Obama: Bipartisan health deal may not be possible

[Ali G. 37]

YES! And for someone from Aussie land. Bragging six figurs all the while criticizing the very land you draw a paycheck is hilarious. Get on back to the barbee!

Dude do you ever shut up? What the heck are you even doing on here?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

YES! And for someone from Aussie land. Bragging six figurs all the while criticizing the very land you draw a paycheck is hilarious. Get on back to the barbee! We know who fights your battles, some unknown soldier you dont know.

vLBKOcUbHR0

[Obama 2012 1,714]

While I respect your opinion I have to disagree. We already pay more than double (per capita) than Japan and Australia yet live 3 to 4 years less. This bill is the first step in ensuring that health care is no longer treated like purchasing a car. This should not be an industry were corporations are allowed to make billion in profits at (literally) the expense of Americans' lives. The number you quoted also does not cover the under-insured, or those insured that are denied coverage and have to simply die of a disease.

What are the first three words of the document you just today swore to protect? Clearly there was a purpose for those words having been chosen to be first, as being the most important part of the constitution. By passing such a monumental bill, Congress is effectively "form a more perfect Union" and put Americans ahead of profit; as the founding father intended.

I think we'd agree on a lot more if we'd go beyond the insurance side of it (and if you've seen a couple of my other threads, i'm against insurance anyway). It's all about costs through and through.

There should never have to be ANY type of bureaucracy when it comes to health care.

It should be as simple as Patient A. Doctor A. Period.

The problem is, there are plenty of other factors in there as well, many of them in government that prevent that type of scenario from happening.

People are going to die because of denied coverage, because of having to wait too long for treatment, because of lack of treatment, etc.. no matter where you go in the world. That's not going to change no matter what.

Our system right now, is a good system, minus the cost part of things.

Granted, I'm not one that believes health care is a right no more than owning a car is a right. Technically speaking you can survive without both, but yeah sure in a given circumstance being without both can cost you your livelihood.

Health care is a service provided by people for other people. That's where it should be and should have remained from day one.

I'm personally more for stopping the 'waste' in our health care system and that would have a HUGE impact. You'd be amazed about how many people go to the doctor every time they sneeze or have a stomach ache, a head ache, etc....... You want to talk about waste on the system, there's surely plenty of it to go around.

My point is, you can't place blame on one central source and you can't fix the problem by switching the bureaucracy. You have to take it completely away from the hands of bureaucrats at all levels to have an actual realistically perfect system.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Dude do you ever shut up? What the heck are you even doing on here?

Can you answer the question? Prolly not!

Edited February 26, 2010 by Col. Lingus

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Boo booo! Couple questions. If Aussie land is so awesome why you here? Thats question number 1.

Question number 2: If your so passionate about your ideas why dont you make a stand? Get on HOME and sort some plastic from the paper! Or are you addicted to the thing you condemn?

[Ali G. 37]

Can you answer the question? Prolly not!

Dude what do you mean 'prolly not'? I'm not British, hence don't sound like that..

[Ali G. 37]

I think we'd agree on a lot more if we'd go beyond the insurance side of it (and if you've seen a couple of my other threads, i'm against insurance anyway). It's all about costs through and through.

There should never have to be ANY type of bureaucracy when it comes to health care.

It should be as simple as Patient A. Doctor A. Period.

The problem is, there are plenty of other factors in there as well, many of them in government that prevent that type of scenario from happening.

People are going to die because of denied coverage, because of having to wait too long for treatment, because of lack of treatment, etc.. no matter where you go in the world. That's not going to change no matter what.

Our system right now, is a good system, minus the cost part of things.

Granted, I'm not one that believes health care is a right no more than owning a car is a right. Technically speaking you can survive without both, but yeah sure in a given circumstance being without both can cost you your livelihood.

Health care is a service provided by people for other people. That's where it should be and should have remained from day one.

I'm personally more for stopping the 'waste' in our health care system and that would have a HUGE impact. You'd be amazed about how many people go to the doctor every time they sneeze or have a stomach ache, a head ache, etc....... You want to talk about waste on the system, there's surely plenty of it to go around.

My point is, you can't place blame on one central source and you can't fix the problem by switching the bureaucracy. You have to take it completely away from the hands of bureaucrats at all levels to have an actual realistically perfect system.

Personally, I see it as the opposite issue. The US has always had the let any company involved in health care do as they please approach. When I see senile repubs on TV talking about talking back the country, I have to laugh; especially since so many of them are living in trailers throughout America, pretty much like my bud Marc here. Regardless of the reform going through or not, the status-quo is failing the country and a large portion of people who attempt to use it. Over 60% of bankruptcies are related to health care alone.

I've used both types of systems and can without a doubt say that with all things being equal, prefer the security of a single payer system. I think you will find many on here from other first world countries, share this same view.

If the anti-government rhetoric stopped, you'd achieve more as a country, however, there lies the second problem. These same folks are not interested in doing anything as a country, unless it involves waging wars. As I said earlier, the irony is that the Constitution that these folks cherish the most says it in black and white:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Edited February 26, 2010 by Booyah

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Dude what do you mean 'prolly not'? I'm not British, hence don't sound like that..

Such a simple question for an educated IDIOT! Wiggle dude! Straight -up! If america is so fvcked-up why you here? I would hope to see at least three paragraphs.

Edited February 26, 2010 by Col. Lingus

[Ali G. 37]

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Forgot to highlight the part in red, which seems to be contrary to hating the government and being constantly in conflict with one another.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Forgot to highlight the part in red, which seems to be contrary to hating the government and being constantly in conflict with one another.

It's the preamble, dude! It's not law.

[Ali G. 37]

Such a simple question for an educated IDIOT! Wiggle dude! Straight -up! If america is so fvcked-up why you here? I would hope to see at least three paragraphs.

Dude, you cannot read three paragraphs. Nonetheless, here is the first hint: It's located at the top of this forum.

PS Spare me the educated #######. I have done more manual labor than everyone you know combined.

Edited February 26, 2010 by Booyah

[spookyturtle 9,466]

I'm calling Eric so you guys can have a threesome.

[Ali G. 37]

It's the preamble, dude! It's not law.

Granted but a preamble is: 'introductory and explanatory statement in a document that explains the document's purpose and underlying philosophy'

I'm calling Eric so you guys can have a threesome.

I thought Marc was Eric, they pretty much act and say the same ######..

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Dude, you cannot read three paragraphs. Nonetheless, here is the first hint: It's located at the top of this forum.

PS Spare me the educated #######. I have done more manual labor than everyone you know combined.

I cant read it if it aint there! The only thing I see is a punk that is lost. Carry-on!

[spookyturtle 9,466]

Granted but a preamble is: 'introductory and explanatory statement in a document that explains the document's purpose and underlying philosophy'

I thought Marc was Eric, they pretty much act and say the same ######..

Marc is much smarter than Eric.