If it were,,, I'd choose Crown & Coke.

 

[Liberty]

According to the OP, DeMint says he will attempt to block any vote on raising the debt ceiling until Congress passes, not votes on, a balanced budget amendment. The debt ceiling should just be raised. No one really cares about it.

If no one really cares about it, let's lower it.

 

[apple0154]

It has nothing to do with greed, and common sense is not a lie. Sorry! There are NO examples of a successful government-run health care system in a nation of our size. The closest example to this, would be the former Soviet Union... their health care system was atrocious and barbaric.

The US already looks after it's ill citizens, it's been doing this since the beginning of the US, when Ben Franklin formed the first hospital in America. So yeah, that whole idea is pure nonsense, we've been taking care of the ill, we'll keep taking care of the ill... this isn't about taking care of our sick. You want to make it out to be something it's not, and that is where I call you on your dishonesty and lies. You can believe whatever bilge you want to, I can't do anything about that, but it's not passing here as fact, and no one else is going along with your stupidity, so why don't you just stop?

Sure, Dix. Harvard pumps out bilge all the time. "Harvard Medical Study Links Lack of Insurance to 45,000 U.S. Deaths a Year."
http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes....-lack-of-insurance-to-45000-us-deaths-a-year/

 

[apple0154]

Yes, I'd love a scotch with ice right now as well.

Or maybe Crown on ice. Coke-a-Cola iisn't the same as it was 30 yrs ago.

If it were,,, I'd choose Crown & Coke.

Ah, yes. Remember those little bottles of coke? Just enough in them to chase a couple of Crown Royals.

 

[Liberty]

Ah, yes. Remember those little bottles of coke? Just enough in them to chase a couple of Crown Royals.

Yes!

I remember well.

Just like it was yesterday.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

What I find hilarious is that the Republicans are threatening not to raise the debt ceiling after passing a budget that requires the raising of the debt ceiling while demanding a balanced budget amendment that their budget violates.

??????......and would your opinion change if Democrats got on board and agreed to vote for the Ryan plan?.....