Thousands protest Obama's health care plan at the U.S. Capitol

No, but you can get a hell yeah.

ryan, there are many times when partisanship is thrown out the windows and people have conversations on here. It usually happens after quite a bit of mud slinging though... you have to say something that connects with the other person first.

Good luck... if you stick around, you will see who is best to have civil conversations with and who is just here to troll and throw mud... in fact, I think a lot of what you are seeing, especially on this thread, is that most of the people here already understand what the take the other person they are arguing with is going to have... because they have been around to see what this other person always does. One particular user I am thinking of... dozens have tried to reason with... some still do, but most got sick of them and now just throw mud right back... and no one, I mean no one, ever defends them... from the left or right. You can take a look through the thread and figure out who that is pretty easily... along with the others like them.

So again,

Good luck

Right on...

LOL, this proves nothing other than Obama is, in fact, a politician. If you use this flimsy rationale, then, hahaha, a lot of people would be considered a 'racist'. But this cannot be taken seriously as it is taken way out of context to prove yet another ridiculous assertion.

Look, at no point I have I said Obama was perfect. The funny thing is that everyone assumes that I am many things as opposed to just asking me what my thoughts are, which is an interesting point in itself. No president is perfect, and I have no problems discussing what I like and what I don't like about the current administration. However, you just can't ignore the context of color in America. Are all people who disagree with Obama racist? Ha, of course not. But you are in denial if you think none of these attacks are not motivated by his color. This is America after all. Let's be honest, at the very least, about what kind of country we live in.

A black president who won popular vote and the vote of many white people, I might add....is hated for being black and not because of anything he's done...I don't know..... like give BILLIONS to the car companies and banks then just totally ignore schools.

Oh what did he give them? A cheap, priceless pep talk.

That's like stating that American hates homosexuals that's why Adam Lambert didn't win American Idol.

WHAT? Did Adam get voted off first? No.
Did he get voted off second? No.
Did he get voted off third? No.

Where did he end up then if America hates homosexuals sooooooooooooooooooo much?

Second.

Wow. That's where hate lands you?

If hate of a race lands someone the President then what does that say about all the Hispanic and Japanese, Chinese and whatever--ese who hasn't even got a chance to run? That they are hated by Americans far more than America hates black people?

You are not being as reasonable as you claim.

First you state that it's about Race. I post this video call Obama a racist for ignoring Katrina (JUST Like Kayne West did with Bush in that stupid video for raising money.....and did people denounce him as stating something about a politician? Not as you did with Obama here with this video) and you say that's weak. What you're doing is no stronger. You're generalizing people and then stating it's fact.

It's not fact.

You are not making valid points and you're dismissing points as stating they are not valid because they are against Obama.

While at the same time not offering anything that should be said about Obama for he isn't, as you stated, perfect.

You're acting like YOU are the only one that can say anything that is wrong with him.

Race card is a crutch and you're using it too much and it's belittling to those that have actually be through racist times.

Ha, where to begin. So you're using American Idol to determine how America feels, socially, about homosexuals. Come on JJ. That's just laughable at best. And it's obvious America does not view homosexuals the same because they do not have the same rights as their homosexual counter parts, which goes into the entire argument that inequality still exists in America.

And I'm not generalizing anything. Just because you keep saying I generalize doesn't make it fact. This post is about the protesters at the US Capitol this weekend. That is who I am speaking of. At no point have I said or even implied that everyone who disagrees with Obama is a racist. I don't make ridiculous assertions like that because it simply is not true. Furthermore, it is very telling that you would even quantify who 'is hated more' in America. At no point did I single out one minority group. You did that. And just because, lol, Adam gets second on a tv show and a Black American is elected into the house that does not mean inequality against minorities simply disappears. Electing Obama was a great step socially for America of course, but there is still a lot of work to do. There is still a huge gap when it comes access to healthcare, education, jobs, etc across color lines.

And this post is not about Obama's imperfections. It's about the protesters. Ha, and I'm not acting like anything. I'm merely stating my view. Saying that we still live in a bigoted society is simply the truth. The example of non equal rights for homosexuals is only the tip of the iceberg with this particular point, but if you are leaving in a dream world you believe we live in an equal society, because we don't. If you cannot acknowledge this fact about American culture, you are simply blinding yourself to the truth. It's just that simple.

Just because inequality and racism exist doesn't mean you have any bases for stating that about people who disagree with Obama...even if it's for "some" as you claim.

As for Adam Lambert that was an example to show how ridiculous your claims are about people being racist against Obama in such a massive amount....because some isn't as little as it should be. Some is far too many and you know it. People made that claim about Adam that he didn't win because he is gay.

You're stating that Obama is hated on because he is black.

You have not acknowledged that the protesters have a point. Therefore you're stating they don't have a point because some are racist? If only some are racist that means the majority are not and the majority have a valid point. What valid point do they have?

And you think other people are not being reasonable?

haha...You need another valid defense for Obama. This one has so many holes in it fat Americans can walk through them.

LOL, let's stay focused JJ. I'm not really a fan of American Idol, hahaha, so I can't really comment about all of that. But I will say it is possible that his sexual orientation could have played a role in the decision because of America temperament towards the homosexual community....

And we are not talking about Obama being 'hated on' because he is black. At no point did I make such a generalized statement. I said some of these protesters motivated by bigotry. It has been well documented that by and large these protesters, on matters of policy, simply have no idea what they are talking about, continuously citing socialism and communism as reasons for not liking healthcare. These claims are ridiculous because we are already have a socialized healthcare plan. The point of losing their ability to choose is bogus. And as far as it being paid for, there is a plan, but people continuously claim that there taxes are going to increase, despite Obama's repeated assertions that it's not going to happen. This is no guarantee, of course, but, do we have any real reason to not at the very least take it for it is until it is disproven? No, he's only been in office for 7 months.

And just to be clear, I'm not saying all opponents of Obama's healthcare are racist. This post is not about that. This post is about the protesters in DC this past weekend. And no I don't see any valid points from them. But that's fine. I can deal with ignorance. The difference that I see is the sheer intensity at which people cling to that ignorance and express it. It is irrational, illogical. The hostility and hatred these people are displaying is so visceral. This isn't protest. These are ignorant people expressing ignorant idea in the most hateful ways possible. Are you going to sit here and seriously defend depictions of Obama as Hitler? Is this the valid point you are speaking of?

It's been well documented that Obama got the office because many people voted for him because he was black and it had nothing to do with what he said at any of his speeches.

So no one who opposes these stupid proposals on health care reform have any valid points?

Don't you dare use that public option as a valid disagreement. Don't pander.

Who voted for him has nothing to do with this conversation... stay focused.

We are not talking about anyone who opposes healthcare. We are talking about these protesters. Stay with the thread, JJ.

Pander? Pander to what? It is a valid idea. Providing a government option to private healthcare is a valid idea. Ha, are you saying that it isn't? On what grounds? You don't like it? Sorry, but that is not a valid opinion. I don't like licorice, but I see no reason why others shouldn't. Come on JJ. I know you have something relevant to say in there somewhere.

No. It's a weak disagreement that only agrees with your side. Republicans can have valid points on the health care and you should address those. Not this race crap.

And if it matters that people are racist then it matters that people voted for him because of his race.

LOL, of course it matters, as many people did not vote for him because of this color as well. Thanks for validating what I've been saying.

Ok so are we making the assumption that these protesters are Republicans? Because I'm not talking about the Republican party. I'm talking about these protesters. Again, let's stay focused. And if you know of anyone Republicans putting forth a valid healthcare package, put it out there and stop being hypothetical. I want to see what you are talking about as opposed to you continuing to make these claims they exist. Let's see if you have anything more than just talk.

Just like you are putting out why you oppose them.
Oh wait no you're just stating they're crazy and assuming that's good enough.

It's not.

And I don't agree with them, so I'm not going to make an argument for what I don't agree with. I just don't think you're being as reasonable as you state.

It's obnoxious for people like you who think you have the market cornered on reasonableness to state other people are too stupid to address you without facts. Then you don't address them with any facts.

Haha, now you're just being petty. I've never claimed to have the market on anything. Again, if my thought process makes you uncomfortable, I can't do anything about that.

And so you're admitting you're problem with me is personal and not concerning the actual subject. Ha, that's good to know. You can say what I am and am not as much as you want, but you are, as usual unable to prove anything. But it is your right to believe whatever you want.

That last bit is my point.

It doesn't matter what I say you'd always fall back on that.

You can't state you don't...because you ALWAYS do.

Find a place where you actually agree with me on something political that I've stated against Democrats.

I don't have a problem with you. I have a problem with how you're asking for others to see your point while you ignore theirs and call them racist or a bigot.

I'm not asking for anyone to see anything any kind of way. I am presenting my opinion, no more no less. If people agree with me cool, if they don't I would like to see why. This is called debate JJ. And because I disagree with your generalizations, that makes me what? Ha, part of the problem? You're haven't said anything. I've stated why I think they are motivated by bigotry, while you continue to meander off topic again and again. I'll say this again. Present a relevant idea as to why you disagree with the political leanings of Democrats and we'll talk about it. If you say something that makes sense, I probably will agree with you. But you have yet to do that.

You presented an accusation that you can't back. You can only back it with articles dating back to early 2008.

There are people that didn't vote for McCain because he was OLD. Have you complained about people being ageist?

So what if someone didn't vote for Obama because he's black? Did they attack him? Did they spit on him? Did they scream racial slurs? Right now people don't really like him that much for many reasons and you've yet to address any of those reasons. You're waiting for me to be their spokesperson. Well that's not going to happen.

You've done nothing but complain and totally ignored what I've said every single moment....never addressing anything I've stated. You're so dismissive you're worse than a teacher that hates kids and she teaches 2nd grade. Telling them to be quit that she doesn't want to hear their petty squabbles. Get over it. It doesn't help the problem to tell them that they can do this or that with what they have to complain about.

Sometimes people like to be heard and it's not that hard to listen to what they have to state instead of assuming that because some of them are bigots that they entire group has zero relevance.

Right now I don't like you.

I hope to get over that, but you're not making that easy with your attitude problem.

Now I know you're not reading what I post because you are simply incorrect about the dates. Read, JJ.

We are not talking about McCain. We can if you would like, but that point is irrelevant.

Yes people have used racial slurs. He hasn't been attacked by the Secret Service has been reported in saying death threats have significantly increased since he has been in office. And we are not talking about the general public. We are talking about the protesters. Stay on topic. You keep making inferences about what I think about these other topics, but we are not talking about those so you have no idea what you are talking about.

I have no problem listening to a group express their opinions, but they're opinions aren't based on anything substantial. This has been talked about time and time again. You yourself admitted the lack knowledge of the health bill, but then turn around and get upset when someone brings a light on that and explores the reasons why that might be. You may not like my premise, but there is a precedent concerning bigotry around Obama's presidency and campaign.

Honestly, I have no care about whether you like me personally or not. I just want you to talk about the issue at hand. And I have no idea what you mean about my 'attitude'. If what I say makes you uncomfortable or dislike me, or whatever else you make up, do what makes you feel better. But I'm not going to water down what I'm saying because one person doesn't like me.

Very well.

That's why protesters were outside Bush's ranch many times without getting arrested.

Good job circumventing charlies argument and proving nothing at the same time JJ.

So democrats are good at showing democracy in action as well too huh... where did the monkeys learn it from.... DOH.

The fact that no one was arrested at Cindy Sheehan's Crawford pow wow does not negate the fact that they were arrested in cities around the country on a regular basis.

Were you one of the ones arrested?

Do you have numbers on the arrest and proof they actually occurred outside of assuming?

You're more of a scare tactic kind of person when it comes to those that are not liberals. Trusting you on anything that has to do with how bad conservatives are is like trusting a KKK member on how terrible Obama is.

Ya that's right the KKK is where you get you talking points from isn't it JJ. you just cant help open mouth insert foot. and please if you going to follow my comment come up with some thing different that you don't like my icon.

How is it that these videos made it online if there is such a "police" state at the time? And why wasn't more people arrested? If it was really as bad as you state more people would have been arrested.

That last one with the guy they were unnecessarily rough with him, but he lied about not fighting back. If he wasn't fighting back he wouldn't have ran in the first place.

But it doesn't matter they shouldn't have pulled his hair and they sure shouldn't have stuck their knee into the back of his head.

How do you not know if this was not the city's doing or the states? Why are you suggesting that it was Bush? Where's the order?

I personally think MOST (98%) of all protest are stupid and pointless and do absolutely NOTHING.

Whether the protesters be liberal or conservative or Religious person over movie or figure of their religion being a cartoon or animal activist...it doesn't matter. STUPID. It doesn't solve anything. No matter if it is peaceful or not. It causes more anger.

The rare occasions that it matters was stuff like civil rights and when MILK died and they marched and took over the streets...that was more of a show of massive support and sort of a protest against the wrong and the hate.

Any place chanting can be used to motivate...it probably isn't a good place.

He was not running man, he was being pulled.

Anyone being arrested for this stuff is bad. Tea Baggers are not being arrested. Anit war protesters were. The hypocrisy stops now.

You want them to be arrested---the tea party people?

You called them by that nickname. You're disgusted with them.

If they were arrested like the anti-war people you wouldn't utter a single peep about it. Would you? Don't give me that "Of course I would I"m for rights of this that and the other."

Of course is almost always a start of a lie. Let's avoid the lying.

I find anyone who goes to a protest to be an angry person. Anti-War protesters = angry. Tea party people = angry.

It's not great to be around angry people and be angry yourself. It allows you to think you're being rational when you're not.

No, I do not want the to be arrested. I am on the other hand disgusted with them.

What I want is for them to take a deep breath, write down what they want done, and then review the health care bill. The only things that I have heard them claim to want out of health care reform are things that are being done. Further more, the things they are protesting against are not being done... for instance, a government take over of health care. That is crazy, and it is not being done.

What is being done... health care exchange, where private companies, the ones now in existence, will be allowed to cover anyone from anywhere that wants that companies coverage. What we have now requires the company to offer the insurance in the state, and this severely limits the competition in the open market. The tea baggers have stated they want this in such a way that they believe it is not being done... yet it has been in the HR3200 bill since the beginning, but they are so staunch and stuck on hating that they refuse to even look at it.

That is infuriating... you give them what they claim to want before they claim to want it, and they ignore it and call you a liar? What are we supposed to do... smile?

You could start by not calling them that. I'm sure you wouldn't be too pleased if people (and maybe they did) started calling the anti-war people the anti-military people instead or Anti-American....

Healing never started with name calling.

You can't do much with people that refuse to listen other than ignore their existence. They make up such a small fraction (as some have stated---who knows who's telling the truth) of the American public so why fret over them?

I personally would state that Congress isn't trying hard enough and Obama should have researched more than Canada and Europe for this health care help.

He should have looked at Japan. They already have something that really works well with a capitalist like system. They just need to fix it so that it doesn't crap out like Japan's will because of the massive amount of old people that are going to be tossed on it and financially strain the entire system.

Why would he ignore a system that is working (but need a few tweaks) but go with systems that totally shift what is already in place so much so it might make matters worse?

Well, first, the tea baggers gave themselves the name, and refer to themselves as such, so I do not think that it is name calling.

Secondly, there were vast numbers of military personnel that protested the Iraq war, amongst them were myself, Richard A. Clark (still considered the foremost terrorist expert) and Colin Powell.

There were quite a few others as well
http://images1.americanprogress.org/il80web20037/ThinkProgress/2006/generals8.mo...

You say that you think that congress and Obama should have looked at Canada and Europe as well as Japan for guidance. I believe they have, they took from each of those systems... Sweden has been held as a model for instance (they rely on private insurers as well), most things there work great, the types of care are also inadvertently limited because there are caps on treatment coverage based on the disease or problem... this makes the more expensive, more effective treatments unavailable. Obama saw this and has publicly announced that he will veto any bill that proposes price caps, this also gained a large amount of support from the pharmaceutical industry. Canada's health care while it works to a degree is pitiful in the over all scope... it was tossed out the window because it is not as effective, Obama saw this and reascended his call for a single payer system.

The only people that stand to loose anything in this plan are health insurers. Under a more robust system of free market competition they will be force to reduce profits down from the now 500-1000% profit margins they are now realizing.

With money not being sucked up by health insurance there will be more free capitol in the economy that non health insurance corporations and individuals alike can invest in other things and allow other industries to grow at a more competitive rate with the rest of the world.

My views on this on this health care plan have continuously evolved, but I pay attention to what is being said and consider it before dismissing it. I started out hating this bill, but the more I actually look into it and the more I learn about other systems, the more I realize the forethought and genius that was put into this bill that was drafted by both democrats and republicans alike.

If you dismiss all preconceptions and look at what has happened you will see that staunch ideas from both aisles have been combined and weeded through to produce a truly bipartisan bill that fits both ideals, and will work if it is allowed to.

The proposals have across state coverage? Does any one of them state that there will be coverage no matter if you have a job or not?

I personally think that there should be a way to be covered independent from work or not. If one is to be insured might as well be secured and insured without fear of losing job and then insurance.

There are provisions in there about that stuff, but I have not looked specifically into them yet, so I can not truthfully answer that.

I do know that there is a clause about hardship. If you can not afford health insurance you can qualify for a hardship and not have to pay for it, though you are covered for a brief time... You on the other hand, from what I glanced over, can not stay on this indefinitely. I do not know any more than that on it though.

Work is smooth sailing to day, so I will look it up and get back to you on it in a bit.

Apparently the Hardship clause is an amendment to social security.

It is SEC. 1642 on page 727 of HR3200

Found here:
http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdf

and it refers to amending the social security Section 1128(c)(3)(B) of the Social Security Act

Found here:
http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title11/1128.htm

to make it to where this section of the medicare bill takes control of it

"(i) a health maintenance organization (as defined in section 1903(m)) providing items and services under a State plan approved under title XIX, or

(ii) an entity furnishing services under a waiver approved under section 1915(b)(1),"

Essentially they are allowing for the states to define what the best course of action to take if they want, but there are also provisions to allow people to dip into there social security early if they need to... which is already in place, if you are injured today and can no longer work, you can start drawing your social security tomorrow.
_________________________________

If you loose your job like you are worried about... there does not seem to be any specific provision for it, unless it puts you into the realms of the hardship clause and you can use Medicare which you have already paid for for a time until you can resume another insurance policy.

This would probably be a very legitimate question to ask. What is there intention for such situations? Then call on them to make such intentions more explicit.

Of course, I might be missing something, and all of this is defined in some section of the bill I did not know to search for...

Thanks for the research.

I think it would be a good idea to make insurance independent of work. Build in hardship clause into all insurance plans via the insurer.

They are meant to help not make money. If they want to make lots of money then switch to selling pot or something.

I think it should be made clear insurance is to help people not hurt them....

Reading back over your initial question, I think I might have initially missed what you were asking.

As an individual it should be easier to gain insurance coverage through the exchange system. Companies and individuals are not required to go through the exchange, but because of the competitive nature of the exchange more companies and individuals are likely to get there insurance from companies that participate in it. The rules of the exchange require the rates to be uniform for both company participants and individuals... though a company may pay part of the coverage for you making it even cheaper on the employee.

All of this is covered in Title one of the bill, and under these subtitles, most specifically Subtitle B Sec. 113

Subtitle B—Standards Guaranteeing Access to Affordable Coverage
Sec. 111. Prohibiting pre-existing condition exclusions.
Sec. 112. Guaranteed issue and renewal for insured plans.
Sec. 113. Insurance rating rules.
Sec. 114. Nondiscrimination in benefits; parity in mental health and substance
abuse disorder benefits.
Sec. 115. Ensuring adequacy of provider networks.
Sec. 116. Ensuring value and lower premiums.

Subtitle C—Standards Guaranteeing Access to Essential Benefits
Sec. 121. Coverage of essential benefits package.
Sec. 122. Essential benefits package defined.
Sec. 123. Health Benefits Advisory Committee.
Sec. 124. Process for adoption of recommendations; adoption of benefit standards.

Hopefully it works out as one would expect it to.

Thanks for the info.

"I think it would be a good idea to make insurance independent of work. Build in hardship clause into all insurance plans via the insurer."

I have to say, that is a really good idea man... I would say send it to your congressman... but depending on which part of the Houston area you are from you may be under Ted Poe... and it would do no good sending it to him...

Someone should be presented with that idea though, it is a good one.

If you know someone you can present it. Anyone can. I don't care to have any sort of credit.

Be my guest and share it at will.

HAHA! Too bad reality proves you wrong- it was a blue collar protest.........

DOH... face to palm charlie... I got a good laugh out of that at your expense, thank you.

Just like democrats are not unified thinking that the health care suggestions are great?

Very well said, fix what is broken...don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

rmann, that is one of the many things they are trying to do with the insurance exchange part of this bill. They are trying to make it to where you have more options and you can buy the coverage the best fits you from who ever you want from where ever you want. This was a republican idea, and it was a good idea, so it was incorporated. Competition fosters the absolute best solutions for consumers, and right now we do not have competition in the insurance markets.

President Obama specifically outlined this in his speech the other week, and he gave credit to the opposition for it as well. This bill, HR3200, is going to open insurance options. If your state forces certain types of coverage, you are going to have fight that out with them, there is nothing in the reform bill that will prevent this, and there is nothing in it that will mandate this behavior either, the only thing it mandates is basic health coverage which is pretty much up to the state to decide what that is.

I think the Lame Liberals are instigators of more problems than healing.

Yes! Play the race card! It's not about disagreeing with Obama, it's all about bigotry! Remember: Dissent=Bigotry. It is interesting how the leftist nut jobs view citizens excercising their free speech rights as dangerous, bigoted individuals. They view thesee folks as threats. When conservatives disagree with the status quo, it's racism. When liberals disgaree, it's "tolerance."

Using race is retarded.

For protesting (which you have no proof of) or to suggest that someone else is protesting for.

Comparing Obama to Hitler? Seriously? If you want to talk policy, lets do that, but these kind of comparisons are idiotic, recklessly ignorant and, yes, bigoted. Until someone provides a logical argument as to why healthcare for all is not good, I will side with the context of this country down through history and qualify any argument against Obama as bigotry. The simple fact that so many people do not want to talk about the obvious reasons for what this 'outrage' is based is biased. You cannot ignore this countries history when it comes to the treatment of minorities. To do so is just naive.

If he was white you'd still state bigotry?

Well, considering the damage done by the previous administration and the overall lack of concern shown in light of it, I'm under the opinion that the level of ignorance that is being displayed would not happen if the President was white.

You mean anyone doing this to a white man wouldn't be a bigot. Because the white man, Bush, deserved said treatment that he got from the democrats.

Because you can't use Republicans to prove your point via Republican President. You'd have to use Democrats.....and they protested and they did all the same things.

Let's all remember that the Clintons tried to do this health reform years earlier and did it work? No. Was it because of bigotry?

Ah, ok, let's go with that line of thinking then. The difference being, Bush in large part deserved a lot of the criticism he faced in light of his presidential performance during his term. Obama has only been in office for 7 months. There standard here is clearly different. As far as Clinton goes, he did not, by far, receive the level of rank hostility that Obama has. While Clinton, of course, did endure some ill treatment when it came to his attempt at providing healthcare, but the lack of civility, decorum and quite frankly overall respect for the office of the president is at unprecedented levels. If the argument was about policy, then fine. Criticism on that ground is all in the game of politics. But it is not. And it is again naive to simply ignore the rants of conservative spokespersons, such as Beck and Limbaugh and say this has not had an affect on a group of people's perception of the president. As I stated before if and when I hear a logical argument as to why we shouldn't have healthcare for everyone, then cool. I have no problem talking to anyone about their concerns. But, as these so called protests have shown, it is not about logic, decorum or even reason, which are all tell tale signs of bigotry, especially in light of the inequality that continues to exist in our country today. You simply cannot ignore that context.

Then he shouldn't have become President....if he can't handle it and the crowd of people in the Church of Obama couldn't handle it.....maybe he should have not tossed his hat into this seventh ring of hell.

I don't buy the logical claim...it's said too much and justifies tossing out anything you don't like by calling it crazy.

Also no one has ever stated that health care should just stay the same. There are problems and many have agreed. They just don't think that Obama has the right plan.

He doesn't. If he looked towards Japan and use their health care a as a foundation for America to build upon. Europe and Canada's way sucks....and will NOT work here.

Ha, who said he can't handle it? Black Americans have been dealing with bigotry for centuries. It's not a matter of what he can and can't handle, so that comment is just irrelevant. It just needs to be called what it is.

Ha, many people throw out logic because they are tired of hearing it. I'm not surprised you take the same route. Conversely, ignoring bigotry is a big part of the problem. It's interesting seeing what side of that coin you fall on.

It's politics. Of course people have disagreements. But reading the actual policy or even listening to what Obama says debunks many of the arguments these 'protesters' have. As any one will tell you, I don't have a problem with conflict on legitimate grounds. However, calling Obama a socialist, communist and comparing him to Hitler is not what I would call legitimate or constructive. Ha, maybe you would...

As far as that last statement goes, you just have no idea what you're talking about. While direct application of whatever countries healthcare system will not work, of course, blatant ignorant criticism of those systems is, well, foolish.

This conversation is boring my JJ, so this is the last comment I will make concerning it. When you have something relevant to add to the debate, I will respond in kind. Have a good one.

And that is how the people who claim there is not logical disagreement end conversations....

....I'll alk to you when you're more logical....

...no. You say that because you don't want anyone to disagree with Obama or you'll cal them a racist.

Terrible actions.

The fact you talk in circles is the reason I stopped. You're just not offering anything to the conversation other than biased personal views, which lack any sort of context other than the "Church of Obama" line. You're just not listening to what I am saying. Disagreements are fine with me. Playing devil's advocate with no context, substance or point is just boring and unnecessary.

You are offering NOTHING but they are racist. You're not even paying attention to what they are saying. You automatically jump to liberal talking points about how they don't want to change anything.

It's like you don't have a single thought that doesn't come from Keith himself.

Ha, you're rebuttals are bordering on the ridiculous, JJ. Every point that you have made or presented I have offered a counter point. If you can't see that, then you are just being willfully blind. It's interesting that you call me a liberal, when in actuality I have not used any of their dogma in the conversing. Ha, I don't even watch Keith. I'm just a socially aware citizen that sees what is happening, and has been happening for quite a while in our country. If you choose to deny even the possibility that some of these 'protests' are motivated by his color, then you are simply denying the obvious. It's pretty basic.

I'm just mocking your opinion of generalizing an entire group of protesters WHO are against someone you love and blindly defend.

Apparently only your criticisms of Obama matter.

Do tell us what he's doing wrong since you're the only one that has any knowledge on what congress is talking about and what Obama plans to do.

Please....teach us your knowledge.

LOL, even more assumptions. At what point did I even imply that I love and defend Obama blindly? You're assuming that without actually reading what I am asserting. And again you assume that I am generalizing when I clearly I am not. As I stated early some, not all, some of these protesters I believe are motivated by bigotry. Read what I am saying. And why do I say that you ask? Because a lot the these claims being made against healthcare, i.e. socializing healthcare are ridiculous and not based on reason at all.

Furthermore, haha, I have made no assertions that I know more than anyone else. If you feel threatened by my knowledge and my ability to make a cohesive thought, then that is something I cannot help JJ. And I will gladly discuss any part of Obama's administration. Present something that you have misgivings about and I will address it.

However, I am still waiting for you to acknowledge that some of his opponents, some, JJ, some, are motivated negatively by his color. This is the reality of of American culture. It's ugly and unpleasant, I know, but it happens, still, everyday. If you want to have an honest debate, we need to be honest about the kind of country we live in.

I have hardly heard any racist comments and I will NOT give you the word SOME as an ok word.

I will give you a fraction of a little.

Few.

Minute.

Not some.

In order for it to be some you'd have to have more examples of it other than you're assumptions that you have and don't like others to harbor.

You don't.

You have a feeling.....and then tell me I'm not being reasonable even though I'm not using feeling to tell you that you're wrong about some.

We can quip about this word vs. that word, but the point is that it happens. And talking into the account the bigotry that we have seen from his campaign and also in these recent town hall meetings, it's foolish to assume that because you haven't 'heard' anything. You're simply in denial, JJ. The reality of it is staring you in the face, but because you 'feel' that's not the case, you won't give it credence, despite substantial evidence to the contrary.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/12/AR2008051203014....

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26803840/

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/09/MNB313DUTE.DTL

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080407/younge

http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2009/08/200982075754210254.html

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2054917/concern_for_health_care_or_raci...

http://rawstory.com/blog/2009/08/watch-at-forum-white-man-destroys-black-womans-...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/12/taxpayer-march-on-washing_n_284477.html...

And?

That has nothing to do with the people at this event.

You can't use other people to denounce these people. I want examples from this protest.

Now we are getting somewhere. These examples are not valid because what? They support the premise that bigotry has been expressed against Obama at every step of his presidency and his campaign, establishing a link between the behavior displayed before and during his campaign and, as I see you did not actually read, the last link which is concerning the protests this weekend. If you cannot or perhaps will not acknowledge the similarities in ignorant behavior then I don't know what else to tell you. You, like many other people in America just don't want to see the truth. This is called willful ignorance, and if that is what you choose, that is your decision.

You and people like you make the problem worse.

Instead of talking about the issues, because you're afraid, you'd rather speak about who is against what race.

You talked about focus. You can't even focus on the issues. You have to focus on what they believe and think about another race. Not even ALL or SOME do that....a few do that.

ISSUE of health care is important is it not?

If it is then that is what you should be focusing on and discussing instead of altering it to some sort of a race talk that you WILL NOT budge on because you're so SURE there's enough people to make this a big deal.

You don't care about health care. You care about making a big deal about race.

Ha, ah yes, the obligatory accusations about what I care about and don't. I find it interesting that you have yet to detail anything substantial these protesters are saying, but yet defend them so fervently. Look it's pretty basic, JJ. These protesters and the same people who share there views are making no attempts to say anything relevant about healthcare. They are just using their rights as citizens to express ignorance in the most ridiculous ways possible. It is not difficult to connect this movement if you want to call it with the theme of ignorance that has followed Obama since he has first declared he was president. The overall ignorance combined with the hostility displayed make it easy to determine what this really is. You can call me all the names, expound ignorantly about what you think you know about me and my political views, because quite simply, you have no idea what you are talking about. But I'm used to dealing with ignorance. If you want to separate the obvious from the healthcare debate, then that is your right. But the facts simply speak for themselves wether you agree with them or not.

You are the problem.

You want to blame them but you are agitating the problem.

OMG race wawawa....

making it worse.

You've yet to solve it. You've yet to make it peaceful. You've yet to do anything that remotely shows you care to help them get over that. You just want to punch them in the face.

Giggle all you want to but if you're not helping...you're harming.

And I don't care to defend them. I wouldn't protest Obama. I didn't protest Bush. It's a waste of time. I think MOST protests are stupid...period. Except for a very FEW things.....very few...notice I didn't state some exceptions because that's far too many.

I don't label them as stupid and dumb and a waste of time, though. People protest because they have an issue with someone or something and if you don't address and you laugh at them and move on...well...you make it worse.

They'll just do it again.

They are not stupid and they are not a waste of time.

I can't stand people that support Obama like you do by dismissing arguments stating they don't know what they are talking about. That's not addressing anything. That's just stating OMG you're wrong.

Why? Because you're crazy.

That's not a good why.

And you want a good debate. You spew more BS in this thread than I've seen from you in really long time.

Address the issues is what you want, but you don't deliver.

You are not doing as you want others to do.

LOL, so you admit you have a problem with the generalized idea of what you think I am rather than the actual issue itself. What a cop out. I have called no one stupid or advocating violence in anyway. You're just desperate to glean some type of relevance to what you're saying, you just start making wild claims. This is what is called ignorance and hypocrisy. The only context I have asserted is that they are motivated by bigotry, and provided plenty of reading to support that claim. You have done nothing but simply complain and throw out unsubstantiated personal views. Ironically, ha, this is very similar to the protesters themselves.

Ha..it's funny you assume more than you listen.

Restate what I'm talking about right or you've ended this conversation because you can't seem to have one with me. You're having one with who you think you're talking to.

Ha, you're not saying anything JJ. That's my point. You just went on this tirade of how you don't like 'people who support Obama like me' and this post has nothing to do with supporting Obama. I said, again, these protesters are in my view motivated by bigotry. That's it. I'm not going off on some wild tangent with every post generalizing about what I think I know about someone else. My premise is pretty basic. Stay on task. If you don't like me, message me. But you still haven't said anything relevant on the topic.

Wrong. I have been relevant. You've been NOTHING but insulting and presumptionous as well as totally and annoyingly pretentious.

Watch and learn how this works and maybe you'll actually learn something other than tell people what you know--when you really don't know nearly as much as you allow people to assume.

You're Bill or Sean or Glenn....you know those names...you sure are emulating who you don't like.

For all your shouting about how we should stay on task you went everywhere you wanted and paid attention to nothing I've said.

You are stating that there are people that don't like Obama because of the color of his skin. They don't like the health care reform that Obama has pushed for and congress has debated over (even taking some Republican ideas and implementing them) because he's behind it. If he were not Obama and he were someone like Bush they wouldn't have a problem because they just see someone they don't like in office and therefore will not like anything he's touched because he has black cooties.

They also lack the basic knowledge of what is in the proposals and refuse to learn anything about them and therefore go off points that other people have told them. They also would rather be angry than talk about what they think is wrong and suggest something else that would help.

So how easy that is.

Right now you're really insulting and hateful and I don't think you're even human....just a vindictive little typist.

People like you make this world worse for pointing the finger and blaming others for the problems that are here.....not even offering to solve them or discuss them. You just want to blame.

And then you complain about the problems you're agitating.

You're not paying attention to what I've said.

You once said that you like to have discussions. I'm seriously doubting it right now.

And this might be the last time you have a decent conversation with me. You better chose your words wisely or the next we talk....there will be bombs dropping in forms of words.

I would think twice before you make another snide remark.

Again, such generalizations and then threats. Interesting. We already know that a lot of people protesting lack knowledge of the bill. This is obvious. I am more concerned with why the continue to cling their ignorance. As as there has been a theme of bigotry surrounding Obama's entire presidency and campaign, I think it is safe to assume their resistance is possible based in bigotry. If you want simply dismiss that, you can do that. But I will not. This is not hateful. This is expressing my opinion. I have not insulted anyone and it is your perception that I am pretentious. You continue to meander off the topic into personal attacks, which is fine. As I stated earlier I am used to such things. If sharing my opinion is making me vindictive, pretentious, or whatever else you want to claim, then you are entitled to believe that. You can attempt to intimidate, threaten, demean, etc as much as you want, but I'm going to keep expressing my opinion until I see something that requires me to rethink my premise. I know what you're saying. I just don't agree because you don't take the context of what has happened in Obama's campaign previously into account. You ignore the obvious to support this idea that people are being civil and even reasonable in their anger towards Obama's plan, and they clearly are not. If you choose not speak to me that is your choice. And please... let's see these aforementioned bombs...

You are so full of bs

and

you LIED to me.

You're also subtly insulting pretending you're not insulting while making attacks. I can read and I do understand what you've stated so don't pretend that you're so clean with your words.

And while I understand your point of view you cannot understand mine.

You're just as bad as you assume the protesters are.

I just can't believe you lied to me.

You won't even fix it.

Pride before the fall.

Ok JJ so we're back to the personal attacks. So predictable. If you think I am insulting you, that is you're perception. And I completely understand. I just don't agree.

Hey hombre76. Thanks for the words, but I know what JJ is. Ha, we kind of have a love/hate relationship. I don't mind who has the last word really, but honestly sometimes I just want to see how deep the rabbit hole goes, so to speak. But I appreciate the heads up nonetheless...

Very well.

This is a question I would like to ask all of them. Where was the financial responsibility while Bush was having off budget unnecessary wars? Why did they make the medicare bill a give away to big pharma when they refused to allow the federal government to negotiate lower drug prices like the VA. Where were th ese racists when Halliburton was stealing the taxpayers blind and the Republicans refused to investigate it?

Yes! Play the race card! When your argument falls flat, go to Plan B- The race card! Works every time!

hahaha!