Poll: Only 4% Don't Want Any Health Care Reform

Democratic Party is DISGUSTING. They have USED every tool to steal twenty percent of our economy! I'm so sick of it. These people are total PIGS! They aren't Americans, they are PIGS!

You posted the same drivel on another thread and when challenged to produce a credible link to which 20% of the economy they stole you slunk away with your tail between you legs. So here's another chance. Please provide a credible link to backup what you are claiming. It should be easy since you keep repeating it.

National Health Care? We’re Halfway There
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/03/business/yourmoney/03view.html

"the government’s role in the vast health industry has been expanding. By various measures, the United States is about halfway toward a system in which the government and taxpayers fully fund health care. And trends are pushing the government to become more involved each year."

Inform yourself. Almost 50% of the health care industry has already been taken over the the government in one form or another.

3.2

lol

Robert, Tappy

macattack has not posted a bio or a picture.  S/he uses anonimity to make trollish comments like these, culled from other threads:

Suck it @!$%#

Your such a tough @!$%#... I just about @!$%# my pants over here on the sofa... Oh, so scary

I often wonder what you fools get out of such statements?

are you a circus clown??

Suck it @!$%#

The proper reaction to macattack is this, from another thread:

 macattackk Name call is against the COH, not to mention childish. Last warning!

Please just delete him. You do not need this disrespect.

I love it when these folk just go on national t.v. and contradict themselves and don't even know they are doing it!

Tappy, you didn't get an answer, yet again. Giggle!

Tappy - hate to agree with Sen Bond but reconcilliation WAS only meant for small things. I guess the problem here is DON'T PASS STUPID LEGISLATION if you don't want it to come back and bite you in the a$$.

Passing this bill on reconcilliation is a slap in the face to all the people who want it FIXED before it passes

kjm

4.2

LMAO! Rec was used to pass MAJOR legislation by Reps.

Under the original design of the Budget Act, reconciliation had a fairly narrow purpose. It was expected to be used together with the second resolution adopted in the fall, and was to apply to a single fiscal year and be directed primarily at spending and revenue legislation acted on between the adoption of the first and second budget resolutions

The Byrd Rule (as described below) was adopted in 1985 and amended in 1990. Its main effect has been to prohibit the use of reconciliation for provisions that would increase the deficit beyond 10 years after the reconciliation measure.

Congress used reconciliation to enact President Bill Clinton's 1993 (fiscal year 1994) budget. (See Pub.L. 103-66, 107 Stat. 312.) Clinton wanted to use reconciliation to pass his 1993 health care plan, but Senator Robert Byrd insisted that the health care plan was out of bounds for a process that is theoretically about budgets.

LMAO now? Wikipedia

Hey kjm' - Just in case you didn't know it, the health care bill has already passed the senate.

Reconciliation will be used only to pass small parts of the bill that the house wants modified after they pass the senate bill. What will be passed by the Democrats will be far smaller than the Bush Tax Cuts. In fact, if reconciliation is used to pass the entire health care bill it will only be half of what the tax cuts amounted to!!!!

I don't give a damn about Bush - he's gone. Also, what part of prohibiting its use for provisions that would increase the deficit beyond 10 years don't you understand?

OH, you must be one of those people who actually BELIEVE it will reduce the deficit!

What about the byrd rule?

Oh, and you DO realize that they pulled medicare reimbursements out of this bill and passed them separately to get the $$$$$ to work with what they wanted CBO to say, right?

It's not about Bush, it's what the Republicans in the senate did during the Bush administration. You know, the same senators who are running their mouths right now. I'm old but I don't suffer the short term memory loss these Republican wing nuts suffer!

What is it you don't understand about reconciliation? What is it you don't understand about the bill already being passed?!?!

I understand that reconcilliation was intended to be a short-term fix for BUDGET issues. I understand that anything passed through reconcilliation expires after 10 years. I understand that Clinton's health care couldn't pass under reconcilliation.

Do YOU understand that BOTH HOUSES AND THE PRESIDENT must pass bills for them to become law?????

And why don't you stop calling names - it so happens that I am NOT a republican, nor am I a "wingnut"

kjm

Still laughing at you. I know the BS that you are referring to and nobody but bad sport Repugnuts cares...

Senate Parlimentarian obviously does. Ruled today they can't USE reconcilliation like they had intended.

Republicans claim that reconciliation was only intended to be used for bills dealing closely with the budget. In fact, when Republicans were in power, GOP lawmakers used reconciliation numerous times to pass major domestic policy legislation, including the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 and important changes to health care policy. In fact, 34 of the 41 Senate Republicans have used reconciliation in the past to pass major pieces of domestic policy.

In 2005, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) famously defended reconciliation as “majority rules.” Think Progress has compiled a video of some of these 34 senators who have, in the past, defended reconciliation and railed against the filibuster. Some highlights:

– “If you’ve got 51 votes for your position, you win.” — Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH), 3/15/05

– “For some time, I hoped that my colleagues who oppose reform would allow a majority in both bodies to prevail and do what the vast majority of the American public desires.” — Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), 10/15/99

– “It [the filibuster] is the product of a rule of the Senate passed many years after the ratification of the Constitution. This rule does not derive from the authority of the Constitution.” — Sen. Kit Bond (R-MO), 5/19/05

– “Filibusters are neither an idea of the founding fathers nor a historical tradition of the Senate.” — Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), 4/27/05

For it then, against it now. On video for you ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fsxPtbIu_0&feature=player_embedded

4.10

This has been answered, but it looks like the course is set for the House to approve the Senate version, so this thread is dead.

And WHO in the House is going to trust the Senate (who no longer HAS a super-majority) to make the changes they want once the bill is law???

As you may have heard, the Parlimentarian ruled that the House cannot change anything but must vote on the bill AS IS

The house can't pass anything but gas

Ha ha ha you are so funny. The house has passed over 290 bills that are waiting on the Senate to do anything but wait while the GOP screams NO NO NO over and over again.