STOP THE PRESSES ! A rational, thoughtful opinion....
RufRTs Obama Windup
- Thread starter RufRT
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) are here to discuss Amad saving our blushes in a win against Southampton as well as our now annual loss at home to Brighton. They discuss Amorim's post-match comments, revisit how mid-table we may or may not be, and discuss some transfer news.
- Status
STOP THE PRESSES ! A rational, thoughtful opinion....
I completely forgot about the Maine Gay Marriage vote...a wonderful night all around....
If my original post ended any hope of a "good conversation" how did you "initiate it" ?
Your logic is at least amusing, I'll give you that....thanks for the entertainment
Gwad I could be of service to ya massa'
Aaaand you're a redneck, shoulda known.
Why celebrate the triumph of ignorance over equality ?
Mate, read all he's said so far... should we REALLY ask him this question?
12 months in and plenty of time to go before anything should be labelled success or failure. Passing health care will however be Epic.
RufRT. You act and sound like a previous poster - WeWonItTwoTimes.
Anyway, I'm sure one day you'll do something to get you banned from the cafe.
Perhaps the mods should do an IP check
Anyway, I'm sure one day you'll do something to get you banned from the cafe.
Perhaps the mods should do an IP check
RufRT. You act and sound like a previous poster - WeWonItTwoTimes.
Anyway, I'm sure one day you'll do something to get you banned from the cafe.
Perhaps the mods should do an IP check
check away...if opinions free of swearing are ban worthy offences, I might just get canned
In the meantime, keep hoping...typical response from wide eyed groupies...ban all dissenting voices !
The watered down version will be spun that way, if it passes...but it will hardly be "epic" in scale...put the bong down
AP sources: Dem Health bill to get AARP backing
WASHINGTON – In a coup for House Democrats, AARP will endorse sweeping health care overhaul legislation headed for a history-making floor vote, officials told The Associated Press on Wednesday.
An endorsement from the seniors' lobby was critical when then-President George W. Bush pushed the Medicare prescription drug benefit through a closely divided Congress in 2003. House Democratic leaders are hoping it will work the same political magic for them as they strive to deliver on President Barack Obama's signature issue.
An announcement from the 40-million member group is expected Thursday, said officials with knowledge of the group's decision. They spoke on condition of anonymity because the endorsement is not official yet.
Backing the 10-year, $1.2 trillion House bill is a tricky move for AARP. Many retirees are concerned about cuts in Medicare payments to medical providers, which will be used to finance an expansion of health insurance coverage to millions of working families who now lack it. Also, AARP says its membership is about evenly divided among Democrats, Republicans and independents, meaning its endorsement in today's highly politicized atmosphere could anger many members.
Floor votes on the House bill could come as early as this weekend. Obama planned to visit the Capitol on Friday, according to congressional officials. They spoke on condition of anonymity because the meetings have not been announced.
Meanwhile, the Congressional Budget Office released an analysis of the House GOP bill that found it would reduce the number of uninsured by just 3 million in 2019. By comparison, the more expansive Democratic bill would gain coverage for 36 million.
While the Democrats' bill would cover 96 percent of eligible Americans, the Republican alternative would cover 83 percent — roughly comparable to current levels. The budget office said the Republican plan would reduce federal deficits by $68 billion over the 10 year period and push down premiums for privately insured people.
House Democratic leaders moved on Wednesday to shore up support for the measure among their rank-and-file, even as they sharpened their fight with the health insurance industry.
Asked Wednesday if Democratic leaders had the 218 votes needed for passage, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., responded: "We're counting. We're counting."
Last-minute changes to the Democrats' bill cleared the way for votes as early as Saturday.
In a move aimed directly at health insurance companies, the revised House bill would launch a federal-state crackdown on what it terms "unjustified premium increases." Insurers have sought above all to block creation of a government insurance plan, which happens to be the top legislative goal for liberals.
Under the bill, insurance companies would have to publicly disclose the justification for premium increases before they go into effect. The federal Health and Human Services department would monitor patterns of premium increases, and could take action if the price hikes are out of line. The bill would also provide $1 billion to state insurance commissioners, allowing them to ramp up their own enforcement.
Democrats also strengthened a provision that would strip the industry of its decades-old exemption from federal antitrust laws.
Supporters said the tougher approach is needed to keep insurance companies from artificially boosting premiums in advance of the major reforms taking effect in 2013.
Other late changes to the bill, such as enhanced status for the government's office of minority health, were intended as sweeteners for supportive lawmakers, including members of the Congressional Black Caucus.
With no Republican backing for the measure, Democrats will need overwhelming support from their own. A festering intra-party disagreement over how to prevent federal funds from being used to pay for abortion remained unresolved Wednesday morning.
The House bill is estimated to expand coverage to about 96 percent of eligible Americans. Beginning in 2013, it would provide government subsidies to extend coverage to tens of millions who now lack it, and ban insurance company practices such as denying coverage to people with pre-existing medical problems.
For the three years before the federal aid starts flowing, the bill would set up a temporary "high-risk pool" through which people who have been denied coverage because of poor health could obtain a government-subsidized policy.
The bill would set up health insurance "exchanges" through which self-employed people and small businesses could buy coverage, either from a private insurer or a new government plan that would compete. All the plans sold through the exchange would have to follow basic consumer protection rules, making it easier to shop and compare among them.
The majority of middle-class Americans covered under big employer plans would not see dramatic changes. But coverage for the poor through Medicaid would be significantly expanded.
Seniors in traditional Medicare would get improved preventive benefits. Also, the prescription coverage gap known as the "doughnut hole" would be gradually closed. However, seniors signed up for private insurance plans through Medicare could lose some benefits, as the bill scales back extra payments that the plans have been getting.
In addition to raising money by cutting payments to hospitals and other medical providers, the House bill boosts taxes on upper-income earners. Democrats also moved Tuesday to close a biofuel tax credit loophole, raising about $23 billion to help pay for the legislation.
WASHINGTON – In a coup for House Democrats, AARP will endorse sweeping health care overhaul legislation headed for a history-making floor vote, officials told The Associated Press on Wednesday.
An endorsement from the seniors' lobby was critical when then-President George W. Bush pushed the Medicare prescription drug benefit through a closely divided Congress in 2003. House Democratic leaders are hoping it will work the same political magic for them as they strive to deliver on President Barack Obama's signature issue.
An announcement from the 40-million member group is expected Thursday, said officials with knowledge of the group's decision. They spoke on condition of anonymity because the endorsement is not official yet.
Backing the 10-year, $1.2 trillion House bill is a tricky move for AARP. Many retirees are concerned about cuts in Medicare payments to medical providers, which will be used to finance an expansion of health insurance coverage to millions of working families who now lack it. Also, AARP says its membership is about evenly divided among Democrats, Republicans and independents, meaning its endorsement in today's highly politicized atmosphere could anger many members.
Floor votes on the House bill could come as early as this weekend. Obama planned to visit the Capitol on Friday, according to congressional officials. They spoke on condition of anonymity because the meetings have not been announced.
Meanwhile, the Congressional Budget Office released an analysis of the House GOP bill that found it would reduce the number of uninsured by just 3 million in 2019. By comparison, the more expansive Democratic bill would gain coverage for 36 million.
While the Democrats' bill would cover 96 percent of eligible Americans, the Republican alternative would cover 83 percent — roughly comparable to current levels. The budget office said the Republican plan would reduce federal deficits by $68 billion over the 10 year period and push down premiums for privately insured people.
House Democratic leaders moved on Wednesday to shore up support for the measure among their rank-and-file, even as they sharpened their fight with the health insurance industry.
Asked Wednesday if Democratic leaders had the 218 votes needed for passage, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., responded: "We're counting. We're counting."
Last-minute changes to the Democrats' bill cleared the way for votes as early as Saturday.
In a move aimed directly at health insurance companies, the revised House bill would launch a federal-state crackdown on what it terms "unjustified premium increases." Insurers have sought above all to block creation of a government insurance plan, which happens to be the top legislative goal for liberals.
Under the bill, insurance companies would have to publicly disclose the justification for premium increases before they go into effect. The federal Health and Human Services department would monitor patterns of premium increases, and could take action if the price hikes are out of line. The bill would also provide $1 billion to state insurance commissioners, allowing them to ramp up their own enforcement.
Democrats also strengthened a provision that would strip the industry of its decades-old exemption from federal antitrust laws.
Supporters said the tougher approach is needed to keep insurance companies from artificially boosting premiums in advance of the major reforms taking effect in 2013.
Other late changes to the bill, such as enhanced status for the government's office of minority health, were intended as sweeteners for supportive lawmakers, including members of the Congressional Black Caucus.
With no Republican backing for the measure, Democrats will need overwhelming support from their own. A festering intra-party disagreement over how to prevent federal funds from being used to pay for abortion remained unresolved Wednesday morning.
The House bill is estimated to expand coverage to about 96 percent of eligible Americans. Beginning in 2013, it would provide government subsidies to extend coverage to tens of millions who now lack it, and ban insurance company practices such as denying coverage to people with pre-existing medical problems.
For the three years before the federal aid starts flowing, the bill would set up a temporary "high-risk pool" through which people who have been denied coverage because of poor health could obtain a government-subsidized policy.
The bill would set up health insurance "exchanges" through which self-employed people and small businesses could buy coverage, either from a private insurer or a new government plan that would compete. All the plans sold through the exchange would have to follow basic consumer protection rules, making it easier to shop and compare among them.
The majority of middle-class Americans covered under big employer plans would not see dramatic changes. But coverage for the poor through Medicaid would be significantly expanded.
Seniors in traditional Medicare would get improved preventive benefits. Also, the prescription coverage gap known as the "doughnut hole" would be gradually closed. However, seniors signed up for private insurance plans through Medicare could lose some benefits, as the bill scales back extra payments that the plans have been getting.
In addition to raising money by cutting payments to hospitals and other medical providers, the House bill boosts taxes on upper-income earners. Democrats also moved Tuesday to close a biofuel tax credit loophole, raising about $23 billion to help pay for the legislation.
I can understand to an extent why people are against it, but to deem it wonderful that in a state you don't live in therefore not a citizen of whether people of the same sex can get married or not despite the fact they consent to and are adults is just plain sad.
As far right-wing Americans love to preach about the constitution and state power and the second amendment, whatever happened to minority rights?
Any bill passed which opens up the health care system to everyone will be as Raoul described, epic. No other way to describe it, given the importance & change it will mean to millions of Americans now and in future generations.
The AARP is no more a universal spokesman for old people than the AMA is for doctors...just a lobbying group that grabs old age pensioners SSI money.
Did you know that 85% of US doctors don't belong to the AMA ? This one has about the same value in endorsement....
Next Yahoo news clip cut and paste please.....
The original proposal during the election cycle (aka wide eyed dreamers time) was epic....this is a watered down farce in comparison...costly and burdensome to future children yes, epic no.
Apparently the AARP have 40 million members. This would be a massive boost for the healthcare legislation. Imagine that, an organization with 40 million members giving its thumbs up to the House bill, which is clearly the more ambitious of the two. Have the Republicans come up with any ideas on this issue ?
96 percent of the population get access to health care. Epic.
The Republican plan to maintain the Status quo. Epic Fail.
How is it watered down? Health care is opened up to the majority of the American people - i don't call that watered down.
Costly and burdensome? Free health care is always a costly procedure, but one which works fine here. Burdensome though? I cannot see how accessible health care to all is burdensome, only if you believe that health care should only be given to those that can afford it, which lets be honest is a fecking prehistoric view.
check away...if opinions free of swearing are ban worthy offences, I might just get canned
In the meantime, keep hoping...typical response from wide eyed groupies...ban all dissenting voices !
So basically what Republicans do?
I'm not calling for your banning. You just seem thick enough to get banned one day. I couldn't care less either way as I ignore 99% of your posts, except to periodically laugh at them.
I admire Raoul for actually discussing things with you. It must be like talking to a brick wall hoping for an intelligent response. Although I can only speculate.
But yes, you don't swear, good for you, that makes all your arguments perfectly sound. Great logic there.
And FYI, WUMs have been banned in the past just for being idiots and lowering the tone of the place. So you don't have to swear to see the boot.
Anyway, carry on, I'll leave you to it.
Jeez i don't believe i'm about to agree with Rurft but he is correct, in it's current form, as in the bill that recently got in which will have dramatic changes made to it yet. It is an incredible watered down version that actually gives more power to the insurance companies. They included a punishment fine for the non treatment of patients. In oth er words the insurance companies would have the power to decide wether to take a $6,000 fine or fork out for a $60,000 operation and this is the best bit, because thy will have been fined by the US goverment then there's no chance of compensaton from the courts. Now it won't stay like this, it was written that way to get it past the first hurdle. A national Healthcare for the states with the amount they spend on healthcare now as a nation would be the best in the world.
The important point you said was to get it past the first hurdle, you'd be foolish to think if this is the one & only draft, hence why the term watered down would only be taken into account if its the only draft of this policy.
Obama's policy from the get go caused controversy, i think he see's this as the easiest way to get a foot in the door & can work it further. Almost to the point where the opposition cannot do anything about it.
I still stand by my point though.
Obama's policy from the get go caused controversy, i think he see's this as the easiest way to get a foot in the door & can work it further. Almost to the point where the opposition cannot do anything about it.
I still stand by my point though.
It's already got past the first hurdle, which is why i think it was made that way. Now comes the time for them to rearrange it, hopefully.
Last nights results in the New Jersey Governors race and Virginia Governors/Lt Governor/Attorney General races are indicative of a national mood swing and repudiation of the country's direction. But for a split conservative vote in Upstate NY, it would have been a clean sweep.
The coalition of independants and young voters that swept Obama into power either defected to the Republicans or couldn't be bothered to turn out...a stunning drop in enthusiasm this early into the Obama revolution.
Promises not kept, ridiculous overspending, continuing rise in unemployment despite a gross stimulus package having reached its "peak effect" (words of the administration, not mine), lack of confidence in a novice politician....all result in one of the fastest drops in popularity of any US President...one of the 3 worst I believe.
Funniest thing ? George Bush had higher poll numbers at this point in his presidency
Moderate Dems will take note...the US electorate is pissed off and is unhappy with the direction the country has taken. I have a feeling this will definitely influence the climate vote and healthcare vote as ******* Reid has indicated they will stretch into next year.
McCain was right...Obama is just great at creating a rockstar persona, but is the same old politician deep down (just not as effective as someone with more experience).
Nobel peace prize....
I elect this as the 'Most Moronically Misleading Post of the Year'.
It is almost completely devoid of factual information, yet reassures one that the Neo-Con/Fox-Heads will never change there ways.
It's a typical Rufrt post, he complains about everyone else copy'n'pasting yet any anti Obama news he finds he decides to start a thread on using the same technique.
Yes, David Plouffe, the man who engineered the Obama campaign. I'd say he knows what he's talking about.
49% voted dem in NY. That's not a split repub vote you thicko.
How do you explain Bloomberg squeaking by?
Anyone who knows anything about politics knows that the turnout for local elections is always much less than that for a presidential election. The major congressional and senatorial elections next year will be the indicator. Get back to me then. Until then, your conclusions are stupid and premature.
You left out the part where he adds lots of laughing smilies. It's a rhetorical device he learned in medical school.
I'm sorry, I know this was yesterday, but this is hilarious. Do you honestly believe that all the people disagreeing with you are all that far to the left? You seem just as RAWK-like to us as we do to you.
Also you're talking about voters in a few states and generalizing as "US Voters". I'm sure US Voters are starting to be a little more wary of Obama and what his administration has failed to do so far, but the American people are forgiving as feck and certainly are going to give it more time before completely turning on him, especially since it would almost require an admission that they voted wrong last time.
I'm sorry, I know this was yesterday, but this is hilarious. Do you honestly believe that all the people disagreeing with you are all that far to the left? You seem just as RAWK-like to us as we do to you.
Clearly when someone runs out of ideas, the only alternative is to accuse their opponents of acting like RAWK members.
He's used to being that.
I just thought I'd throw that in seeing as this thread is another example of his outstanding maturity. Oh and let's not forget to include his astute logical thinking and deductive reasoning.
In 2008 the vote in NY 23 was 65% R 35% D. This time the dem got 49% - how the feck is that a split repub vote?
The turnout was also the lowest ever, not counting 2002 when the repub ran unopposed.
What a numpty.
The turnout was also the lowest ever, not counting 2002 when the repub ran unopposed.
What a numpty.
Take a bow my man
96 percent of the population get access to health care. Epic.
The Republican plan to maintain the Status quo. Epic Fail.
2% covered by the new provisions, 94% covered by existing private insurance.
1.5 trillion dollar pricetag to cover 6 million people ? You do the math.
Are you an imbecile ? Add up the conservative and republican vote (thats the split part "numpty")...how much do you get ? Is it more than the Democrat percentage ?
I'm sorry, I know this was yesterday, but this is hilarious. Do you honestly believe that all the people disagreeing with you are all that far to the left? You seem just as RAWK-like to us as we do to you.
Also you're talking about voters in a few states and generalizing as "US Voters". I'm sure US Voters are starting to be a little more wary of Obama and what his administration has failed to do so far, but the American people are forgiving as feck and certainly are going to give it more time before completely turning on him, especially since it would almost require an admission that they voted wrong last time.
65% of independants voted republican yesterday....I'd say thats a reconsideration of their last vote...
There'll be a lot more splitting of the votes in 2010 as the Conservative Party is going to submit more candidates to take on moderate Republicans.
Bloomberg squeaked by because people were furious that he altered the rules to run for a third term. I wouldn't have minded Bloomberg losing tbh...he's hardly a conservative with his pro gun control weak stance
How many notable elections were held on Tuesday ?
That may well be true...I know they have to be concerned about that and if anything it will help republicans get back to their roots. I am sure a deal will be struck before then...nothing gets accomplished by a split vote and voting in a democrat
another brilliant post...
- Status