Rep. Debbie Wasserman Shultz insists that you don't have to buy health insurance. Did she even read the bill she voted for? What has she been smokiing lately?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/63885

Originally Posted by Ooper

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Shultz insists that you don't have to buy health insurance. Did she even read the bill she voted for? What has she been smokiing lately?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/63885

Mindless Dem sheeple following her clueless leaders.

I do not recall a BIGGER, MORE POLITICAL, boondogle that is so bad for this country EVER being passed in any congress in my lifetime (and I aint young)

We CANNOT allow these moronic representatives to remain in office! We need CHANGE on November 2, 2010!

Originally Posted by Ooper

We CANNOT allow these moronic representatives to remain in office! We need CHANGE on November 2, 2010!

Exactly. This administration is a boil on the world. I only hope this nation survives.

Talk about passing bills mindlessly without even having your staff read them for you? How did these brainless doobies get elected in the first place. Is the electorate that stupid? There must have been some signs? I agree without term limits, or just voting these stupids out of office we stand little chance of hanging onto our retirement income and health.

people who are not buying insurance today because "they can't afford it", how will they be able to afford it under the new Obamascare reform?
I know someone will say they will get a subsidy from the government. To prove that will not work...my son offers his employees an opportunity to participate in his group insurance plan...if they opt in they get very good coverage for a reasonable price...he offers to pay a small % of their premium as an incentive...more than half the employees have chosen to remain un-insured because "they can't afford" the premiums.

So my question has been and remains...just what is in Obama's rushjob scare care program that will make people like this all of a sudden be able to afford health care?

Add to these people the ones who would not buy health care if the premium money was put in their pockets tomorrow morning.

Just like so much about the bill that makes no sense at all....those who promoted, approved and support the bill have no clue to the reality of peoples needs/wants.....ABSOLUTELY NONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

btk

Originally Posted by Bucco

I do not recall a BIGGER, MORE POLITICAL, boondogle that is so bad for this country EVER being passed in any congress in my lifetime (and I aint young)

I'm not wild about the totality of the healthcare bill that finally got passed either, Bucco. But even if it turns out to be at its worst, it still won't hold a candle to our unjustified decision to invade Afghanistan and then Iraq, starting wars that are now going on twice as long as the longest war we ever entered into, at a cost in treasure, blood and reputation that will scar this country for generations to come.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

I'm not wild about the totality of the healthcare bill that finally got passed either, Bucco. But even if it turns out to be at its worst, it still won't hold a candle to our unjustified decision to invade Afghanistan and then Iraq, starting wars that are now going on twice as long as the longest war we ever entered into, at a cost in treasure, blood and reputation that will scar this country for generations to come.

OMG Spare us the left-wing talking points. There's millions of Iraqi's that thank us every day that we freed them from tyranny. Remember the purple thumbs?
We also have killed many enemies in Afghanistan who's only purpose in life is to kill the infidels.

senate that sits today!!!!! Some how they manage to distance themselves from that fact. And if truly unjustified then why has there been no pull out yet under Obama's direction?
Unpopular? With some. Unjustified? Not when they all voted to support the action at the time.
And in addition, all the other ongoing unjustified spending list of billions/trillions continues....unabated.

btk

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

I'm not wild about the totality of the healthcare bill that finally got passed either, Bucco. But even if it turns out to be at its worst, it still won't hold a candle to our unjustified decision to invade Afghanistan and then Iraq, starting wars that are now going on twice as long as the longest war we ever entered into, at a cost in treasure, blood and reputation that will scar this country for generations to come.

I can only assume that your thinking is that we should not have invaded anyone.....THAT I totally disagree with. Folks who talk like this have very very short memories of a regime in Iraq that EVERYONE in the world thought had WMD's...and we KNEW they had used biological weapons on their own people. Now, we had just been attacked......so you can "monday morning quarterback" all you want but....THIS HEALTH BILL....this was not done in any kind of atmosphere that demanded action as 9/11 did...it was done with a concentrated effort by a few and trust me...this bill, unless repealed will haunt us for many many decades !

I am tired of hearing about Iraq and Afghanastan.....if this board was up and running at the time of the invasion of Iraq, I would say that everyone would be supporting. It is easy to do the "monday morning" thing now and seems to be the left answer to anything and all that has to do with this bill or anything on the deficit...it is the first thing out of their mouth !

...Some how they manage to distance themselves from that fact. And if truly unjustified then why has there been no pull out yet under Obama's direction?...Unjustified? Not when they all voted to support the action at the time. And in addition, all the other ongoing unjustified spending list of billions/trillions continues....unabated.

Point well made.

Basically the same Congress who failed to ask the right questions about the need to go to war are the same people who currently criticized for not reading bills before they vote on them. These are almost all the same members of Congress who "spent like drunken sailors", as described by John McCain, many of whom are now criticizing their political opponents for spending too much and not following "conservative values".

Different Presidents, different political parties in the majority, mostly the same people...same result.

Someone give us a compelling argument what any member of Congress should be re-elected to do the same thing again, on some other issue of great importance to the country.

Originally Posted by Bucco

I can only assume that your thinking is that we should not have invaded anyone...

I'm not sure about "anyone", but I'm quite certain that we did not have any justification for invading Iraq.

I can recall having discussions at the time with friends of mine that the administration in power had already decided to invade Iraq, even though they were continuing meaningless discussions in both the Congress and the UN regarding the justification for such action. At the same time the Congress and the UN were debating and holding hearings, our commander-in-chief and the Secretary of Defense had already ordered almost 150,000 American troops to deploy into the Kuwaiti desert, immediately across the border from Iraq. We were going to war, no matter what. Anyone with any military experience whatsoever could have predicted that. The only question was in how many days. If you recall, we were going to have to invade in order to avoid the annual sandstorms so common in south and central Iraq, beginning annually only a few weeks later.

You're right, Bucco. I continue to believe that there was inadequate justification for the invasion of Iraq. Saddam Hussein was a bad guy, no doubt. But we had already invaded and supposedly freed Afghanistan and destroyed the training camps where there was evidence that al Quaeda operatives were being trained. Our invasion of Afghanistan probably was justified, but once we were successful there, we kept right on going into Iraq.

Had we been attacked by terrorists on 9-11? Yes. Was there evidence that some of the terrorists had been trained in Afghanistan? Yes. Were we justified in invading Afghanistan and eradicating the al Quaeda camps? Yes. Was there any evidence whatsoever that Iraq was involved in the 9-11 attack on the U.S.? No. Let's not practice revisionist history just of the purpose of making a political argument against the current POTUS, who wasn't even serving in elected office at the time of the invasion of Iraq.

Other than the belief of a few people in power in the administration at the time that we should take the opportunity to plant a democracy in Iraq, there was no justification for invading that country. Iraq did not present a threat to the United States. Even to this very day, no one involved in the decision will make the argument that they did. The idea of invading Iraq and democratizing the country far preceded even the Bush administration.

Do you remember an organization called the Project for a New American Century (PNAC). That was a group which in 1998, three years before the 9-11 attack, recommended to then President Bill Clinton that the U.S. should invade Iraq, oust Saddam Hussein, and democratize the country. The objective was to be that a democracy in Iraq would spread throughout the Middle East, much to the benefit of the U.S.

Who was the PNAC, you might ask? Among the people who signed the letter to President Clinton on January 26, 1998 making that recommendation were: Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Elliot Abrams, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Armitrage, William Bennett, John Bolton, William Kristol, Richard Perle and James Woolsey. Any of those names sound familiar to you? Of course. They were all key members of the Bush administration.

In the letter sent to President Clinton, this group recommended the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Their reasoning, as quoted from the letter itself, said, "...(our continued unwillingness to invade Iraq) will, by itself, have a seriously destabilizing effect on the entire Middle East. It hardly needs to be added that if Saddam does acquire the capability to deliver weapons of mass destruction, as he is almost certain to do if we continue along the present course, the safety of American troops in the region, of our friends and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a significant portion of the world’s supply of oil will all be put at hazard."

Bucco, you can believe what you wish about the justification for the invasion of Iraq and the war there that continues to this very day. I am as convinced as you are that the invasion of Iraq was planned and executed by this same group of neocons, who by 2001 had been placed in key positions in the administration at the time. The fact that the U.S. had been attacked on 9-11 provided only a convenient excuse, based on ideology not circumstances or a real threat, to take the military action in the Middle East that had been in planning for at least three years before.

Your getting pretty close to called Sept 11, 2001 a conspiracy. I would not be very proud to be in that group.

Originally Posted by Donna2

Your getting pretty close to called Sept 11, 2001 a conspiracy. I would not be very proud to be in that group.

Wow! There's a leap if I ever saw one. Unbelievable!

If I thought 9/11 was a conspiracy, I would have said so. I don't believe that, so I didn't.