Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyD
I'm not being a smart ass, just accurate. I see no point in arguing "what might be" when there are a number of issues with "what is". My issue with the Repubs when it comes to this issue is that I think they're conflating the subject and merely working towards next year's elections, as opposed to logically addressing the issues within the bill. My issue with the Dems is that in my opinion the bills *drafted* do not effectively address the issue of rising health care costs. Does anyone even remember that is where this all started - to curb rising costs?
|
sorry about the smart ass remark, it wasn't meant in a mean way..I just feel like you are sticking to a circular argument...you expect particulars on a fishing website that can't even be provided by elected officials and the administration...the bill is not intended to curb rising costs which is why that is not effectively addressed in your opinion...between the house and senate version there's nearly 2000 pages of vague legal muck, so mucky that I can cite the specific part of the bill and you can say, "it doesn't say that" in virtually every case, this was done intentionally...the intention is clearly government take over of the American healthcare system...which is why it needs to be opposed...show me any place in the nearly 2000 pages where government is limited? and I want the names of those 50 million uninsured people without healthcare.....prove that they actually exist
Threaded Mode