Dems reach 60th vote on healthcare debate

[B_VinylBoy]

No. The government is trying to take over the insurance industry. There is a difference.

Technicalities, technicalities.

And it's not a phobia, it's just unnecessary. I pay $90 a month for my health insurance, and it has never failed me.

Then guess what? You could stay on your plan and not even have to deal with what the government is providing. Issue averted.

In fact, it saved my mother's life...without it, she probably would have died from cancer and my family would be bankrupt. Thank you BlueCross and BlueShield for providing us, and a 100 million other people, with affordable healthcare.

Well, guess what?
Because I'm gay, I can't put my partner of nearly 6 years on my health insurance plan and he pays through the nose for it. Would I like to have more options for health insurance, even though the coverage I currently have takes care of a majority of my immediate needs? You bet I would. Only a fool would deny additional options. The problem is, you're so adamant in your beliefs that government provided health care equals "government takeover", that you're willing to deny millions of other people (some of which are also included in the 100 million you listed in your praising of BlueCross/BlueShield) that decision to have an option that could prevent them from going bankrupt or even save their lives.

And let's not act as if you know how much this bill is going to cost or how your taxes are going to be affected by it because nobody here knows. Not even you. The bill hasn't even been finalized yet, nor is it in Obama's hand to sign or reject. All we're doing is going insane over proposed ideas and estimates, forgetting that there's more than one version of the bill out there. How hard is it for anyone to just wait until we actually have a final bill before we really start talking about what it will or will not do?

It's amazing how people fear the unknown.

 

[lucky8]

Technicalities, technicalities.



Then guess what? You could stay on your plan and not even have to deal with what the government is providing. Issue averted.



Well, guess what?
Because I'm gay, I can't put my partner of nearly 6 years on my health insurance plan and he pays through the nose for it. Would I like to have more options for health insurance, even though the coverage I currently have takes care of a majority of my immediate needs? You bet I would. Only a fool would deny additional options. The problem is, you're so adamant in your beliefs that government provided health care equals "government takeover", that you're willing to deny millions of other people (some of which are also included in the 100 million you listed in your praising of BlueCross/BlueShield) that decision to have an option that could prevent them from going bankrupt or even save their lives.

And let's not act as if you know how much this bill is going to cost or how your taxes are going to be affected by it because nobody here knows. Not even you. The bill hasn't even been finalized yet, nor is it in Obama's hand to sign or reject. All we're doing is going insane over proposed ideas and estimates, forgetting that there's more than one version of the bill out there. How hard is it for anyone to just wait until we actually have a final bill before we really start talking about what it will or will not do?

It's amazing how people fear the unknown.

I don't know how to mulit-quote, so I'm going to take a willtom approach on this one...

"Then guess what? You could stay on your plan and not even have to deal with what the government is providing. Issue averted."

According to the bills I've read, after Y1 of implementation, I will not be able to enroll in private insurance if I'm ever in the situation I need to suspend it for a few months. THAT IS NOT A FUCKING OPTION.

"Well, guess what?
Because I'm gay, I can't put my partner of nearly 6 years on my health insurance plan and he pays through the nose for it. Would I like to have more options for health insurance, even though the coverage I currently have takes care of a majority of my immediate needs? You bet I would. Only a fool would deny additional options. The problem is, you're so adamant in your beliefs that government provided health care equals "government takeover", that you're willing to deny millions of other people (some of which are also included in the 100 million you listed in your praising of BlueCross/BlueShield) that decision to have an option that could prevent them from going bankrupt or even save their lives."

This is a GOVERNMENT issue. The fact that gays do not have the same marriage rights and perks that come with them is not the fault of the insurance companies, it is an issue that stems DIRECTLY from the government.

How many fucking times in this thread have I said "I support a public option?" Enough that it should be clear that I DO support a public option. I firmly believe government sponsored price competition is the most efficient way of reducing insurance costs, but the fact of the matter is, every attempt at placing an OPTION into a bill has thus far turned out to restrict private insurers from enrolling new customers after Y1 of implementation of the bill. READ THE FUCKING BILLS for christ's sake.

"And let's not act as if you know how much this bill is going to cost or how your taxes are going to be affected by it because nobody here knows. Not even you. The bill hasn't even been finalized yet, nor is it in Obama's hand to sign or reject. All we're doing is going insane over proposed ideas and estimates, forgetting that there's more than one version of the bill out there. How hard is it for anyone to just wait until we actually have a final bill before we really start talking about what it will or will not do?"

I'm not concerned about "how much this will cost our nation" I have said nothing in this thread about the "cost to our nation." Stop fucking lumping me into a generalized group of fanatics just because I have more common sense than most of you. So far, America has proven it can spend how ever much it wants to finance whatever it wants. I don't expect this to change anytime soon, and with the inflation that will ensue in the next 5 years due to the $12 trillion dollars of new currency (which is 12x the amount currently in circulation), higher taxes aren't going to be that huge of an issue as the value of the money then will be less than the current value today...they will begin to offset themselves.

What happens when we "wait until there's a final bill?" Answer: they put all of this mumbo jumbo bullshit in the bill that we're currently bitching about because noone had the opportunity to bitch about it until it was too late and already passed. And then what? We end up with a POS, one-sided bill because no one had the balls to stand up and debate. You're political blindness is causing you to overlook the fact that both parties do have good ideas, just as both parties do have bad ideas. The middle ground between 2 extremes is always best. Without this debate between both parties, we end up with a one-sided bill that isn't as good as it would be with a combination of both sides of the issue. It's the basis of our entire political system. THAT is why we shouldn't "wait", because if we wait, our represtatives think we're satisified and pass a subpar, one sided bill that no one has challenged.

It's amazing how people disregard logic to satisfy their politcal ego

 

[B_ccc888]

LEGALIZE EUTHANASIA and ABORTION

ONE CHILD POLICY !

Sick, old no insurance ? Here's a free Euthanasia for you!

Pregnant because ones are too dumb and ignorant to put condoms and birth control before having sex ? Then get a free ABORTION then...........

We can't avoid to spend tax dollar on ignorant people.

 

[jason_els]

lucky8 has some good points.

Now that there is no public option, drug pricing competition is right out, and there appears to be nothing to spur insurance company competition, I tend to think this bill is pointless. All it seems to do is require people to buy health insurance while making no provision to require standards of care or expanding the rights of insurees. If it does pass, it seems to be a Pyrrhic victory.

Oh and I loathe Lieberman even more than I did before. The man is completely feckless though I shouldn't be surprised at his position considering Hartford is still the insurance capital of the country.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

According to the bills I've read, after Y1 of implementation, I will not be able to enroll in private insurance if I'm ever in the situation I need to suspend it for a few months. THAT IS NOT A FUCKING OPTION.

Now tell us, on which version of the bill does that appear on? The House version? The Senate version? Both? Is it a provision that you know will be on the final version? Or did you read it on a number of sites, jump to the conclusion that it would be included and panic like you're doing now?

This is a GOVERNMENT issue.

Strike one!
That is not an issue that is only decided by the Government. There are companies that do have plans that honor this right now right now. According to the University of Illinois, they provide Health, Dental, and Vision insurance coverage for eligible same-sex domestic partners of benefits-eligible University employees. Emory College in Atlanta, Georgia does as well. In New York, the state that I live in, the Village Voice was one of the first companies to extend same sex domestic partner benefits and that was in 1982. But should I be forced to abandon all of my career goals, quit my job and fight to get a position there just to get better health coverage that not only protects me, but also extends help to my partner?

The fact that gays do not have the same marriage rights and perks that come with them is not the fault of the insurance companies, it is an issue that stems DIRECTLY from the government.

No need to type in caps if you don't know what you're talking about. Really.

The truth is... most people in Government don't really care either way. That's why they've put the decision for same sex marriage up to a vote to make it seem as if they're trying to make a noble effort for civil rights. Kinda funny that in other civil rights matters for African Americans and Women, they were adamant in passing legislation. Gay rights are approached at by our Government in a very nonchalant matter.

But this only applies to same sex marriage. As I illustrated before, one doesn't have to be married in order to be eligible for same sex domestic partnership. If the Government passes a law, it becomes mandated and every company would be required to do it. If not, then it's up to the employers and the insurance companies to honor it... and most companies do not.

How many fucking times in this thread have I said "I support a public option?" Enough that it should be clear that I DO support a public option.

Apologies if I don't read every single post you make on the subject matter. This is a penis site, ya know.

I firmly believe government sponsored price competition is the most efficient way of reducing insurance costs, but the fact of the matter is, every attempt at placing an OPTION into a bill has thus far turned out to restrict private insurers from enrolling new customers after Y1 of implementation of the bill. READ THE FUCKING BILLS for christ's sake.

You're making it harder for me to be civil.
Why are you even suggesting that I've somehow not read the bill(s) if I didn't come to the same conclusion as you?

I'm not concerned about "how much this will cost our nation" I have said nothing in this thread about the "cost to our nation." Stop fucking lumping me into a generalized group of fanatics just because I have more common sense than most of you.

I didn't try to put you in a "box". I don't need to, for it's much easier to just focus on YOUR flaws and misconstrued logic than a whole group of people.

So far, America has proven it can spend how ever much it wants to finance whatever it wants.

That is true about everyone and not just our country. Stop preaching the rhetoric.

and with the inflation that will ensue in the next 5 years due to the $12 trillion dollars of new currency (which is 12x the amount currently in circulation), higher taxes aren't going to be that huge of an issue as the value of the money then will be less than the current value today...they will begin to offset themselves.

Even without Health Reform, we know that taxes are going to rise. So again, stop preaching rhetoric.

What happens when we "wait until there's a final bill?"

You have no choice in the matter but to wait. But let's see what you predict, Chicken Little...

Answer: they put all of this mumbo jumbo bullshit in the bill that we're currently bitching about because noone had the opportunity to bitch about it until it was too late and already passed. And then what? We end up with a POS, one-sided bill because no one had the balls to stand up and debate.

You're not debating... you're bitching. MAJOR difference.

You're political blindness is causing you to overlook the fact that both parties do have good ideas, just as both parties do have bad ideas.

Bullshit. You're just saying that because I disagree with you. Who made you the one with perfect 20/20 vision?

The middle ground between 2 extremes is always best.

And as much as you think you're in the middle ground, YOU'RE NOT.
It requires more than just bitching about problems while labeling oneself as "Undecided" or "Independent". On this particular issue, YOU HAVE PICKED A SIDE. Unless you want to admit this, then further debates with you on the subject matter are pointless.

Without this debate between both parties,

Which shows one party trying to push things forward while the other one is trying to stall... and that doesn't even require reading the bill to see that.

we end up with a one-sided bill that isn't as good as it would be with a combination of both sides of the issue.

It's going to be positioned as a one sided bill anyhow because Conservatives in both areas in Congress have adamantly voted no on everything for about a year now. Let's not even try to make this an argument about bipartisanship because anyone can see what is happening here.

It's the basis of our entire political system. THAT is why we shouldn't "wait", because if we wait, our represtatives think we're satisified and pass a subpar, one sided bill that no one has challenged.

You misinterpret my words when I said we should "wait". I'm only suggesting we get the final draft before we make our decisions. There's nothing you or I can do, as civilians, to make the process go any further. And bitching about it on this board (or anywhere on the internet) will not do a thing.

 

[B_spiker067]

Laws, dumbass. You don't have to take over an entire industry to clean up ethical issues. I point you to Sarbanes-Oxley, for starters.

Laws don't mean shit if people aren't prosecuted. There are enough laws on the books to deal with fraud and yet all those NINJA loan officers and clients aren't going to jail, WTF???

If they prosecuted the message would be clear and people would behave. Look at Merrill Lynch... that moron Elliot Spitzer never sent anyone to jail when he had the chance. To the end ML was an illegal piece of shit organization that now has tainted BofA with corrupt morals.

 

[lucky8]

Now tell us, on which version of the bill does that appear on? The House version? The Senate version? Both? Is it a provision that you know will be on the final version? Or did you read it on a number of sites, jump to the conclusion that it would be included and panic like you're doing now?



Strike one!
That is not an issue that is only decided by the Government. There are companies that do have plans that honor this right now right now. According to the University of Illinois, they provide Health, Dental, and Vision insurance coverage for eligible same-sex domestic partners of benefits-eligible University employees. Emory College in Atlanta, Georgia does as well. In New York, the state that I live in, the Village Voice was one of the first companies to extend same sex domestic partner benefits and that was in 1982. But should I be forced to abandon all of my career goals, quit my job and fight to get a position there just to get better health coverage that not only protects me, but also extends help to my partner?



No need to type in caps if you don't know what you're talking about. Really.

The truth is... most people in Government don't really care either way. That's why they've put the decision for same sex marriage up to a vote to make it seem as if they're trying to make a noble effort for civil rights. Kinda funny that in other civil rights matters for African Americans and Women, they were adamant in passing legislation. Gay rights are approached at by our Government in a very nonchalant matter.

But this only applies to same sex marriage. As I illustrated before, one doesn't have to be married in order to be eligible for same sex domestic partnership. If the Government passes a law, it becomes mandated and every company would be required to do it. If not, then it's up to the employers and the insurance companies to honor it... and most companies do not.



Apologies if I don't read every single post you make on the subject matter. This is a penis site, ya know.



You're making it harder for me to be civil.
Why are you even suggesting that I've somehow not read the bill(s) if I didn't come to the same conclusion as you?



I didn't try to put you in a "box". I don't need to, for it's much easier to just focus on YOUR flaws and misconstrued logic than a whole group of people.

That is true about everyone and not just our country. Stop preaching the rhetoric.


Even without Health Reform, we know that taxes are going to rise. So again, stop preaching rhetoric.


You have no choice in the matter but to wait. But let's see what you predict, Chicken Little...



You're not debating... you're bitching. MAJOR difference.



Bullshit. You're just saying that because I disagree with you. Who made you the one with perfect 20/20 vision?



And as much as you think you're in the middle ground, YOU'RE NOT.
It requires more than just bitching about problems while labeling oneself as "Undecided" or "Independent". On this particular issue, YOU HAVE PICKED A SIDE. Unless you want to admit this, then further debates with you on the subject matter are pointless.



Which shows one party trying to push things forward while the other one is trying to stall... and that doesn't even require reading the bill to see that.



It's going to be positioned as a one sided bill anyhow because Conservatives in both areas in Congress have adamantly voted no on everything for about a year now. Let's not even try to make this an argument about bipartisanship because anyone can see what is happening here.



You misinterpret my words when I said we should "wait". I'm only suggesting we get the final draft before we make our decisions. There's nothing you or I can do, as civilians, to make the process go any further. And bitching about it on this board (or anywhere on the internet) will not do a thing.

"Now tell us, on which version of the bill does that appear on? The House version? The Senate version? Both? Is it a provision that you know will be on the final version? Or did you read it on a number of sites, jump to the conclusion that it would be included and panic like you're doing now? "

HR 3200 and HR3600.

"Strike one!
That is not an issue that is only decided by the Government. There are companies that do have plans that honor this right now right now. According to the University of Illinois, they provide Health, Dental, and Vision insurance coverage for eligible same-sex domestic partners of benefits-eligible University employees. Emory College in Atlanta, Georgia does as well. In New York, the state that I live in, the Village Voice was one of the first companies to extend same sex domestic partner benefits and that was in 1982. But should I be forced to abandon all of my career goals, quit my job and fight to get a position there just to get better health coverage that not only protects me, but also extends help to my partner?

No need to type in caps if you don't know what you're talking about. Really.

The truth is... most people in Government don't really care either way. That's why they've put the decision for same sex marriage up to a vote to make it seem as if they're trying to make a noble effort for civil rights. Kinda funny that in other civil rights matters for African Americans and Women, they were adamant in passing legislation. Gay rights are approached at by our Government in a very nonchalant matter.

But this only applies to same sex marriage. As I illustrated before, one doesn't have to be married in order to be eligible for same sex domestic partnership. If the Government passes a law, it becomes mandated and every company would be required to do it. If not, then it's up to the employers and the insurance companies to honor it... and most companies do not."

Thank you for backing up my statement that rather than taking over an industry, laws can be passed to clean up ethical issues.

"Why are you even suggesting that I've somehow not read the bill(s) if I didn't come to the same conclusion as you?"

Because you deny the fact that these 2 bills I have referenced eliminate new enrollment for private insurance, which makes it obvious that you don't know the contents of either of these bills, and are just trying to defend your position.

"That is true about everyone and not just our country. Stop preaching the rhetoric.


Even without Health Reform, we know that taxes are going to rise. So again, stop preaching rhetoric. "

You're the one that brought cost and taxes into this by assuming I'm afraid of bankrupting the country and higher taxes. You should stop assuming, it ruins your arguments.

"You're not debating... you're bitching. MAJOR difference. "

I am offering rebutles for your guys' flawed assumptions about my beliefs. Look it up. It's called debate.

"You misinterpret my words when I said we should "wait". I'm only suggesting we get the final draft before we make our decisions. There's nothing you or I can do, as civilians, to make the process go any further. And bitching about it on this board (or anywhere on the internet) will not do a thing"

Correction. This bitching you speak of is largely responsible for most of the Republican and Democratic "no" votes on these bills. Believe it or not, some people actually don't like what they've read in these bills.

And you're right, I have made up my mind on this issue. I've chosen not to follow any of the republican or democratic rhetoric that is currently being spouted, and read some of these bills myself in order to draw my own conclusions. Better than 99% of the people on this board can say...

 

[lucky8]

Laws don't mean shit if people aren't prosecuted. There are enough laws on the books to deal with fraud and yet all those NINJA loan officers and clients aren't going to jail, WTF???

If they prosecuted the message would be clear and people would behave. Look at Merrill Lynch... that moron Elliot Spitzer never sent anyone to jail when he had the chance. To the end ML was an illegal piece of shit organization that now has tainted BofA with corrupt morals.

Again, this issue is so because of a lack of ability of the US government to properly enforce policies and programs that it has deemed itself responsible for. You guys are just proving, time and time again, that government regulation is entirely inefficient. You're arguing against yourselves...and you don't even realize it.

 

[thadjock]

Please tell me where you buy insurance for 90 dollars a month. Is it through your employer? How much does your employer contribute. I am self employed and pay 800 dollars a month.

yeah I'd like to know too,

i'm 33 non smoker, no prexisting conditions, not on any meds, excellent health , no claims in the last 5 yrs , and i pay $300 a month. and it's up $50 a month from last year ( i pay annually)

if you're buying your own private coverage it has to be more than $90.

Obama completely dropped the ball on this, I know some will argue it's congress that screwed this up but Obama could have gone over congress and laid out the real situation directly to the people and then congress would be forced to create a bill that's best for us instead of whats' best for their biggest contributors: the industrial healthcare complex.

instead he sat on his ass and let it be crippled into what it is today. the mandate just gaurantees the insurance companies 35 million more customers and I (the taxpayer) gets to pay the insurance companies to cover those 35 million through subsidies. excellent!

Hey Obama: u get an F on healthcare

 

[lucky8]

Please tell me where you buy insurance for 90 dollars a month. Is it through your employer? How much does your employer contribute. I am self employed and pay 800 dollars a month.

Not through my employer, their program is terrible. Probably attributable to the fact that I'm 24 and never go to the doctor or hospital even if I'm sick. Couple that with the fact that I've been extremely healthy my entire life and I have no need for a super deluxe gold package, there currently isn't much risk for me being on a plan, therefore the cost is low.

Oh, and I live in Kansas. Our cost of living is like 3 times lower than everywhere else, everything else follows...

 

[B_spiker067]

Again, this issue is so because of a lack of ability of the US government to properly enforce policies and programs that it has deemed itself responsible for. You guys are just proving, time and time again, that government regulation is entirely inefficient. You're arguing against yourselves...and you don't even realize it.

I'm not with you or against you or anyone else in this. I'm just saying laws mean nothing if they aren't enforced. Something you should have explicitly included.

I'm for absolutely tax free Health Savings Accounts and CATASTROPHIC insurance as being the real solution.

 

[thadjock]

Not through my employer, their program is terrible. Probably attributable to the fact that I'm 24 and never go to the doctor or hospital even if I'm sick. Couple that with the fact that I've been extremely healthy my entire life and I have no need for a super deluxe gold package, there currently isn't much risk for me being on a plan, therefore the cost is low.

Oh, and I live in Kansas. Our cost of living is like 3 times lower than everywhere else, everything else follows...

come to california and try and get $90 healthcare

 

[D_Smidley Smelliepits]

i'm 33 non smoker, no prexisting conditions, not on any meds, excellent health , no claims in the last 5 yrs , and i pay $300 a month. and it's up $50 a month from last year ( i pay annually)

I live in Spain and know just a bit about US healthcare system. TJ, even though you pay taxes for healthcare, do you have to go to a private insurance company or go to public health centers? (If I'm not making myself clear, just tell me, my English can be quite poor sometimes... :tongue

 

[lucky8]

come to california and try and get $90 healthcare

I'll pass, thanks.

 

[Industrialsize]

They're modeling the "insurance exchange" on the one in Massachusetts. You enter some info and then it displays all the insurance plans and their costs. You can see how much it would cost you to get insurance in Massachusetts. The new federal Exchange would provide subsidies for those who couldn't afford insurance.

https://www.mahealthconnector.org/portal/site/connector/

 

[scottredleter]

It's all over. The Health care insurance industry won. We will forever be enslaved to big business for health care so they can control us more effectively and keep us all making widgets to make them rich. the only way there will ever be real health care is for all Americans to DUMP their health care coverage. Never again make a single payment to a health insurance company. Yes, some of us will die, some of us will get sick. But they have to be broken completely down.

 

[thadjock]

I live in Spain and know just a bit about US healthcare system. TJ, even though you pay taxes for healthcare, do you have to go to a private insurance company or go to public health centers? (If I'm not making myself clear, just tell me, my English can be quite poor sometimes... :tongue

yeah it's complicated to understand and the US system is a fukd up mess, basically engineered to profit private insurance companies and drug manufacturers. but we do have gov't run insurance for old people and military veterans. mostly because no private insurance company want's the old people because they're the most expensive to insure, and the gov't has a duty to its soldiers (rightly so). this cluster fuk exists purely because of the money involved, it has nothing to do with quality of care.

as far as taxes go, I was making the point that in order to write a bill into law that forces people to buy insurance, the government needs to provide those people who can't afford insurance (because the insurance companies are effectively unregulated and can charge anything they want) with subsidies so they can afford it. those subsidies will come from tax dollars. my tax dollars.

the only people who will benefit from this bill are the really really rich and the really really poor. the rest of us in the middle get to pay for it all.

a variation of the systems like most of europe and canada and japan use is the only sane solution but there's too much money at stake for the organized crime industry known as insurance companies to let that happen here. be glad u live in spain.

 

[thadjock]

It's all over. The Health care insurance industry won. We will forever be enslaved to big business for health care so they can control us more effectively and keep us all making widgets to make them rich. the only way there will ever be real health care is for all Americans to DUMP their health care coverage. Never again make a single payment to a health insurance company. Yes, some of us will die, some of us will get sick. But they have to be broken completely down.

i'm with u 100%

 

[D_Smidley Smelliepits]

as far as taxes go, I was making the point that in order to write a bill into law that forces people to buy insurance, the government needs to provide those people who can't afford insurance (because the insurance companies are effectively unregulated and can charge anything they want) with subsidies so they can afford it. those subsidies will come from tax dollars. my tax dollars.

the only people who will benefit from this bill are the really really rich and the really really poor. the rest of us in the middle get to pay for it all.

a variation of the systems like most of europe and canada and japan use is the only sane solution but there's too much money at stake for the organized crime industry known as insurance companies to let that happen here. be glad u live in spain.

But really don't understand that you pay $300 a month in taxes and don't have public healthcare assistance. In Spain, I pay €250 a month and have a public health system.

Yeah, I'm glad I live in Spain. When are you moving in? :wink:

 

[B_VinylBoy]

HR 3200 and HR3600.

Neither of which have been finalized or signed.

Thank you for backing up my statement that rather than taking over an industry, laws can be passed to clean up ethical issues.

If you want to think I'm backing you in your desperate need to be right then feel free to twist my statement into such. However, if the Government provided an alternative health care plan that also approved same sex domestic partnership, then our Government wouldn't have to push a bill to mandate it for every company out there. Private insurance companies and employers could then retain their rights to honor same sex domestic partnership or not, and civilians could have a choice to move to one that does. It also gives private insurance less excuses for raising their premiums, although I'm sure they'll find another reason to do it anyhow. You probably didn't think that one through in your continued bouts of yelling, screaming, and declarations of "political blindness".

Because you deny the fact that these 2 bills I have referenced eliminate new enrollment for private insurance, which makes it obvious that you don't know the contents of either of these bills, and are just trying to defend your position.

I didn't deny anything. I'm just waiting for the final bill to be presented before I make my final judgement. You're the one getting worked up on two separate bills, forgetting that Obama is only signing ONE. It doesn't have to be either one of the two bills presented either... it could also be a merging of the two under a different act. Again, none of this sinking in your brain yet?

You're the one that brought cost and taxes into this by assuming I'm afraid of bankrupting the country and higher taxes. You should stop assuming, it ruins your arguments.

Nothing is ruining my argument here, much to your chagrin. That's because I'm not here to "win". But please continue.

I am offering rebutles for your guys' flawed assumptions about my beliefs. Look it up. It's called debate.

Hmmmmm... under the word "debate", the dictionary doesn't provide any information about a person's assumptions, nor does it suggest that the information provided by one side is right while the other is "flawed". Merriam-Webster is not your friend. Perhaps you read that in HR 3200 and HR3600?

What usually happens in most "debates" on topics with no definitive answer is that two sides, both with interesting yet flawed information, clash heads. In a good debate, some form of middle ground is developed and a compromise of the two ideas is created. In this so-called debate you're trying to conduct, you've already taken the title of "middle ground" since you claimed to have read both bills. That doesn't make you "in the middle", nor does it make you more informed than anyone else... especially if your final arguments are extremely lopsided. I know plenty people who read but still calculate data worse than a chimp. A full comprehension of the entire scenario, is different. I have yet to make any real decisions or judgement calls on these bills since I know that there's still a lot more work to be done before we see the final one. I'll admit that I've read many things in the two bills and still don't understand everything in them 100%. I'll also admit that I'm willing to see what happens when both of these bills are presented to Obama and see the outcome of both before I make a final decision. I also know that whatever gets signed (if anything) is bound to have continued opposition, so I also expect many amendments to emerge to further change the bill in the future. What's sad is that you've yet to figure that out... what's even sadder is watching you frolic about on a penis site acting as if we should all be revolting over what's proposed in two bills when the whole process isn't even completed yet.

Correction. This bitching you speak of is largely responsible for most of the Republican and Democratic "no" votes on these bills. Believe it or not, some people actually don't like what they've read in these bills.

You really have a way to use these generalized statements that can be perceived in many different ways. The key word here is "some", as it's painfully obvious that many people in Congress haven't even read the bills. Either that, or they're merely voting down party lines as usual. Some are voting in their own financial interests. Let's not even try and position the naysayers of this bill under the same umbrella because they all have their own reasons for doing so and they're not all out of any ethical concern for the Nation.

I mean, we ARE talking about politicians... aren't we?

And you're right, I have made up my mind on this issue. I've chosen not to follow any of the republican or democratic rhetoric that is currently being spouted, and read some of these bills myself in order to draw my own conclusions. Better than 99% of the people on this board can say...

Actually, you're a product of it and don't even realize it. You've adamantly declared you "picked a side" when nobody knows what the final bill is going to look like, and chirp more bullet-pointed, political rhetoric than I do on this thread. If that's your definition of being on the "middle ground" and having an independent mind, then consider me slanted. Someone get me a V8.