Thanks for nothing Mr. Obama! I could see this coming long ago, the minute Pelosi made her famous idiotic statement, to pass the law, then read it. I wouldn't buy a car without reading the financial conditions! Are the 'common' people smarter than their government representatives?
Hubby and I received a letter from our personal physician whom we've had for at least 20 years, stating that she is closing her practice. She's highly intelligent, very caring, goes beyond what many physicians might and it's a sad thing for anyone to experience. Who's next on here to lose theirs?
Let's see how many others here will also soon be notified that their doctors will no longer be practicing.
YUP! Pass the law, then we'll read it! Their integrity, what little there was, went out the window with that statement. But many thought, "Papa O, will take care of us." Hasn't the government always done that?"
As we get further into O'care, you'll truly see how much socialism has come into our laws and government 'performers'.
Enjoy your freedom while you can. What little is left.
Many folks visit only specific news outlets and get a one sided view but it might surprise you to hear all sides of issues and be willing to learn more than just from the left, right or center. They're not all 'political' viewpoints. Some are financial experts trying to tell us what the consequences can be if certain laws are put in place.
Remember, when one law is passed, there can be multiple others under the same umbrella, that are never heard of until it affects you or I personally.
What a sad country we've become.
Pull-Up Strap Handle Kit
Wall Mount Boat Racks
Kayak Motor Kit
|Table of Contents|
|Messages in this Topic|
It's the new age of shamelessness|
Posted by: dogmatycus on Feb-14-14 12:39 PM (EST)
brought to you by the democrat party. I used to be a democrat. Back then they hid their ruthless, shameless manners. Now it is the party of Anthony Weiner and Filthy Bob Filner. Then they have the unmitigated gall to accuse the GOP of waging a war on women.
Can you provide a link to|
Posted by: OC1 on Feb-14-14 1:25 PM (EST)
that Pelosi quote? In context?
Posted by: clarion on Feb-14-14 1:30 PM (EST)
If you think something is out of context, why not give us the context? Seems pretty basic to me.
Sure. Here you go.|
Posted by: Big_D on Feb-14-14 1:39 PM (EST)
This article provides former Speaker Pelosi's explanation of the quote and the context related to it.
So it is taken out of context|
Posted by: OC1 on Feb-14-14 1:51 PM (EST)
That's what I suspected.
So says former Speaker Pelosi.|
Posted by: Big_D on Feb-14-14 4:16 PM (EST)
Look at the time lines and determine for yourself what is reasonable. I do not see how the facts of where the bill was and when it was signed are consistent with her explanation.
Pelosi is lying.|
Posted by: clarion on Feb-14-14 1:54 PM (EST)
So here's what she said|
Posted by: OC1 on Feb-14-14 2:07 PM (EST)
“You've heard about the controversies within the bill, the process about the bill, one or the other. But I don't know if you have heard that it is legislation for the future, not just about health care for America, but about a healthier America, where preventive care is not something that you have to pay a deductible for or out of pocket. Prevention, prevention, prevention--it's about diet, not diabetes. It's going to be very, very exciting.
No. In context it means EXACTLY|
Posted by: clarion on Feb-14-14 2:09 PM (EST)
This quote is often mangled|
Posted by: OC1 on Feb-14-14 2:21 PM (EST)
into something like "we have to pass the law in order to see what's in it" (see the opening post, for example).
Well, they didn't know what was in it|
Posted by: clarion on Feb-14-14 2:22 PM (EST)
That doesn't change what she|
Posted by: OC1 on Feb-14-14 2:31 PM (EST)
Posted by: clarion on Feb-14-14 2:33 PM (EST)
Even that is a dishonest portrayal|
Posted by: OC1 on Feb-14-14 2:38 PM (EST)
of what she said.
But you already conceded that|
Posted by: clarion on Feb-14-14 2:43 PM (EST)
Posted by: OC1 on Feb-15-14 10:24 AM (EST)
I never "conceded" that. I have no idea which individual congressman read or didn't read the bill.
She didn't read it|
Posted by: clarion on Feb-15-14 10:26 AM (EST)
OC, you could make an anvil spin|
Posted by: dogmatycus on Feb-14-14 2:36 PM (EST)
like a ballerina.
I'm not sure what means|
Posted by: OC1 on Feb-14-14 2:40 PM (EST)
But I'll take it as a complement. ;)
Absolutely a compliment|
Posted by: dogmatycus on Feb-14-14 2:59 PM (EST)
I have lots of friends that are as good as you are in the AGW debate. Maybe not quite as good. But they are fun debates to have.
Posted by: pirateoverforty on Feb-14-14 2:04 PM (EST)
First of all, it was we have to pass the bill so YOU can find out what's in it.
Posted by: ralph59 on Feb-15-14 3:39 AM (EST)
The Affordable Care Act was always an effort to manage the cost of care or have you forgotten about the death panels? Remember? It was all the rage at one time.
Well we agree on Bachman|
Posted by: pirateoverforty on Feb-15-14 8:26 AM (EST)
The death panels are still about managing the cost the government has to pay out, about the cost of the insurance. It does nothing to lower the cost the hospital sends out, asides from the predicted savings when nobody shows up in the ER who doesn't have insurance, which I don't believe in. So the ACA is about the cost of health insurance, not the cost of healthcare.
I prefer "Ichabod" |
Posted by: rWVen on Feb-14-14 1:39 PM (EST)
I'd take just about anything|
Posted by: tktoo on Feb-14-14 4:28 PM (EST)
Why is she quitting?|
Posted by: acre on Feb-14-14 1:56 PM (EST)
In fairness, there have been some|
Posted by: converse on Feb-14-14 3:00 PM (EST)
suspicious stats thrown around. Nevertheless, in no way has the profession been warm to Obamacare. An early poll in 09 by Investors Business Daily--before the country had grown absolute cold to the idea and before we had a chance to pass the bill then experience what was actually in the law--found 45% of physicians would consider leaving or taking an early retirement. You may even believe this poll to be a sham but in no way does Obamacare create any incentives to correct what is projected as a major problem in the years to come. Again, it's a disincentive.
profession not warm to Obamacare ... |
Posted by: pilotwingz on Feb-14-14 11:53 PM (EST)
...... tactical way to get rid of the opposition .
Here are the facts...|
Posted by: al_a on Feb-14-14 10:44 PM (EST)
we had a thread|
Posted by: radiomix on Feb-15-14 6:23 AM (EST)
About Limbaugh a while back where context was not allowed. If she said it, she said it.
If it wasn't such an assnine comment...|
Posted by: jaws on Feb-15-14 10:38 AM (EST)
why are those on NPR embarrassed by it as they have mentioned a few times on air?
Posted by: al_a on Feb-15-14 10:06 PM (EST)
because they didn't look at what was actually said and the context, either. The spin and attack politics ruled the day. I don't get it. She did not say, as was misquoted and repeated over and over, that "we have to pass it so that we can figure out what's in it." She told a group of people that the House had to pass it so that those people could find out what was in it (instead of listening to all the political rhetoric about it). Seems to me that any objective person would agree that what she actually said was not nearly as damaging as what opponents SAID she said.