Health care victory

[FlashLackey]

And the so-called "options" offered by people was truly non-existent. They said they existed, but those Loch Ness type of offers really were empty and not fully thought out. Stalling techniques of the long-winded.

Alternatives were widely discussed. The idea that the Republicans didn't have alternative ideas about this was simply a false Democrat talking point.

Alternative ideas included variations of:

Tort reform
Allowing interstate purchase of healthcare
Removing tax breaks for companies buying plans
Vouchers
Health Savings Accounts

That depends on your position.
The CNN poll.
41 percent think the bill is just right.
13 percent don't think it is liberal enough .
The remainder think it's too liberal

CNN also shows a negative job approval rating for Obama: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...oval-1044.html

Also, a majority think that the country is on the wrong track and that the health care bill should be repealed. It appears that the GOP will make large gains in the coming election: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...enate_map.html

If what's reduced is funding spent on waste and fraud then I can accept that, just as my wife would gladly accept a reduction in my McDonald's funding to help pay for more vegetables.

If there was waste and fraud occurring in Medicare that could be "reduced", a bill wasn't needed to do so.

What is really occurring is that the new bill cuts the popular Medicare Advantage plan.

This is not an isolated incident by a single nutjob and the "liberals" in this country have not behaved in any manner like what's going on now on a national level.

Yes they have. Do I really need to dig up the link showing the multitudes of death threats, Bush pictures with Hitler moustaches, etc.? You yourself have contributed to religiously bigoted sentiments on this site. Statements that could constitute violations of civil rights in some contexts such as a work-place. One impressionable young liberal I worked with told me (comfortably in front of several co-workers at a job) that he would "shoot Bush in the head" if he had the chance.

Democratic leaders have slandered troops, police, corporations, religions, demographics of poor and rich people alike, etc. All groups that have experienced prejudice, threats, vandalism, violence etc. that could be attributed to Democrats according to the same logic you're using.

The results of this are unprecedented in our lifetime and to try and sweep it under the rug is as despicable as the acts themselves.

Associating wrongful acts performed by some with other people or groups who had no control or involvement whatsoever is despicable because it risks inciting violence. That looks like it could be the case in the unfolding story about the gunshot that hit Republican Eric Cantor's office this week.

No, there weren't.
While there were alternative plans spoken of, none were proven to cover everyone (or even as many as this one) or reduce prices.

Double-standard fallacy. Obama's plan has never been "proven" to cover everyone or reduce prices either. It has never been a requirement to prove what will happen. That simply isn't possible.

The difference is that the alternative ideas being discussed do have a proven track record of the results we want in other applications. Obama's plan has a proven track record of not achieving the results he claims it will based on other failed applications of the same concepts.

...or you could just as easily argue that our quality of care will go up as indicated by every other form of disease, health issue, life expectancy, and infant mortality as is shown in countries with single-payer systems.

That would be true if any of those things actually were better in countries with single-payer. However, they are not.

Please post a link to the evidence that shows this.

I already have. Why should I bother re-substantiating a point to a person who has already seen the evidence but chooses to deny it?