JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
1
Why do Japanese change their attitude when they communicate with foreigners?
-
2
Confrontation
-
3
U.S. Navy investigating how parts fell off aircraft near Atsugi
-
4
California court to decide if SeaWorld whales are illegal 'slaves'
-
5
Kuroki reported pregnant 2 weeks after denying relationship with Akanishi
-
- Assistant Language Teacher (ALT) in Kanto region
- RCS (RCSコーポレーション), Kanto
- Salary: ¥180,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month includes performance bonus
-
- Assistant Language Teacher - TOKYO - late-March start
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥230,000 ~ ¥255,000 / Month
-
- Assistant Language Teacher - Kanagawa Prefecture - late-March start
- Interac, Kanagawa
- Salary: ¥230,000 ~ ¥255,000 / Month
0
tigermoth
Hey, wait just a sec here - weren't all you screaming liberals like Taka vehemently opposed to drilling when it was proposed by the Republicans?? Now it okay and necessary. I'd rather be in team temper tantrum than team don't have a clue wtf we're doing.
Posted in: Obama expands offshore drilling for oil, gas
0
tigermoth
Yeah, mine too. But unfortunately your statement is far from true. If I look on the map of sex offenders (which we can do in our state) I'm surrounded. But ironically the danger came more directly from the Catholic Church. My son attended Catholic school, and we were informed that the Priest was accused of child molestation and would have a 'temporary leave of absence'. Turns out there were nude pictures of this a-hole on the Internet - and even presented with that smoking gun a good many of the faithful in this diocese didn't want to believe he was guilty. The alleged molestation was from instances (several people had come forward) some fifteen years ago or so (not recent when my son was there) and fell outside the statutory limit or some nonsense, so the church farmed him off somewhere else and that was the end of it.
We had several meetings at the school with folks higher up in the local diocese. I've never seen a bigger bunch of hypocrites falling all over themselves to cover it all up and make it go away as quickly as possible. It was unclear whether any of the current students had been molested by him, and my wife - a mental health counselor - had offered to have someone with appropriate experience and training come in and speak with the students - just to be sure. They wanted nothing to do with it. There is no desire to fix anything within the catholic church, but rather sweep it away as quickly as possible so not usurp their power or ability to make money. I'm not Catholic - my wife is - but I lost any respect I may have had.
Posted in: Vatican offers 3 reasons why it is not liable for abuse
0
tigermoth
USAFdude - explain to me then how I will benefit? Assuming that I never get dropped from medical coverage by my insurer anyway(my parents never were, and I know of no one that was - not saying it doesn't frequently happen, as quite obviously it does) and don't have need to keep my child covered until the age of 26. How is is going to benefit me? Because there will be less insurance fraud? I would say that insurance companies will just adapt to bilk you another way. I know there are a lot of theoretical bits that could save us money, but the optimum word is 'could'.
But I'm not talking theoretical here, I'm talking reality. And obviously by the failure to answer my other question, you have in fact answered my other questions. You don't know. No one does - and that doesn't make you at all uneasy??
Right now I pay $100 per pay period (every two weeks) for family health coverage. Can you with assurance tell me that I will pay no more for that under the new plan. Because what I'm understanding is that if my insurer's plan doesn't meet with the standards laid down in this bill, the company I work for has to change plans, or the insurer has to change coverage. Maybe I'm wrong and it will get better, i.e. cheaper. But maybe not. And no matter how you spin it, we all pay for this in taxes. Yes, we paid for having a flawed system. But I'll bet when all is said and done the price tag for this 'miraculous' bill is going to be quite high. And in the end I'll pay more for equal or less coverage. Convince me otherwise with hard fact; I'm open minded.
Posted in: U.S. Congress completes overhaul of health care; more threats come in
0
tigermoth
Being a german who has studied the history of my country I can tell you there's nothing, really nothing to compare between nazi germany and the situation in the US health care discussion now.
To use such arguments, tigermoth, makes me believe that you have never ever seriously read one history book about nazi germany and how things really worked there.
Anyone who stated such explicit anti-opinions on political topics in such an insulting way, as you and your right-wing fellows frequently do, would find himself in a concentration camp within days, at gunpoint of people who really didn't bother much about putting up with different opinions.
Bam Boo if you read the posting above mine you will see that mine was a response to a posting from the left accusing the right of Hitleresque 'anti-Jewish' propaganda - so it was not I that originated a comparison to the Third Reich, but rather one of your left-wing compatriots. I dare say that I have read likely more than you on National Socialist Germany as at one point I was utterly fascinated with the horror of what occurred and read everything I could get my hands on.
Actually, you must not have studied your country's history very well, as increased governmental control of various aspects of German life was indeed very much a part of Hitler's Germany, and indeed a trademark of fascist control. Certainly as a scholar of such you cannot deny that truth. And it's rather amusing that you speak about the right to criticize not being allowed in Hitler's Germany, as it seems here in the good 'ole US of A anytime anyone questions a policy of our President the left immediately labels them a racist. So now if I don't agree with his policies, it's because of his color, not not the policy itself??
It seems now that the conversation on health care here has turned to the inevitable. Those not of the left who disagree with this bill must be doing so because they are racist, and don't want to help the poor minorities in the country. I'm not sure why anyone here that leans left cannot understand a simple truth. You erroneously seem to think that all Americans that aren't currently on public assistance are well-off, or at least enough so that they shouldn't care if Uncle Sugar dips his hands in our pockets one more time to help our unfortunate brethren. If you could see beyond this myth, you would see a country full of folks that are struggling, even the ones above the poverty line. What's a few more dollars out of my pocket? A few more bucks that I earned that I don't want to give to someone else. Because I'm a cruel, uncaring, thoughtless horrible racist? No. I work for a living, not because I want to but because I have to. We might want more children, but we don't have them because we know we can't afford them. We aren't addicted to crack, not drunk more often than not, not getting welfare because it 'pays better than flipping burgers'. We get up every day, sick, tired, bored - whatever. We go to jobs we hate and work our arses off. We come home too tired to do much, too broke to go to the movies, too broke to take a real vacation and painfully do it the next day. We pay taxes, do what we must and try to better our lives. Many months we owe more than we make. We get by and survive.
Now enter this bill. No one really knows what's in the whole thing, few have read it but all on the left think it's nothing short of Moses coming down from the mount with a couple of stone tablets. Is the cost of what I am currently paying for insurance going to go up? No one can answer that yet. How much will I actually pay in taxes for everyone elses' health care? No once can give a definite figure yet. Despite the 'predicted' deficit reduction, what is this actually going to cost the American public? What affect will this have on large US firms that now must follow the guidelines of this bill? Will it cost them money? Will they pass these costs to the consumer? Will the quality of our health care deteriorate when doctors decide that entering or staying in the profession is no longer lucrative enough to match the cost, both financially and psychologically, of becoming a physician? Will the amount of time it takes to get an office visit with a doctor increase significantly as the number of doctors lessen and the number of patients increases (most likely I should think)?
The question are numerous and the answers are few. So you can't see why so many oppose this bill? We're not evil, uncaring louts. We're an American public tired of ill thought out government legislation from any party that tends more to make bad situations worse rather than supplying sustainable gains. We're tired of being asked to pay more when we're paid less and the economy is in the toilet. We're tired of a government increasingly in our lives telling us what to do despite the fact that they can't even agree that the sky is blue.
Posted in: U.S. Congress completes overhaul of health care; more threats come in
0
tigermoth
Actually with the increasing government control and role in our lives in telling us what to do thanks to the left, I would say it's the dems that more closely resemble the NSDAP of the 1930's.
Posted in: U.S. Congress completes overhaul of health care; more threats come in
0
tigermoth
Umm..that's kind of the problem. I don't think very many have read through the entire bill, including those who signed off on it. People in this country have become too stupid to actually read something in depth and attempt to understand the consequences, what might affect something else, long term costs vs. benefits. In the business world this always leads to project failure. Taken on a government/nationwide scale will bring much of the same.
Posted in: U.S. Congress completes overhaul of health care; more threats come in
0
tigermoth
Well, in this link the President is quoted as saying "This is a patient's bill of rights on steroids," the president said Friday at George Mason University in Virginia. "Starting this year, thousands of uninsured Americans with pre-existing conditions will be able to purchase health insurance, some for the very first time. Starting this year, insurance companies will be banned forever from denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions."
The link: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Gap-in-health-care-laws-apf-4272209396.html?x=0&.v=1
Clearly says 'starting this year'. While of course it could mean that the legislation is passed this year, the quote is none-the-less quite misleading.
Posted in: Obama signs $938 billion health care overhaul into law
0
tigermoth
That's the difference; charity is something given, not taken. If I give to help the earthquake victims of Haiti, that's my decision to be charitable with the money I've earned. If the government takes it out of my pocket to give to someone, that's not charity - it's robbery.
Again apples and oranges. Building roads and sustaining the military with my tax dollars provides a service directly to me, i.e. I use the roads and the military supposedly protects my way of life. I currently pay about a hundred buck per pay period for my insurance. It works. Now I still get to pay for my insurance, but I get to pay for other people's as well. Not a choice but a government inflicted taking of my funds whether I like it or not. That is socialism. There is a stark difference between the two that many of you don't seem to get - not sure why.
The liberal assumption - and a poor one - is that the only money being really taken are from the rich 'fat-cats'. Well no, that's not true. A large sector of the population is middle class and this sector will pay. The assumption that if you live above the poverty line you can afford to give is NOT true in this day and age. A good number of liberals these days are younger people. When you're young, the idealistic nature of giving to 'help your fellow man' seems much more romantic and is easier when you're only responsible for yourself. When you're supporting a family, you tend to notice more where your hard earned cash is going, and you seem to notice that the 'have-nots' are are not always your idealist ideal of the poor souls who have really tried hard but just can't make it. There are a whole, whole lot of folks of the 'government dole' who are just as capable of making a living as the rest of us. But why bother when Uncle Same hands you a check?
Quick case in point; I live in a medium sized city and take public transportation to work. There's a guy who gets on the bus every day who is both mentally handicapped, and has something wrong with his legs. He gets on that bus and goes to a 9-5 every day. He likely gets some type of disability, but with his condition could get full disability, but chooses to work a 9-5 (albeit at a job specifically designed for people with handicaps). Conversely there is a family that gets on the bus a few times a week; I've heard them talking that they're going to pick up their assistance checks. She's about 24, he's in his twenties with no physical deformities or conditions that would preclude work. Neither do, and they have three kids. So might you see why people get angry enough to hurl rocks through windows (which I do not in any way condone) when more money is being removed so such people can have health care? Cruel and heartless? Depends upon your perspective I suppose.
Posted in: FBI investigating threats to Democrats after health care vote
0
tigermoth
Oh for Christ's sake it has nothing to do with his color; I'm so sick of hearing that crap. Now I can't criticize my President because he's black. It's just naturally assumed (and seems to me more of a crutch used by the left) that if I'm white, not a liberal and criticize that I must be a 'banjo-playin', rebel flag carrying, gap-toothed, Ree-pub-lykin with an IQ of twelve. I'm not just saying this to make myself look 'hip' but frankly his color is meaningless to me - and I'll bet very many of us - and wouldn't even be a thought if it wasn't thrown in our faces because it's an easy way to accuse because not everyone agrees with BS legislation that was hastily thrown together after defeat of the original plan and rammed through to win a political victory.
It is true that most everyone - liberal, conservative, democrat/republican, tall, short, white, black, green or indigo - has not read through this bill to study and understand all of its nuances. You know the talking points and the 'good things' it will do. But what about all the crap tacked on to the back pages? I suspect there is a lot of bill there that few have really gotten to the meat of. So why not rush it through so we can all pay for it and enjoy it? Read it? Why would you want to do something so stupid? I'm a tech writer by trade and write the instructions that most of you never read when using a new piece of software, or putting together a bookcase you bought from IKEA. You never read the instructions and screw it up every time. Usually they aren't written correctly and make no sense (not mine of course!). Same thing here. Ram it through and will fix it later. Sure, great idea.
Some type of health care reform was most definitely needed, and past administrations have dragged feet and one nothing. I'll give it to the President that he at least did something. But hastily cobbling legislation, ramming it through and changing our system to one that at least bear strong resemblance to socialized medicine was not the way to go and is dangerous. Too many of us currently have health insurance that we pay for that seems to work. Now I have to change all of that so I can pay for everyone else to have it as well. Magnanimous or not, you can see why that might make some of us rather nervous.
Instead of getting a clear-cut, concise and studied in-depth presentation and rational discussion of what this bill would entail and in fact do, we were met with presentation of an angry car salesman telling us that we need this and to shut up and pass it. Logic wins out over stupidity. If this had been presented correctly rather than crammed down our throats by less than eloquent politicians and witch-like Pelosi and weirdo Reid, it may have been more palatable and even made sense to the masses.
Posted in: Obama signs $938 billion health care overhaul into law
0
tigermoth
The Obama govt. knows it's not going to be realistic discussing introducing it.
Oh, it's coming, don't you worry. All the models of socialized medicine out there have something similar. I lived nine miles from the Canadian border. We used to go there for dental care as it was cheaper than getting it in the States. But have a look at your average bill when in Canada buying anything and notice the several lines of taxes added on to what the initial cost is. I think there is more truth in the statement 'there is no such thing as a free lunch' than people ever want to see or admit to.
Posted in: Obama signs $938 billion health care overhaul into law
0
tigermoth
But wait a minute USAFdude; you seem like a logical type so just follow this through for me. You saw the vitriol of the 'town meetings' that precipitated the first attempt. You've seen the polls - the results aren't made up and are even printed on liberal-friendly websites. Granted, I think polls can be manipulated to say what you want - but in this case they all say pretty much the same thing, and the question is pretty straight forward. The American people did not in the majority support this bill as written. The President did everything he could in my opinion to be as secretive as possible in explaining all aspects of the bill; too many meeting for 'democratic leaders' only. Sign it quickly before anyone can really read it (didn't he say something about Americans having five days to review any bill put on his desk for signature??). So much for an open, candid President. But you still maintain just because the representative voted for it that the majority of their constituents and the majority of the American public wanted this bill signed? Well, I suppose we'll see in the polls later on. Remember this conversation and we'll compare notes then.
Posted in: U.S. Congress clears historic health care bill
0
tigermoth
Again, all of you claiming that 'America has spoken' because they elected Obama and we now have this funtastic health-care bill that the polls say most Americans did NOT want (we're not making up the polling results folks), you shoot yourselves in the foot a bit. Not so long ago you were talking about the unpopularity of Bush and 'his wars' but yet he was voted in for a second term. I suppose if you concede that most Americans agreed with him then I wouldn't have a problem with that, but most of you have spent a lot of time and a lot of space telling us just how much the American people hated and disagreed with the man's policies. Or does this only work one way?
Posted in: U.S. Congress clears historic health care bill
0
tigermoth
Oh, it's not priceless - there is a steep price tag attached, with no means of paying for it except the pockets of the American people, or possibly indebting ourselves further to our good friends the Chinese.
Posted in: U.S. Congress clears historic health care bill
0
tigermoth
That's sort of a loaded question. To get rid of one form of leaching my instituting another hardly puts my mind at ease. People will continue to leach, it has become the American way, and one that is now government sanctioned. And despite chotto's posting above that should be read to the strains of a wailing violin, I'm not buying it. I don't have a child with asthma, when my sons are 23 they can bloody well pay for their own insurance, or there is already relatively inexpensive plans I could purchase for students that will likely cost me and the taxpayers far less in the long run - particularly my kids who will be paying for this and the great stimulus package long after I'm dead and gone. It's a costly bill with no way to pay for it except through higher taxes. Period. Was the status quo a financial burden and waste? Yes. Did we badly need reform. Yes. But our great leaders just argued about it until they developed this rubbish that is now forced down our throats.
Wolfpack is the only one talking sense here. Maybe we need John Wayne and to 'grow a pair' as a society instead of falling into the liberal trap of government dependence where becoming financially successful and independent is seen as a crime. And those who don't wish to just hand over the money they worked hard for to those who have not for indeterminate reasons that may be of their own making are not quite unfairly labeled as heartless ghouls. Barnum's old quote about a fool and his money is never more true in this administration.
This country was created on the basis of having the freedom to pursue life, liberty and happiness on an equal basis. But that was never meant to be those that do must give to those who won't or can't so that all are equal. It was meant that by hard work, perseverance, integrity and ingenuity that all could achieve and succeed. It wasn't meant that we should create a welfare state, or a system of government dependence where those that do must pay for those that don't. The government was supposed to guide, not dictate. Wars have been fought to preserve this (or at least attempt to).
I'm not saying let the people die in the streets because they cannot afford medical treatment. What I am proposing is that governmental dependency through such things as socialized medicine is not something that will make our nation strong, but rather the opposite. I fully realize this sounds somewhat archaic to most of you with modern, liberal attitudes. But my father grew up during the Depression and was fiercely proud of 'making his own way'. If he didn't have money for it, we didn't get it. Credit cards? Didn't have one. Times have changed but not always for the better. Helping those who don't have get to the point where they can do is fine. Institutionalizing dependency is not, and the opportunity for abuse is far too great. And all with my tax dollars.
Sorry - had a point when I started this post, but working and typing at the same time sort of lost the momentum. I'm afraid the unintended consequences are going to be a great falling in the quality of care when being a doctor is no longer as lucrative as it once was. Quantity over quality is not encouraging when you need an operation.
Posted in: U.S. Congress clears historic health care bill
0
tigermoth
SuperLib, you do have a good and valid point. I'm not disputing that our health care system has always had serious issues that needed to be addressed, nor am I disputing that previous administrations failed to properly do so. I've had friends in similar circumstances as your own. Of course I wouldn't wish to be dropped for some condition. But you must stick with the selling point that was so hammered home that it is 'health care for everyone'. And conversely, no matter how you wish to paint it, through taxes I'm paying some part of that bill. I think there are other reforms that could/should have been enacted first before jumping on this bill that is so unpopular - and make no mistake that it is indeed not a popular choice. It's easy to say 'America has spoken through it's elected representatives' but we all know that is a misnomer. Elected representatives can and do frequently vote for legislation that we as individuals would never approve of. We vote on party lines or for the lesser of two evils in some circumstances, and saying that is a true representation is often just not so. I should add if that were the case, you would have to concede that all things done under the Bush administration were the result of 'America speaking through its elected representatives', and if you are an American, despite being Democrat, it was your choice. Faulty logic I'm certain you'll agree.
Really, its all so just so much dribble from these posters. Five year olds have more sense.
Zucronium you never cease to make me both wince and chuckle. Your arguments are always illogical and nonsensical, but amusing none-the-less. I must wonder why a Canadian has such a vested interest in the U.S. political system, but perhaps you're a 'wanna-be'. I'll address your posting anyway.
You are tired of posting from immature, immoral losers who do not have the 'balls' as you so eloquently put it to be responsible for themselves. Why then, might I ask you, should I be responsible for paying for medical coverage through my hard-earned tax dollars for a group that likely largely contains the very same said 'losers'? Granted, not everyone without health coverage fits in such a case, and as SuperLib pointed out, there are those simply dropped, etc. But street sense (that meaning having lived in several major cities and several different states and being observant of my fellow man) tells me that for every two people legitimately without coverage there are four or more that could be working and paying for coverage but are not. Why SHOULD I pay for their health coverage? The goodness of my heart? Believe it or not, I have one and it is noble I hope. But too often liberals confuse nobility with naivety. Why IS it my responsibility to foot the bill for all?
Posted in: U.S. Congress clears historic health care bill
0
tigermoth
The more I think about it, the funnier – or sadder – the whole thing is. It’s like a teenager buying his first car. As long as it looks cool and has a kick @ss stereo, that’s what they’re looking at. Oh, they know that it has an engine, four doors, a trunk, sort of how the cd player works. The 120 page manual that comes with it – who reads that? The contract and other fifty pages you sign when you buy?....c’mon. The financial contract - You’re kidding right? Besides mom and dad will pay if they can’t.
The President went out of his way to formulate as much of this behind closed doors – or at least away from Republican eyes – that he could. Something very ethically wrong there - but okay, I’m sure Republicans have done it on former legislation as well. We’ve had lawmakers admit that they don’t read most of the pages of a bill – did anyone really even read through this one? Did any of you, who espouse how great it will be? What does the ‘fix-it measure’ entail? Oh, I’m sure you all know the basic meat and potatoes as told to you by the car salesmen – i.e. your political brethren. But do you really know and understand the minutia? Do you know if there is some problem that will metaphorically be the stuck accelerator pedal on this model you all just had to have? Or after costing me and my fellow tax payers an arm and leg, will it just be another Edsel?
Posted in: U.S. Congress clears historic health care bill
0
tigermoth
Ah Romeo, you hit the nail on the head. It's not what the people want, it's what the party wants. Has an ominous ring to it, doesn't it?
Posted in: U.S. Congress clears historic health care bill
0
tigermoth
A
And if all that wasn't bad enough, I'm betting that almost every opponent of this bill on this thread who wants to deny others the ability to have health insurance.....has cushy health insurance themselves. You name them - Sailwind, RomeoRamen, Sarge...ALL have health insurance and ALL want to deny others the same priviledge.
You both over-simplify and miss the point. It's not an evil wish to deny anyone the means to get medical care when needed. It is not 'bile and caustic hate' that makes me opposed to this bill at all. Rather it's common sense, self-preservation and a little bit of old-fashioned ideology.
Let me start my saying I'm probably representative of the 'typical American', although admittedly tougher economic times have brought many to a lower end of the economic scale rather quickly - but too often from their own stupidity in the first place. I am by no means wealthy, and with wife and two kids struggle to make ends meet. I have a typical job, making a typical wage and pay into my company's health care plan which allows me and my family trips to the doctor with a co-pay. Not cheap but 'do-able'. Now in your myopic vision of the world, the poor who cannot afford health care and will now be helped by this bill are all wide-eyed children and parents who have tried so hard to make it in our economy, but the evil right has simply not let them do so. In my world - which is in an average-sized city in New York, it's not the Rockwell painting you envision. The poor are thus: a family where the father works a constructions job, when he's not drunk and can - which is infrequently; the mother who doesn't work for no reason other than the fact that she has four children that she takes ill care of and spends most of her day on the front porch chatting with a likewise neighbor and smoking cigs that (a) I couldn't afford and (b) will add to health issues for which I will now be expected to foot the bill. Family B is the single mother with three kids. It's not that the father died, but was just never part of the picture other than the horizontal shuffle through a late night of bad choices. Or now possibly the immigrant family. Yes, they might work hard and do the jobs that lazy Americans will not. But they don't pay taxes and are here illegally. Tell one of my Indian co-workers who has worked equally as hard and who is going through the proper channels to become a citizen that this is fair.
I work hard as well, and while not poor we barely make ends meet and more often than not have outstanding bills to pay. We don't take vacations often nor live beyond our means. So do I have a problem that you want to tax me more to pay for those who will not work, cannot work because of some stupidity on their own, or do so illegally? Yes, I most certainly do. If that makes me a mean person than so be it. I'm in the majority of Americans who make 'too much' to qualify for any assistance and too little to pay most of my bills. Now I'm being told I shall pay more for others.
The ideology part? I'm not a socialist, I'm a capitalist. Like it or not that's what this country was founded upon. It is about freedom from persecution. But America has always been about the American Dream. This dream was that you can come to this country and make money. Now many of you would have those that do feel guilty for having the audacity to make that money, and that those that do should pay for those who cannot or will not. My ancestors came here with little more than the shoes on their feet. Some made it through hard work, some didn't. But they didn't expect to be handed it all for free. While certainly there are those that genuinely need, your new legislation that you're all so gleefully patting each other on the back for doesn't take into account the huge amount of abuse.
After you're all done singing Kumbaya and doing a group hug, you might want to actually read through the legislation, review the current systems in place (oh yes, I know the Canadians on here are crowing about their 'great' system)and think about all of the consequences. I can name a few: increased taxes obviously; fewer incentives for doctors means a 'watering down' of the quality of care; likely longer wait times to be seen by a doctor; the pushing of cheaper treatment plans that might not be the best solution; a sh*tload of new bureaucracy to add to the incredibly wasteful red tape already in place in our health care system.
The democrat's consensus on ramming through a bill that is highly unpopular seems to be 'better to do something than nothing' which is dangerously stupid thinking.
and Sushi you seem to be advocating socialism - i.e. more government control and socialized medicine.
Posted in: U.S. Congress clears historic health care bill
0
tigermoth
No, Americans tend to like to think about something and weigh the consequences rather than having bad legislation jammed down their throats by either party, despite being the elected choice. Democracy is not supposed to mean that you vote once in four years and are then subject to any idiocy put forth. We've been doing that for far too long under both parties.
Posted in: Democrats start countdown toward health care vote
0
tigermoth
adaydream your reasoning is a recipe for disaster. What you put forth is that since it took (paraphrase) "70 years of Republican inaction" to get to this point that this health care legislation should be rammed through no matter what. The fact that most Americans don't like the legislation as worded? - who cares. Democrats are for health care reform, you're a democrat, you have a democrat as president who wants it, so by God it should be so. Do you even know the intricacies of what's in this legislation, and what the implications are? Have any of you rabid Pelosi-loving, Obama worshiping, died-in-the-wool true blue Democrats really stepped outside of your altruistic world to really examine this legislation, understand it and understand the implications? (very doubtful) Or is it the standard support of the party and supposed cause no matter what the cost? (likely) Just as the wild and irresponsible stimulus spending will accomplish no real sustainable and tangible results, neither will this health care bill be the great savior of the indigent masses.
It will be quite interesting if we're all still around in ten years to see what the believers in this nonsense have to say.
Posted in: Democrats start countdown toward health care vote