canndo
Well-Known Member
It says that Republicans are duplicitous because Obamacare was their idea and they are touting it as something different.
ObamaCare Summery Hit's The Nail On The Head
- Thread starter beenthere
- Start date
It says that Republicans are duplicitous because Obamacare was their idea and they are touting it as something different.
Mr Neutron
Well-Known Member
Oh, is that all it says? Seems to me it could have been more concise. I mean, that video was one sentence and it said a lot more than just blaming one evil twin over the other.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
And last month they were comparing Obama to Regan...
Just because it is said, does not make it true.
Why can't you comment on the video canndo, just can't bring yourself to defend the indefensible can you? LOL
canndo
Well-Known Member
You opted not to read it and actually asked what it said - I told you. The specificity and reason inherent in the article is usually lost in short videos.
canndo
Well-Known Member
The video? one long diatribe with nothing behind it? are you serious? I post a thoughtful piece on why the right should embrace Obamacare, you post two minutes of a comedy and expect a reasonable comment? I doubt that woman has read it, I doubt you have as well.
canndo
Well-Known Member
Long diatribe! It's 1:42 seconds. LOL
Well I won't say I doubt you read it, I'll guarantee you didn't, how's that?
BTW, I love those flowery little words you use, like thoughtful and embrace!
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
I read enough of it to know it is total crap....
One part of the article equates forcing people to buy something or be fined to the competitive marketplace.
The whole article is a steaming pile of bullshit.
ink the world
Well-Known Member
Get your shit straight Clayton, this is a growing forum first and foremost.
After seeing the few pics you've posted of your plants I'd suggest you spend more time in the Beginner Growers section than the politics section.
Mr Neutron
Well-Known Member
... but not in this case.
rollinbud
Active Member
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
he's too embarrassed to post any pics of his grows, yet he acts like he is a master grower.
i wonder why anyone still has actual debate with a lying racist who can't spell simple words or use apostrophes correctly.
ink the world
Well-Known Member
Havent been here much this past week.
Fall harvest is finally done...got 3 days straight rain and finally had to chop.
Fall harvest is finally done...got 3 days straight rain and finally had to chop.
FootballFirst
Well-Known Member
Doctor's, specifically primary care doctors such as Family Practice, OBGYN, and Internal Medicine physicians, don't like Obamacare for a couple of reasons:
1. it ties doctors pay to improving their patient's health. doctor's are frustrated by this because up to half of their patient's don't take their medications or they take it incorrectly. it absolves the patient of all responsibility. try tying teachers salaries to the performance of their students and just watch the bloodshed.
2. it creates more work for primary care physicians without any provision for recruiting, training, or compensating new primary care physicians. primary care doctors taking new patients are few and far between as it is, especially for medicaid because medicaid reimburses around 50-75% less than private healthcare and medicare. it is looking like the gov't will ultimately mandate that physicians see medicaid patients for very little compensation, eventhough they have to see double the amount of patients to make what they are making now. no physician wants to take medicaid because it doesn't pay.
1. it ties doctors pay to improving their patient's health. doctor's are frustrated by this because up to half of their patient's don't take their medications or they take it incorrectly. it absolves the patient of all responsibility. try tying teachers salaries to the performance of their students and just watch the bloodshed.
2. it creates more work for primary care physicians without any provision for recruiting, training, or compensating new primary care physicians. primary care doctors taking new patients are few and far between as it is, especially for medicaid because medicaid reimburses around 50-75% less than private healthcare and medicare. it is looking like the gov't will ultimately mandate that physicians see medicaid patients for very little compensation, eventhough they have to see double the amount of patients to make what they are making now. no physician wants to take medicaid because it doesn't pay.
FootballFirst
Well-Known Member
i should also state that in the ethics of medicine, the patient's will, provided they are competent to make decisions, always, always, always, trumps the doctor. doctors see themselves as people who give medical advice and recomendations.
tying physician compensation to patient's health turns that relationship on its ear from advisor to solicitor. this is repugnant to most physicians.
tying physician compensation to patient's health turns that relationship on its ear from advisor to solicitor. this is repugnant to most physicians.
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
December 2, 1993 - Leading conservative operative William Kristol
privately circulates a strategy document to Republicans in Congress. Kristol
writes that congressional Republicans should work to "kill" -- not amend -- the
Clinton plan because it presents a real danger to the Republican future: Its
passage will give the Democrats a lock on the crucial middle-class vote and
revive the reputation of the party. Nearly a full year before Republicans will
unite behind the "Contract With America," Kristol has provided the rationale and
the steel for them to achieve their aims of winning control of Congress and
becoming America's majority party. Killing health care will serve both ends. The
timing of the memo dovetails with a growing private consensus among Republicans
that all-out opposition to the Clinton plan is in their best political interest.
Until the memo surfaces, most opponents prefer behind-the-scenes warfare largely
shielded from public view. The boldness of Kristol's strategy signals a new turn
in the battle. Not only is it politically acceptable to criticize the Clinton
plan on policy grounds, it is also politically advantageous. By the end of 1993,
blocking reform poses little risk as the public becomes increasingly fearful of
what it has heard about the Clinton plan.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/forum/may96/background/health_debate_page2.html
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
January 3, 1994 - Harold Ickes, the new deputy White House chief of staff, is chosen to be the political director of the health care reform battle in its critical final phase. For his first two weeks on the job, when he should be focusing on health reform, he is forced to spend nearly all his time coordinating the White House response to a torrent of Whitewater stories and increased calls for the appointment of a special prosecutor. Republicans link Whitewater with health care reform in an allout campaign coordinated with the conservative talk radio network. The result: rising doubts that the public can trust Clinton in either case.
January 25, 1994 - In his State of the Union address, President Clinton tries to refocus public attention on health care reform as Congress prepares to wrestle with the actual legislative proposals. In the most dramatic moment of the speech Clinton unequivocally lays down the gauntlet, promising to fight to the end. He threatens to veto any legislation that does not guarantee every American private health insurance. Moynihan and Foley say privately this is a serious mistake.
The barrage of Whitewater stories continues, creating a siege mentality at the White House. Republicans openly embrace William Kristol's latest advice: Oppose any Clinton health care reform "sight unseen" and adopt a stance that "There is no health care crisis." Bob Dole uses this approach in his State of the Union response. During his talk Dole uses a chart -- depicting a bewildering array of new government agencies and programs -- to hammer home his point that the Clinton plan is government-run health care. The chart becomes a centerpiece in Capitol Hill debates and further frightens a public already Suspicious of government and increasingly distrustful of the President and the First Lady who have designed this new government program.
Late January 1994 - A critically influential -- and intensely controversial -- pair of articles appears on the Wall Street Journal's conservative editorial page and in the liberal New Republic. Written by an obscure staffer of the conservative Manhattan Institute, the fear-mongering articles paint a devastating account of the impact of the Clinton plan. The White House, and other independent experts, say the articles are filled with patent falsehoods and distortions. Notwithstanding the criticism, the articles become highly influential, especially in conservative circles. Newt Gingrich will later characterize them as "the first decisive breakpoint" in support for the Clinton plan.
January 25, 1994 - In his State of the Union address, President Clinton tries to refocus public attention on health care reform as Congress prepares to wrestle with the actual legislative proposals. In the most dramatic moment of the speech Clinton unequivocally lays down the gauntlet, promising to fight to the end. He threatens to veto any legislation that does not guarantee every American private health insurance. Moynihan and Foley say privately this is a serious mistake.
The barrage of Whitewater stories continues, creating a siege mentality at the White House. Republicans openly embrace William Kristol's latest advice: Oppose any Clinton health care reform "sight unseen" and adopt a stance that "There is no health care crisis." Bob Dole uses this approach in his State of the Union response. During his talk Dole uses a chart -- depicting a bewildering array of new government agencies and programs -- to hammer home his point that the Clinton plan is government-run health care. The chart becomes a centerpiece in Capitol Hill debates and further frightens a public already Suspicious of government and increasingly distrustful of the President and the First Lady who have designed this new government program.
Late January 1994 - A critically influential -- and intensely controversial -- pair of articles appears on the Wall Street Journal's conservative editorial page and in the liberal New Republic. Written by an obscure staffer of the conservative Manhattan Institute, the fear-mongering articles paint a devastating account of the impact of the Clinton plan. The White House, and other independent experts, say the articles are filled with patent falsehoods and distortions. Notwithstanding the criticism, the articles become highly influential, especially in conservative circles. Newt Gingrich will later characterize them as "the first decisive breakpoint" in support for the Clinton plan.
Unlike you, you won't find me claiming to be an expert. I'm always learning, so when you can get over a gram per watt, I'll start listening!
Dude, I can see why a guy like you posted all the pics in the outdoor growing forum, it was your first outdoor grow, I get it. It's just not that big of a deal to me, sorry I got over the pic thing a long time ago.
Similar threads
