Brown 53%... Coakley 46%

[Shady]

You think this is bad? Wait till November 2010....

By the grace of god, Obama's shitty healthcare plan dies soon in filibuster hell.

I don't understand why people like you are so opposed to a reform in the healthcare plan. Do you have health insurance? Let's say you don't - and you get into an accident. Now multiply that by a few million people, every day, for the last 8 years, and the next 3, conservatively speaking of course. If ALL Americans were forced to have healthcare and pay into the system, guess what - suddenly healthcare isn't the largest money sink in America. Is the bill perfect? Absolutely not - is it a step in the right direction?? Let me ask you this, do you like paying money to cover a total stranger's healthcare expenses when they go to an emergency room because they're uninsured?? Remove your head from your ass. We're in one of the largest recessions in our country's shortlived history and you're rooting for more of the same. Well done sir.

 

[Tomasello]

I don't understand why people like you are so opposed to a reform in the healthcare plan.

Because it is the worst bill ever written. Full of exclusively DEMOCRAT injected pork and waste.

Highlights include:

1) Sen. Ben Nelson backs bill after compromise on abortion funding, more money for Nebraska

2) Sen. Bernie Sanders said he was unsure if he'd vote for the bill. But after his home state Vermont got some extra help for Medicaid, and Democrats gave $10 billion to his pet project -- community health centers nationwide.

3) Sen. Chris Dodd buried $100 million in the measure for a new hospital.

4) Other perks include extra Medicare funds for states like Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota. etc. etc. etc.

Do you have health insurance?

Yes, through my employer. I have a job unlike the dead beat losers who want this bill to pass so they can get the kind of healthcare I break my balls 60 hours a week to afford and have me pick up the tab.

If ALL Americans were forced to have healthcare and pay into the system, guess what - suddenly healthcare isn't the largest money sink in America.

Money sink for who? I have health insurance I pay $500 a month for already. I'm now supposed pay for that AND Obamacare. How is that cheaper for me and my family??? OR worse be forced to use exclusively Obamacare because we all know how well gov't run facilities like the DMV, the IRS, welfare office etc. are run now.

Is the bill perfect? Absolutely not - is it a step in the right direction??

No it's a step in the wrong direction. Just because its something different doesn't make it something better.

Let me ask you this, do you like paying money to cover a total stranger's healthcare expenses when they go to an emergency room because they're uninsured??

I like it more than paying for Obamacare when I already have insurance and at least I don't have to wait 6 hours to see my doctor like I would have to wait in the emergency room where people with no insurance are treated ahead of me even though I'm paying my bill with my insurance and paying their bill with my taxes.

Remove your head from your ass.

Why don't you kiss mine jackass? Insults don't valid your point, they just valid mine.

We're in one of the largest recessions in our country's shortlived history and you're rooting for more of the same.

EXACTLY... so according to you we should pile a TRILLION more dollars of debt into paying for this garbage.

Well done sir.

Thank you, I do my best to educate the ill-informed such as yourself.

 

[Tristam Green]

It's not a hard concept to understand. Shut up.



I love this part:

3) Sen. Chris Dodd buried $100 million in the measure for a new hospital.

OH GOD SAY IT ISN'T SO!?!?! ANOTHER HOSPITAL?!??!!? WHAT WILL WE DO!?!?!

 

[Tomasello]

OH GOD SAY IT ISN'T SO!?!?! ANOTHER HOSPITAL?!??!!? WHAT WILL WE DO!?!?!

Why can't a state with the 3rd highest median household income in the country like Connecticut pay for it's own fucking hospital??? It's not exactly a poor state like Mississippi or something. If they get a new hospital, why don't the other 49 states get one? Lets throw in Guam and Puerto Rico too.

Let the residents of CT pay the tax to construct it. Why should I? I got a hospital. Are you so blind that can't you see the big picture?

There's this place I dream of, where one can be fiscally conservative and socially liberal. It's a happy place, a "middle-ground", if you will humor me.

Then you have the audacity to make this comment??? All I see is more liberal hypocracy.... YOU ARE NO FISCAL CONSERVATIVE if you think the American tax payer should be paying for other states construction projects.

By the way, I know of this happy place you speak of. I'm the god damn mayor.

Now you can shut up.

 

[Halifirien]

1) Sen. Ben Nelson backs bill after compromise on abortion funding, more money for Nebraska

Nelson has since reversed himself on that after the national outcry. No more "cornhusker kickback."

 

[Miros]

Wasn't there also something in one of the proposed healthcare bills basically stating that once it is in it couldn't be taken out by any future congress? That's a pretty fucking scary thing especially if it FUBARs things.

 

[Makelith]

Isn't that unconstitutional?

 

[Miros]

It was something totally effed up like that. Unfortunately the health care bill has become a joke. It is no longer something that is being debated for the good of the people, rather just a "trophy" for one side to say they got through.

I don't think there are many people who are actually against a universal healthcare plan, however with all of the crap that we are currently going through fiscally this is not the right time to be trying to get a bill this huge rushed through. This is something that needs to be thought about very carefully...

The people of Mass realized this and proved it when they voted Brown in I believe.

 

[Tristam Green]

Isn't that unconstitutional?

I would think so.

Why can't a state with the 3rd highest median household income in the country like Connecticut pay for it's own fucking hospital??? It's not exactly a poor state like Mississippi or something. If they get a new hospital, why don't the other 49 states get one? Lets throw in Guam and Puerto Rico too.

Maybe because the rich assholes of the great state of Connecticut (no offense, Miros and Taurothar...I know there are at least *two* hard-working individuals out there) won't pay for it themselves, without being told to by a senator?

Leave Guam and Puerto Rico out of this, unless you want to count every single territory or protectorate we have. Puerto Rico has had its chance at statehood, and we don't belong there anymore (especially since they flipped their shit at Vieques).

Then you have the audacity to make this comment??? All I see is more liberal hypocracy.... YOU ARE NO FISCAL CONSERVATIVE if you think the American tax payer should be paying for other states construction projects.

Social necessity outweighs the need to make money. Again, not a hard concept.

 

[Shady]

Money sink for who? I have health insurance I pay $500 a month for already. I'm now supposed pay for that AND Obamacare. How is that cheaper for me and my family??? OR worse be forced to use exclusively Obamacare because we all know how well gov't run facilities like the DMV, the IRS, welfare office etc. are run now.

Ill informed such as me he says.. it's a money sink for AMERICA if AMERICA is paying for healthcare of the uninsured. You do know what a deficit is right? That's a rhetorical question. And no, you're not supposed to pay for yours and theirs, you keep yours, they get theirs - mandatory health coverage for all Americans to reduce the deficit. That's the goal of this whole thing.. asides from oh I don't know, getting health insurance to millions of Americans currently unemployed who don't have the benefit of getting insurance through their employers as you are fortunate enough to have (yea, fortunate - imagine how much you'd be paying if you had cobra right now).

 

[Tomasello]

Social necessity outweighs the need to make money. Again, not a hard concept.

Except paying $100 million for a hospital they can afford to construct themselves without federal tax money is not a social necessity.

Try again.

 

[Sevv]

Actually being from mass and voting for scott brown, I am excited about the possible change. Concerning the video post election, in every debate held Brown said he was against the current bill proposed. Mass health sucks, having to have insurance in our state ....ing awesome, mass health yay. . .

 

[Celvantes]

Since when has it ever been a right to have health care?

Where, exactly, in the US Constitution does it say everyone in the US (regardless of citizenship) has the right to receive the most expensive service in existence for free if they can't afford it normally?

I don't think our founding fathers would kick poor sick or injured people to the curb, but they certainly wouldn't hold taxpayers liable for the bill.

I say if you waltz into the ER without insurance, you have three options:

1) Pay the hospital out of pocket
a) ...over time and with interest if you can't afford it up front.
2) Ask a charity to pay the hospital bills
3) Beg the hospital to take care of you pro bono (which the hospital could then deduct from their corporate taxes as a charitable donation)


If you don't like those options, get a fucking job and/or spend your money more wisely. I personally know two low-income families who have cable TV with high speed internet and a cell phone plan. That's upwards of $120/month if you're lucky. I just got a quote and basic Blue Cross/Blue Shield in my area costs $113/month. Get rid of the cable, switch to the $2/month low-income qualified landline you can get at Radio Shack, and holy shit, you can afford health insurance.

It's not that hard, America. Yeah, going without cable and a cell phone sucks, but if it's the choice between good health and watching another episode of Survivor, what should you be paying for?

I, as the taxpayer, should not have to subsidize your inability to spend properly.

 

[Halifirien]

Since when has it ever been a right to have health care?

Since a lot of industrialized nations decided it was a right and made it happen. We're still lagging behind. As with most societal changes, enough people agree that it's a right and we work through the government to make it happen.

The founding fathers also thought slave ownership was normal and restricted the vote to white landowning males. We'd barely discovered inoculations when they were writing the Constitution, and doctors thought bloodletting and laxatives could be used to cure stuff like appendicitis, so I wouldn't look to them for medical guidance.

 

[Tristam Green]

Since when has it ever been a right to have health care?

Oh my God, I cannot believe I'm hearing this shit.

If you have a right to live, you have a right to live well. You have a right to live well, and to be treated well, regardless of your income, ability or inability to pay, social status (because that's what this is all *really* about, isn't it?), in addition to race, creed, gender, or religious affiliation.

From the same mouth you same people profess to be "pro-life", yet feel a denial of basic healthcare services to the USUAL CANDIDATES FOR ABORTIONS is a-okay.

I have news for you - the illusion of equal opportunity in this country is gone. If you weren't born to a monetarily stable family in the past 10-20 years, odds are you aren't going to be monetarily stable yourself, and if you do somehow make it on your own, then POWER TO YOU.

Fuck all of you pretentious assholes.

 

[Thelona]

everyone already has the right to healthcare, the issues not even about that, the isssues been so twisted and fucked up, the ones trying to push this threw want you to believe if someones against their bill they are against to right to health care.

Everyone in this country already has the right to emergency health care, the question is, does everyone have the right to the exact same quality/extent of health care regardless of their ability to pay for it.

personally I don't think it has anything to do with the "right to healthcare" for the people pushing this threw, i think its about getting rid of the disparity between those who have insurance and those who don't, some people see the idea of one person having the means to have better quality health care as wrong.
The ones pushing this threw know the negative effect the bill is gonna have on our health care, but it lvls the playing field, so even if its shitty at least EQUALLY shitty, for everyone. and they wont stop at health-care, some of these radicals in our government are the type of loons that see ANYONE having better means to afford ANYTHING, as unjust.

Sure life would be easier if you had a guaranteed right to something just because its a necessity.

but that's not how this country works, you don't have the right to a free roof over your head, you don't have the right to free electricity and a free car, and you don't have a right to get every medical treatment in the book for free.

personally I'm all for health-care reform, of course we need it, just not THIS reform.

and the ones who think "anything is better then nothing" are hopelessly retarded and should just stfu, if you really believe our healthcare system couldn't be worse, then your being disingenuous or flat out stupid.

every time some democrat politician says "anything is better then nothing" i sit there and contemplate how this country put these idiots in power, thank GOD the founders of this country weren't stupid, incompetent, lazy, and corrupt enough to go about things with a "anything is better then nothing" attitude.

 

[Celvantes]

Oh my God, I cannot believe I'm hearing this shit.

If you have a right to live, you have a right to live well. You have a right to live well, and to be treated well, regardless of your income, ability or inability to pay, social status (because that's what this is all *really* about, isn't it?), in addition to race, creed, gender, or religious affiliation.

From the same mouth you same people profess to be "pro-life", yet feel a denial of basic healthcare services to the USUAL CANDIDATES FOR ABORTIONS is a-okay.

I have news for you - the illusion of equal opportunity in this country is gone. If you weren't born to a monetarily stable family in the past 10-20 years, odds are you aren't going to be monetarily stable yourself, and if you do somehow make it on your own, then POWER TO YOU.

Fuck all of you pretentious assholes.

And just because you were born rich does not mean you have the business acumen or intelligence of your parents. Yes, you can go to better schools and yes, you can be set up for success, but at the end of the day, you will eventually fall or rise to the level merited by your individual work ethic. If you are born extremely rich, it might take a couple of generations, but work ethic will eventually win out.

Using the wealth of the masses to prop up people who obviously cannot fend for themselves does not encourage economic self sufficiency. Instead it breeds complacency and lowers the quality of care for all.

Can universal health care work? If the population size of the country in question is small enough and the wealth per capita is large enough, then yes. But don't say it's a good thing... I've heard plenty of bitching from Canadians and Brits about their respective health care systems.

The problem is that we are too damned big population-wise for universal health care and our economy is comparatively too small. If we took the UK model and directly applied it on our scale, the resulting dollar expenditure would be greater than the GDPs of most countries on this planet.

We. Can't. Afford. It.

And I say we shouldn't have to afford it. No matter which way you look at it, universal health care is socialist in nature, and I believe that it stands in direct contrast to the concept of rugged individualism which formed and sustained this country. If you subscribe to socialism, move to Europe, where it is widely practiced. I do not believe you belong here.

I'm not saying that we kick poor people who need medical care to the curb. I do say we send the bill, collectively, to charitable organizations instead of the taxpayer.

If you care so much about health care for the poor, donate your time or your money to your local Shriner's hospital. Don't run legislation that forces every taxpayer in the country to essentially give charity when they might not otherwise do so.

 

[Tristam Green]

I'm not saying that we kick poor people who need medical care to the curb. I do say we send the bill, collectively, to charitable organizations instead of the taxpayer.

This I could probably get behind.

 

[Halifirien]

And I say we shouldn't have to afford it. No matter which way you look at it, universal health care is socialist in nature, and I believe that it stands in direct contrast to the concept of rugged individualism which formed and sustained this country. If you subscribe to socialism, move to Europe, where it is widely practiced. I do not believe you belong here.

We are not a nation of "rugged individualists" anymore. Our economy, our society, our laws and just about every facet of life in the good ol' U.S.A. is one of interdependence. We're not exactly growing or hunting our own food, and few of us are living completely off the grid.

If we decide as a nation that we all need to work together to make sure families aren't going bankrupt because someone got cancer, I don't care if it's labeled "socialist." I'd rather be socialist than leave it to corporations who only exist to serve the bottom line and will gladly cut you loose when you get sick or if you have a pre-existing condition because the shareholders put profit over keeping people healthy as long as they don't have to see how what they do affects people.

We can do it if we want to badly enough. We're just not there yet.

 

[Thelona]

every day, the idea of the founding and building of our country having divine influence seems more plausible. imagine if these people in power now had the chance to write our bill of rights and build this country from the ground up. BOY would we be royally FUCKED. we'd most likely have "Grand Empress for life Nancy Pelosi" or somethin.



I don't doubt for a second how radical the people in power are, Obama himself refered to our bill of rights as a bill of "inconvenient rights" how it talks to much about YOUR rights, and not enough about what the government has the right to do ON YOUR BEHALF.

sorry mister Obama, but thankfully our founding fathers had the foresight to know what radicals like yourself mean when you speak of government doing something "on your behalf".

I'm just wondering when people are gonna wake up, thankfully its starting to happen, I'm looking forward to 2012.