Senate back in session; vote expected on health care bill

[01001010]

What...?

 

[vampist]

What the hell?

or your edited version lol

What..?

What's the problem? Did I miss something?

 

[01001010]

Also, why is it that you completely ignored my other comments and parts of my last post?

What do you want me to respond to?

Nothing to be honest, I was just curious as to why you had just picked out only a few things from my previous post #36. http://computerforums.org/showthread.php?p=995241#post995241

^

 

[vampist]

^

Yes. I was being honest, I don't want you to respond to anything. But I was just curious as to why you only picked a few things from my previous post; post number 36. Instead of responding to the whole post or even most of the post.

Not sure how that was confusing... But okay.

 

[01001010]

Yes. I was being honest, I don't want you to respond to anything. But I was just curious as to why you only picked a few things from my previous post; post number 36. Instead of responding to the whole post or even most of the post.

So you're curious as to why I didn't respond to your entire post? What type of question is that? Like I've said before, point out a few questions, and I'll answer them for you.

Simple.

 

[root]

Don't you just love how the libs had to sneak this in the middle of the night to get to vote through?

I'm just so sick of those little political snides he makes in almost every political thread. They add absolutely nothing to the discussion.

Has added to the discussion of this topic, in a GOOD way and is not just you bickering about another member of this forum?

not really, it perfectly reasonable for governments to sit at all times of day.

Also, regardless of what time of day or night a vote is held it's still going to be voted for by the same people

the point being, it doesn't matter what time of day of night the vote is.
it's not being "snuck" past anyone.

it's still being voted for by the same people.

and unless the republican senators are somehow liberal by night (and that conjurers up horrible images), then the outcome of the vote will be exactly the same.

it's not adding to the discussion in a good way, it's a political snide,

of course, I don't question the right to say it, I just have to point out the facts associated with such a point.


for the reason that the vote was held at that time see here: (seems to be a pretty balanced view).
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/o...enates-middle-of-the-night-vote-79781687.html

on the other hand, if you like that point of view that middle of the night votes are a cynical attempt to get things through government...


Damn liberal bastards passing bills in the middle of the night to help immigrants get into the country, (and not deported after their husband/wife dies after less than 2 years of marriage).
http://billnelson.senate.gov/news/details.cfm?id=315575&

and what about those crafty republicans, doling out money to banks in late night rescue package votes?
http://www.housingwire.com/2008/10/01/revised-rescue-bill-faces-senate-tonight/

or late night votes in republican terms that allowed Bush's administration to say that simulating the effects of drowning to make a person fear death so much that they will talk, isn't torture.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/nov/09/usa

so that's 50/50 on contentious late night senate votes.
(and I got those from the first 100 google hits by searching "senate vote night").
(obviously 96% of those hits were for the most recent news of the healthcare package, as you would expect as that is the most current news story).


on another note.

http://andrewroman.net/2009/11/22/quick-thoughts-about-last-nights-senate-vote/
Lets face it, what chance have the republicans got, I mean bush's less than primitive grasp of English was at least humorous. but this is someone hoping to pass themselves off as a serious political blogger trying to find fault with a [single line in a] speech when there just really isn't any.
really, with friends like that, who needs enemies.

 

[dude_56013]

not really, it perfectly reasonable for governments to sit at all times of day.

Also, regardless of what time of day or night a vote is held it's still going to be voted for by the same people

the point being, it doesn't matter what time of day of night the vote is.
it's not being "snuck" past anyone.

it's still being voted for by the same people.

and unless the republican senators are somehow liberal by night (and that conjurers up horrible images), then the outcome of the vote will be exactly the same.

it's not adding to the discussion in a good way, it's a political snide,

of course, I don't question the right to say it, I just have to point out the facts associated with such a point.


for the reason that the vote was held at that time see here: (seems to be a pretty balanced view).
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/o...enates-middle-of-the-night-vote-79781687.html

on the other hand, if you like that point of view that middle of the night votes are a cynical attempt to get things through government...


Damn liberal bastards passing bills in the middle of the night to help immigrants get into the country, (and not deported after their husband/wife dies after less than 2 years of marriage).
http://billnelson.senate.gov/news/details.cfm?id=315575&

and what about those crafty republicans, doling out money to banks in late night rescue package votes?
http://www.housingwire.com/2008/10/01/revised-rescue-bill-faces-senate-tonight/

or late night votes in republican terms that allowed Bush's administration to say that simulating the effects of drowning to make a person fear death so much that they will talk, isn't torture.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/nov/09/usa

so that's 50/50 on contentious late night senate votes.
(and I got those from the first 100 google hits by searching "senate vote night").
(obviously 96% of those hits were for the most recent news of the healthcare package, as you would expect as that is the most current news story).


on another note.

http://andrewroman.net/2009/11/22/quick-thoughts-about-last-nights-senate-vote/
Lets face it, what chance have the republicans got, I mean bush's less than primitive grasp of English was at least humorous. but this is someone hoping to pass themselves off as a serious political blogger trying to find fault with a [single line in a] speech when there just really isn't any.
really, with friends like that, who needs enemies.

You should be a writer. Do you realize you epicness? Hahaha

 

[Äߧý∩†H♠H䎀]

Thank God. Someone else who realizes that not everything is about themselves. I for one would be happy to pay a little extra to make sure that everyone in this country is getting what they deserve. God this country has gone down the shit hole. I'm so sick of all this "everything for me Me ME ME ME" BS. It's getting old and it really pisses me off. No one does anything to help each other out anymore. If we do, it's publicly recognized so people see the people who are helping--that's not the point of serving others. Bah. I just don't even want to talk about it. We complain about so much shit in this country it's ridiculous. I have to deal with my dad watching CNN and MSNBC all day long bitching about it all. FFS, get over yourselves. See the world through the eyes of the people who don't have a food, a home, or frickin' healthcare.



And don't let anyone tell you that "no one makes their own booze", because making booze is a lot more time consuming than growing a damn plant. Good rationale, Grant. If it was able to be all taxed, it would be a superb idea, but you are correct in the above assertion.

Okay I do plenty to help other people out including donating money & my time. Why exactly should I have to pay more to support the small percentage of the population that can't get insurance? It's not my problem and if they were responsible with their life they would have insurance. Any job I've ever had has offered insurance and it's not that hard to get a job with insurance. I think that's the problem most people have with this. It's always the same people that need food stamps, health coverage, jobs etc etc. They should have a limited option available to help them get back on their feet and if they can't do it within a given time cut them off. I'm sick of people leeching off of others to live.

I currently pay roughly $21 a month for my medical coverage. Why should I be forced to pay more and use some government designed health care system which I'll pay more for and most likely get less?

 

[01001010]

It's not my problem and if they were responsible with their life they would have insurance.

Any job I've ever had has offered insurance and it's not that hard to get a job with insurance.

Really?

 

[Äߧý∩†H♠H䎀]

Really?

Can you form a question other than a generic cop out?

Let me ask why is it my problem and why should I care if these people have insurance or not?

Yes, I've had insurance I've ever worked at. It's not like you have to have a top of the line job to get health coverage. For the sake of the argument McDonalds even offers health coverage. You can't tell me that anyone couldn't get a job at a simple fast food place to get health coverage.

Evidently if they can't they don't need it that bad.

You act as though I should be concerned if my neighbor has insurance or not. It's none of my business and I've got my own problems. If they don't want to take action it's there own fault. Note * A action that doesn't involve me paying more to support them.