Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 10 Sep '09 19:59
    haven't been following this much, but hasn't Obama been saying the same thing about the town hallers?
  2. 10 Sep '09 20:07
    Originally posted by zeeblebot
    haven't been following this much, but hasn't Obama been saying the same thing about the town hallers?
    No matter which side you are on, it appears that those opposed to either side will be tagged liars or uninformed. For Obama to say that they simply have a difference of opinion would be to concede legitimacy to the opposition against his plan.
  3. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    10 Sep '09 20:33
    Originally posted by zeeblebot
    haven't been following this much, but hasn't Obama been saying the same thing about the town hallers?
    What Joe Wilson did was stupid and counterproductive.

    You don't yell at a sitting President during an address to Congress. This is not the British parliament, where apparently it's not only acceptable but expected that they behave like a bunch of third graders.

    Even he admitted as much and apologized for his outburst. No good can possibly come to him or the Republican party from his outburst.
  4. 10 Sep '09 21:09
    Originally posted by sh76
    What Joe Wilson did was stupid and counterproductive.

    You don't yell at a sitting President during an address to Congress. This is not the British parliament, where apparently it's not only acceptable but expected that they behave like a bunch of third graders.

    Even he admitted as much and apologized for his outburst. No good can possibly come to him or the Republican party from his outburst.
    Why are you hating on the house of commons? For entertainment value they're second only to Thailand, who get into fist fights from time to time.
  5. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    10 Sep '09 21:42 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by sh76
    What Joe Wilson did was stupid and counterproductive.

    You don't yell at a sitting President during an address to Congress. This is not the British parliament, where apparently it's not only acceptable but expected that they behave like a bunch of third graders.

    Even he admitted as much and apologized for his outburst. No good can possibly come to him or the Republican party from his outburst.
    Agreed. Stupid outburst.

    But was Wilson accurate? I've read chunks of the House bill and it does seem to explicitly exclude undocumented aliens. However, absent a specific provision requiring that this be enforced, I see no reason to believe undocumented aliens will be denied coverage. Amendments to add such enforcement to the bill were defeated in committee on party line votes. Why would that be if the Democrats intended to deny illegal aliens govt health care?

    So I think Wilson was accurate, but chose a stupid time and method of getting his point across.

    EDIT: And I'd love to see Obama, or any US politician for that matter, have to stand up to the grilling that goes on in the house of commons. I think most of them would crumble under the pressure.
  6. 10 Sep '09 22:07
    Originally posted by sh76
    What Joe Wilson did was stupid and counterproductive.

    You don't yell at a sitting President during an address to Congress. This is not the British parliament, where apparently it's not only acceptable but expected that they behave like a bunch of third graders.

    Even he admitted as much and apologized for his outburst. No good can possibly come to him or the Republican party from his outburst.
    I also noticed a bunch of people playing with their phones.

    When did it become rude to use your phone in a movie theatre, but perfectly appropriate to do so when you're attending a presidential address?
  7. 10 Sep '09 22:11
    Originally posted by PsychoPawn
    I also noticed a bunch of people playing with their phones.

    When did it become rude to use your phone in a movie theatre, but perfectly appropriate to do so when you're attending a presidential address?
    because it would cost too much to send them all to Twitters Anonymous.
  8. Standard member telerion
    True X X Xian
    10 Sep '09 22:33 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    Agreed. Stupid outburst.

    But was Wilson accurate? I've read chunks of the House bill and it does seem to explicitly exclude undocumented aliens. However, absent a specific provision requiring that this be enforced, I see no reason to believe undocumented aliens will be denied coverage. Amendments to add such enforcement to the bill were defeated in that goes on in the house of commons. I think most of them would crumble under the pressure.
    No. Joe was wrong on this one. All he did besides embarrassing himself and his party is make all of us say, "Hmm . . . is he right?" Thanks to Joe most Americans that look are finding that he is wrong. I say "most" because there are still those who choose to get their news from rightwing spam mail.

    As for amendments being voted down, you'd have to show me the votes. For all I know, that may not have been the only change proposed in the amendment. A lot of this town hall scare stuff is an obvious, deliberate attempt to warp the debate. Since it's so widespread, I'm going to be pretty skeptical until I see a strong objective case.
  9. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    10 Sep '09 23:17
    Originally posted by telerion
    No. Joe was wrong on this one. All he did besides embarrassing himself and his party is make all of us say, "Hmm . . . is he right?" Thanks to Joe most Americans that look are finding that he is wrong. I say "most" because there are still those who choose to get their news from rightwing spam mail.

    As for amendments being voted down, you'd have to ...[text shortened]... it's so widespread, I'm going to be pretty skeptical until I see a strong objective case.
    The text of one amendment, offered in Ways & Means by Heller of Nevada, can be found here. It went down 26-15. There are 26 Democrats and 15 Republicans on that committee, though I haven't taken the time to check that each Nay was a Democrat.

    http://republicans.waysandmeans.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Heller_Amdt_Text.pdf

    The Yays and Nays can be found here.

    http://republicans.waysandmeans.house.gov/tallysheet/heller7.htm

    Granted these are from the Republican Ways and Means website, but the text of the amendment and the voting record should be pretty clear.
  10. 11 Sep '09 00:12 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by sh76
    What Joe Wilson did was stupid and counterproductive.

    You don't yell at a sitting President during an address to Congress. This is not the British parliament, where apparently it's not only acceptable but expected that they behave like a bunch of third graders.

    Even he admitted as much and apologized for his outburst. No good can possibly come to him or the Republican party from his outburst.
    I miss the days when they had duels. You know, Joe and Obama walk twenty paces and BANG!! Either way we win.

    It might be a solution to term limits since they will never have any.
  11. 11 Sep '09 00:15
    Originally posted by telerion
    [b]No. Joe was wrong on this one. All he did besides embarrassing himself and his party is make all of us say,
    And Conservatives wonder why they have lost control of the country. If you ask me, they have the Republican party to thank. So thanks Joe!!!
  12. Standard member telerion
    True X X Xian
    11 Sep '09 01:34 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    The text of one amendment, offered in Ways & Means by Heller of Nevada, can be found here. It went down 26-15. There are 26 Democrats and 15 Republicans on that committee, though I haven't taken the time to check that each Nay was a Democrat.

    http://republicans.waysandmeans.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Heller_Amdt_Text.pdf

    The Yays and Nays can be found ...[text shortened]... and Means website, but the text of the amendment and the voting record should be pretty clear.
    I've been looking into this at it seems that there may be truth to this claim. It is very suspicious that the Democrats shot this down when the amendment is clearly nothing more than an attempt to verify status. In one sense, Obama was not lying. The bill does say that the credits are restricted to legal citizens; however, without verification illegal aliens would be able to purchase the subsidized healthcare, effectively covering them too. Heller was trying to fix this with his amendment.

    So I stand corrected. Thank you for pointing this out.
  13. 11 Sep '09 01:55 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by whodey
    And Conservatives wonder why they have lost control of the country. If you ask me, they have the Republican party to thank. So thanks Joe!!!
    Obama called them liars and rightfully so, Joe called Obama a liar and rightfully so. The illegals will get health care as they are persons too. They just wont be allowed to pay into it. Where do you think the money would come from? If the bill passes I don't think it hurt Joe in the least as he will be proven right on the matter.
  14. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    11 Sep '09 02:11
    Originally posted by telerion
    In one sense, Obama was not lying.

    But that's not the sense that matters. In another sense, Obama is brazenly lying through his teeth, and Joe Wilson was exactly right.

    This is essentially the same loophole through which illegal aliens are able to keep finding work in the US. They simply claim they are eligible to work here, but no verification is required, E-Verify is not mandated etc, and they are hired. Are we really supposed to believe Obama hasn't made this calculation? Nah, he lied.

    So I stand corrected. Thank you for pointing this out.

    No problem. There are quite a few other amendments that went down on party line votes in Ways & Means. They are summarized (in a partisan way) at the same site, but there are links to the text of each amendment, and the vote tallies. Interesting reading.

    http://republicans.waysandmeans.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=137859
  15. Standard member telerion
    True X X Xian
    11 Sep '09 02:23 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    Originally posted by telerion
    [b]In one sense, Obama was not lying.


    But that's not the sense that matters. In another sense, Obama is brazenly lying through his teeth, and Joe Wilson was exactly right.

    This is essentially the same loophole through which illegal aliens are able to keep finding work in the US. They simply claim they are el ading.

    http://republicans.waysandmeans.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=137859[/b]
    I understand perfectly well what you call the "sense that matters," however, the sense in which it matters is a judgement call. Are we talking statutory? If so, the Obama is telling the truth, and Joe is lying. The bill does say that buying into the coop requires citizenship. Are we talking effective? If so, then Obama is under any reasonable estimation of likelihood lying, and Joe is telling the truth. The Democrats have good reason to believe that without checking status the word of the legislation will not be enforced. Moreover they seem to want it just that way. Lest you think I still don't get your point, let me assure you that I just finished defending your position against my wife (a bigger Obama fan than I, and a supporter of certain concessions to illegal immigrants).

    I guess in the end, you can choose to call Obama a liar if you wish. My understanding of the matter however is that there is enough grey area in the words "would insure illegal immigrants" for a two politicians to say opposite things and both not lie.

    By the way, did I clear things up on the intragovernment debt vs. debt to the public thing?