Every time you do this prtndr all I can do is laugh at you. Not once, not anywhere in the article does it even hint that Health Care Reform is dead in the water. On the contrary all Senate Majority Harry Reid said was that it might not get passed by the end of the year.

And you are also wrong about the longer it drags on the more opposition grows. The opposite is true. Support for health care reform and especially the public insurance option is increasing not decreasing.

So when you don't really know what you're talking about it doesn't matter what you told us months ago or months from now.

 

I like this one better:

http://inflationdata.com/inflation/inflation_Rate/Historical_Oil_Prices_Table.asp

Its just the yearly averages but you'll notice that the prices don't really follow the Iranian Revolution or the Iran/Iraq war. What the prices do tend to follow is high prices when the Republicans are in office and lower prices when the Democrats are in control. We're experiencing the same thing right now.

 

They would want it because President Obama is smarter than people give him credit for. There's been attempts to reform our health care system for more than 100 years and they've all been dead on arrival because the stake holders, the people and industries that make their profits off it, all got together and killed any reform before it could get off the ground.

This time President Obama was smart enough to divide and conquer the opposition getting the pharmaceutical companies and the AMA to go along with it which leaves the health insurance industry out there fighting all by themselves.

And this strategy is going to work this time.

 

It's also backed by doctors, nurses, and people who have some concern for those among us who are either uninsured or underinsured. I'd be very happy if the pharmaceutical industry was NOT backing it, because I'd like to see prescription drug prices tied to Medicare rates. But you can't always get ALL of what you want in legislation.

Now, explain to me why health insurance providers and the Republican Party are OPPOSED to reform, and why you appear to think that they have the public interest at heart.

 

Your answer was better than mine. Carry on!

 

I've been really watching the commercials and I'm getting kind of excited about it. For one thing there are almost as many pro health care reform ads as there are anti health care adds. And the health insurance industry and their allies are beginning to sound a little desperate.

What I find exciting is that on issues like this its always been the money that wins every time. But I'm thinking it won't work this time and I would just love to see that.

 

I'm very hopeful that some form of reform will be passed. My disappointment that the final version won't do everything I want it to do will be greatly tempered by the pleasure I will feel when listening to the howls of wounded outrage from the likes of prtndr.

 

WOW,,did we have a little time on our hands lately?

 

Puh-leez....yet another talking point dredged up after it was thoroughly debunked.

What you refer to as "czars" are typically deputy directors or assistant directors of Cabinet agencies. "Czar" is an informal moniker, not their official title. They have existed under every recent president, and the term was first coined by none other than Richard Nixon when he appointed Bill "Simple" Simon as his energy czar. But for some reason, people like you never objected until now.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/The-Truth-About-Czars/

 

Not everybody will think the way that you do,,,especially some on in congress.

Ever since this practice of appointing czars began years ago, it has always been considered possible that they are all unconstitutional. But it never built to a critical mass to elicit a court fight. These czars were few and far between, and rarely did anything that seriously ruffled any feathers. But President Obama has taken this to an unprecedented level, to the point where these appointments are dangerous to our constitutional regime.

http://www.infowars.com/senior-democrat-says-obamas-czars-unconstitutional/

 

Kimi, I've mentioned this before but when you look at our form of government its actually like trying to steer a glacier. Its slow, is almost impossible to keep on track, and just grinds on. But in that process it also grinds people like prtndr up and there is no reverse.

Well yeah a little. Tell you what. Why don't you talk Kimiko into keeping me busy.

Here we disagree again Ace and I think its the thing that really pisses you conservatives off the most. President Obama takes his case to the people and the people respond.

I say yes. In fact I say our government has always been more pro business than pro people and have always tried to strike a balance between helping industry and business until they get too far out of hand or need help.

Maybe they are. But they are not problems we cannot solve Ace. Don't you have any faith in the greatness of this nation?

That's what I've always thought. Hell, Ace, we might kill each other over girls.

I thought you would.:excited:

Ace, first of all there is corruption where ever there are humans but let this not blind you to what virtue there is; many persons strive for high ideals and everywhere life is full of heroism. Even in government.

How many Czars does President Obama have?

Less than George Bush did and I never heard a peep out of you over his Czars.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/czar-search/

And the real problem is Ace that you just listen to Fox all the time and believe the Bullshit Glenn Beck and hypocritical phonies like Bill O'Reilly who was actually calling for more Czars to be appointed when Bush was president and now acts like its some big deal because Obama has them. You just gotta quit believing their bullshit Ace.

http://mediamatters.org/research/200909080038

Actually pretty good Ace. I'm one of the ones now benefitting from the increased and extended unemployment and federal break on the COBRA insurance. And if I can get to a state that has medical marijuana I have less of a chance of getting busted again.

Now, now Ace. Both those were governor races. Both of them have a long history of electing people in the opposite party of who ever is president. And both of them were centered on local issues and exit polls showed people in both states did not consider President Obama a factor.

Now on the other hand there was one federal election a house of representative seat open in northern New York because President Obama appointed a Republican. It's been a republican strong hold for decades and Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh all supported the arch conservative after they crowded the other republican out.

And you know how that one came out don't you Ace. Its another democratic vote in the house.:excited:

 

Can Washington Make You Buy Health Insurance?

http://townhall.com/columnists/Bill...shington_make_you_buy_health_insurance?page=2

 

Well I'm not sure conservatives turn her on all that much. And Ace being a liberal would be worth it for her don't you think.

I'm telling you Ace the polls are actually going the other way and every time President Obama talks to the nation the numbers go up.

Ace there's way more crooked businessmen then there are crooked politicians.

Well Ace you need to tell that to your conservative buddies in the government. Because that's actually one of the reasons I've always said conservatism as it is preached and practiced in this nation is a lie.

Just like this last time. The bankers and lenders and financial industry fuck themselves up beyond repair and what's the first thing those conservative free market capitalists do? The go running to the government to bail them out. And what does your conservative/republican president do? He says yes we need to bail them out.

Hell everything that Obama has done from bailing out the financial industry to GM and Chrysler was started by Bush.

You can't separate the two Ace and we never have.

Ok I'll go for that. One of these days we should stop talking politics long enough to see if we can find a girl.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/czar-search/

 

So close to victory after a 100 year struggle to be progressive...

 

Why do you think that is? In his book American Theocracy, Kevin Phillips said there is a strong correlation between gasoline consumption and support for the Republican Party. I would think the GOP would look after its constituency of SUV owners and orchestrate lower gasoline prices.