quote I think that people deserve a congressman who is going to say it like it is… and we've needed that for so long," Grayson said. "We need somebody who has the guts to tell the truth. The reason that people have reacted the way they did is not because I said something controversial. It's because I said something that has been on people's minds for months. And I just happened to be the one who said it," he said.

Equally applicable to Rep Joe Wilson.

quote I think that people deserve a congressman who is going to say it like it is… and we've needed that for so long," Grayson said. "We need somebody who has the guts to tell the truth.

Neither of which he did.

quote The reason that people have reacted the way they did is not because I said something controversial. It's because I said something that has been on people's minds for months. And I just happened to be the one who said it," he said.

What kind of convoluted logic is that, . Self justification I guess.

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Equally applicable to Rep Joe Wilson.

Apples and oranges.
Mr. Grayson did not interrupt the president to make his statement.
He had the floor.

So Wilson had bigger eggs by doing it like he did, instead of during a lil private speech where he couldn't be interrupted?

quote Originally posted by NEPTUNE: Apples and oranges.

He is right Don. Wilson called out a lying politician. Grayson is a lying politician.

hahah what a hack. They're all from the same source! And a "tracking poll" that is not. A tracking poll, professor, is the same poll repeated over and over again, not one poll where they publish results before they've concluded. That kind of poll is called a farce, and it is intended to dupe the easily duped into believing whatever it is they need to so as to be continuously duped.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: The reason numbers are still coming in is because it is a tracking poll. Tracking polls, such as IBD/TIPP's, poll every day and typically average results over a three-day period. Meaning that they do not accept their numbers as fact, just as the latest fact. Nontracking polls survey less frequently. IBD/TIPP Takes Top Honors Again Now, a poll, by itself, does not tell the whole story. The article I lifted that poll from was just one in a series of eight articles. Perhaps you would like to read all eight. Or, do you just listen to lying politicians and partisan hack news outlets ?

quote Originally posted by Jeremiah: hahah what a hack. They're all from the same source! And a "tracking poll" that is not. A tracking poll, professor, is the same poll repeated over and over again, not one poll where they publish results before they've concluded. That kind of poll is called a farce, and it is intended to dupe the easily duped into believing whatever it is they need to so as to be continuously duped.

As Mr Lobe pointed out, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. Myself, I am more eloquent. "You can't fix stupid."
I think that I remember you have a college education. Me, I am a high school drop out. How come you did not learn how to think ? Or even reason ? Have you ever done any research ? Or, is it like Conn says ?

quote Originally posted by connecticutFIERO: Again with the studies and polls always being discounted when it doesn't fit your agenda.

You parade a poll which fits your agenda and proclaim it proof.
You call my poll hack. Yet, you refer to a partisan poll funded by the very same government which is advancing an agenda the poll just happens to support, The poll you cite as evidence was made by an organization which did not even make the list of top ten most accurate pollsters. As I said. I challenge my findings. How can you or your opinion be taken seriously when you do not challenge your beliefs ? That kind of poll you herald is called a farce, and it is intended to dupe the easily duped into believing whatever it is they need to so as to be continuously duped. You said something about easily duped people ?
My poll, was conducted by an entity which has nothing to gain from reporting results. Nothing but benefits, heck even it's existence, from being correct in predicting trends which affect business.

quote Originally posted by Jeremiah: And a "tracking poll" that is not. A tracking poll, professor, is the same poll repeated over and over again, not one poll where they publish results before they've concluded.

, if they repeat the same poll over and over, when do they release the results ? Answer ... AS THEY CHANGE. Data can still come in. A tracking poll is a poll repeated at intervals, generally averaged over a trailing window. That is, a weekly tracking poll will use the data from the past week, discarding older data. A key benefit of tracking polls is that the trend of a tracking poll (the change over time) corrects for bias: regardless of whether a poll consistently over or underestimates opinion, the trend correctly reflects increases or decreases.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: He is right Don. Wilson called out a lying politician. Grayson is a lying politician.

quote Originally posted by Jeremiah: Wrong (again) From the bill itself: H.R. 3200: Sec 246 — NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States. pwnd

Like I said, you can't fix stupid. "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States" is intended to dupe the easily duped into believing whatever it is they need to so as to be continuously duped. C'mon, . A 1000 page bill and that is all it says about preventing illegals from getting health care ? Sort of like saying drugs are illegal and providing no penalties for illegal drug use. Then, after Wilson exposed Obama's lie, the number of uninsured dropped by 20 million ? Coincidence that that is how many illegals we have ? Then the Dumbs prohibit the identification of health care users to identify whom might be illegals. I forget the details but also, the House rushed back into HB3200 to fix verbage which supported Wilson's claim.
Are you that easily duped ?
Pwnd ? Me ? By you ?
You, own3d, by the Dumbocrats, .

[This message has been edited by cliffw (edited 10-03-2009).]

quote Originally posted by NEPTUNE: Apples and oranges. Mr. Grayson did not interrupt the president to make his statement. He had the floor.

To which he apologized, and the President accepted. Therefore, by your own standard, you should admire Joe Wilson's "telling it like it is".

quote Originally posted by fierobear: Therefore, by your own standard, you should admire Joe Wilson's "telling it like it is".

Umm, he's a Dumbocrat, . They have double standards.
Try to pay attention, .

quote Originally posted by cliffw: Umm, he's a Dumbocrat, . They have double standards. Try to pay attention, .

snicker, snicker, snicker

1. No enforcement clause-no enforcement provision-no enforcement authority assigned--no enforcement physically or theorectically possible. No penalty spelled out in the bill that existed on the night of president Obam's speech to congress and the American people. He lied--just as Joe Wilson said he did.
2. No where, in the bill as it existed prior to and on the night of President Obama's speech, does it say the (estimated)12-15 million illegal aliens in this country today, won't have access to healthcare under the provisions of this bill--after immigration reform takes place next year. President Obama has stated in public, both during the camaign, and in Mexico to the Mexican President, that he intends to provide a path to citizenship to the illegal aliens in this country. At that point, they WILL have legal access to healthcare credits via this legislation. This, is what Joe Wilson was referring to. Obama lied.
3. Obama told congress and the American people that seniors on Medicare would not be affected by this bill, when in fact, the bill--as it existed on that night, clearly states there will be new taxes/ & unding cuts on Medicare Advantage, which is the Medicare supplement held by over 20% of medicare recepients. There will also be changes in the bidding process for that program. This is also what Joe Wilson was referring to. Obama lied.

Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States

You can quote this line all you want----the bill, as it existed that night, proves it to be a red herring and a fraud. When you have a bill, that says one thing, but you are in possession of knowledge that subsequent legislation will change who is affected by that bill, any statement toward being truthful is just BS. Omission of the full truth (transparency) is no less of a lie than an outright deception.
If you ask your kids if they took $2 from your nightstand, and Bobby said "No--Billy took it", when in fact, Bobby was watching the door for Billy while Billy physically took it--did Bobby tell the truth or lie? He lied of course--even tho his hands never touched the money. Joe Wilson's real crime was the venue he chose with which to express his sentiments, and the sentiments of most of us who understand what Obama's plan actually is, and what the bill actually says and does not say, but no mainstream media would have ever gven him the opportunity to focus the attention of main stream America on this issue if he had not done it. THAT, is what really got the liberals in Congress mad--his 2 words focused on the truth regarding immigration reform's role in this healthcare bill , which before that, congress had been able to keep out of public discourse.

You all know as well as I do, that if anyone in the media were to ask President Obama, the following question--he would not answer it.

"Mr. President-You told America no illigal immigrant would benefit from this bill. Will the estimated 12-15 million illegal aliens in this country be eligible for health care credits after Immigration Reform becomes law?"

Moot really, we all already know the answer--they will, but that is not what the President implied in his speech.

Now, why did I say "as it existed prior to and up to that night"? The very next week after the speech, congress went to work trying to fix the holes in the bill that Wilson had complained about. The new, ammended bill is now public, but I have not had a chance to read it all.

Lawmakers could learn a lesson here from Obama to win the War on Drugs and end all illegal drug usage over night.
Just make all drugs legal. Problem solved. No one will use drugs illicitly anymore.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: To which he apologized, and the President accepted. Therefore, by your own standard, you should admire Joe Wilson's "telling it like it is".

Why?
Because Joe Wilson is a lout and Mr Grayson followed the rules?


You're funny.

quote Originally posted by NEPTUNE: Why? Because Joe Wilson is a lout and Mr Grayson followed the rules?

Because he had the balls that you seem to admire. Oh...wait...he's a Republican. Neptune CAN'T acknowledge that.

quote You're funny.

You're not.

Poll:
1. Could you support health care reform containing a public option that had a clause allowing individuals to opt out--meaning zero personal benefit and no personal funding responsibility?

2. Could you support health care reform containing a public option that provided a govt backed plan to compete with private insurance?

Me-
1. Yes.
2. No.

[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 10-04-2009).]

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Poll: 1. Could you support health care reform containing a public option that conatained a clause allowing individuals to opt out--meaning zero personal benefit and no personal funding responsibility?

Hmm, I saw your post earlier. I guess I was not paying attention.
Interesting question. Really, not enough details. It would depend on the rest of the health care reform plan. Interesting the way you used the phrase "public option". Like we can decide, like we can decide to do whatever it is what we want to do. The way the regime uses that phrase is more like, "Do you want to die by lethal injection, the firing squad, or by hanging ? It's your option. "
Would I be correct in assuming that what you ask is similar to what we have now ? At present, we have that option to opt out. If I am correct, yes, I would support some sort of health care reform, as I do now.

quote Originally posted by maryjane: 2. Could you support health care reform containing a public option that provided a govt backed plan to compete with private insurance?

No. I think it is wrong for government to compete with private industry. Not only is it wrong, it is unfair as the government makes the rules. Also, such a government plan would cost money. People choosing private insurance would also have to pay for the government insurance program. Another reason I could not support a government backed insurance plan is because the government can't get anything right in the management of assets.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: No. I think it is wrong for government to compete with private industry. Not only is it wrong, it is unfair as the government makes the rules. Also, such a government plan would cost money. People choosing private insurance would also have to pay for the government insurance program. Another reason I could not support a government backed insurance plan is because the government can't get anything right in the management of assets.

yes-no?
1. ?
2. ?

quote Originally posted by connecticutFIERO: Nobody is talking about ending private insurance. Even IF the public option is passed, it would only be accessible to those who currently don;t have insurance. That means small business employers and employees, restaurant workers, etc.. If the public plan is self sufficient without any government funds other than start up cost, I like that idea.

It will also be forced onto those who have there current insurance canceled by the President appointed commissioner appointed per H.R. 3200. If you would bother to read the commissioner and his "board" (which is only required to have a single medical doctor as a member) will set a minimum required level of insurance and any plan that does not meet this level will be canceled. Does not matter if it is insurance you went out and bought on your own or an employer based one. Do you understand why informed people keep saying not just no but hell no to this plan?
Please show us a public plan setup by the Federal Government that is completely self sufficient and gets no funding from them.

The key to Fierojam's post are the words "informed people". Those who just read a light summariy and/or use buzz phrases only are not informed imo, but instead--are just being led about by whatever entity happens to fall in their partisan ideology. Read the bill, but be prepared to spend a lot of time doing it, and be prepared to spend a lot of time looking at a slew of other legislation, because there are dozens (100s?) of references to other statutes and laws, especially regarding funding, penalty, eligibility, and definitions. The bill itself does not spell out specifically what those statutes say, it just says such things as "In accordance with..", so you have to do some rersearch to find out what is really in this bill.

You will spend a LOT of time reading tax laws and provisions of the IRS.

[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 10-04-2009).]

#1 yes
#2 no