The Politics of Being Liberal or Conservative...

[Evil_K_Man]

I also wanted to point out your lack of understanding around ACA...you seem to think its political (which it is in some cases), but the majority of people who understand it the way I do oppose it from an ECONOMICAL standpoint.

They can care less about the conservative/liberal mumbo jumbo you are trying to assign it.

[bulbasaur]

*yawns* 

1.  You wrote, "Stop quoting history (ugh!!!)" You seem upset that the facts do not support you.  Remember, you brought up the 43 Republicans in the Senate in 1993.  You failed to do the math and realize the 57 Democrats.   Which one of us lacks the basic comprehension of history? 

2.  You wrote, "You make it sound like ALL democracts were for the bill.  THEY WEREN'T!!!."   So you admit that the Republicans had very little to do with the Democrats' failure.  My point is proven. 

3.  You wrote, "DOMA…yup…good cop out reply." Yup, good cop out rebuttal.   

4.  You wrote, "I said that ACA addresses ACCESSIBILITY, not cost."  So you admit that ACA is flawed.  My point is proven. 

5.  You wrote, "I support it not because I’m a liberal but because I believe that Healthcare should be ACCESSIBLE to everybody." That's good for you.  However, look at the politics (which is the topic of the thread).  There is a clear divide between Republicans and Democrats.

You seem to think that this is about you, but it's not.  Politicians win...again. 

Stop quoting history (ugh!!!), since you seem to lack basic comprehension regarding it.

You make it sound like ALL democracts were for the bill.  THEY WEREN'T!!!.  Some introduced their own healthcare versions in opposition to the Clintons especially since they didn't agree with the employer mandate. This 1993 Healhcare faced so much opposition not only from conservatives, but including interest groups such AAPS.  There was so much litigation that it was pushed to the next congressional session at which point the Republicans controlled BOTH houses and defeated the Bill.

DOMA…yup…good cop out reply.

I do understand ACA, in fact because of it I had to build in an additional $5.0M into my budget this year, so please don’t go there.  To my point earlier, if you had read and comprehended it, I said that ACA addresses ACCESSIBILITY, not cost.  I support it not because I’m a liberal but because I believe that Healthcare should be ACCESSIBLE to everybody.

[bulbasaur]

You wrote, "I also wanted to point out your lack of understanding around ACA...you seem to think its political (which it is in some cases), but the majority of people who understand it the way I do oppose it from an ECONOMICAL standpoint."

1.  So you admit that it is also political.  My point is proven.

2.  So you admit that the ACA is flawed.  My point is proven. 

You keep accusing me of lacking comprehension and understanding, yet you keep admitting that my argument is correct.   

I also wanted to point out your lack of understanding around ACA...you seem to think its political (which it is in some cases), but the majority of people who understand it the way I do oppose it from an ECONOMICAL standpoint.

They can care less about the conservative/liberal mumbo jumbo you are trying to assign it.

[Evil_K_Man]

*yawns* 

1.  You wrote, "Stop quoting history (ugh!!!)" You seem upset that the facts do not support you.  Remember, you brought up the 43 Republicans in the Senate in 1993.  You failed to do the math and realize the 57 Democrats.   Which one of us lacks the basic comprehension of history? 

2.  You wrote, "You make it sound like ALL democracts were for the bill.  THEY WEREN'T!!!."   So you admit that the Republicans had very little to do with the Democrats' failure.  My point is proven. 

3.  You wrote, "DOMA…yup…good cop out reply." Yup, good cop out rebuttal.   

4.  You wrote, "I said that ACA addresses ACCESSIBILITY, not cost."  So you admit that ACA is flawed.  My point is proven. 

5.  You wrote, "I support it not because I’m a liberal but because I believe that Healthcare should be ACCESSIBLE to everybody." That's good for you.  However, look at the politics (which is the topic of the thread).  There is a clear divide between Republicans and Democrats.

You seem to think that this is about you, but it's not.  Politicians win...again.

1. Yes, and you assumed the rest of the Democrats supported it which they didn't so not only was your math off, it was poorly thought out.

2. No, those are your words. I never said Republicans had little to do with it.  When people can't debate properly they have a tendency to imagine things up.

3. You started it...maybe if you debated the topic we wouldn't be replying to each other with cop outs.

4. I never admited it was perfect and not flawed... (Reading comprehension issues?)

5.  Uhh, ok...thanks Mr. Obvious.

Sometimes you win sometimes you don't...

[Evil_K_Man]

You wrote, "I also wanted to point out your lack of understanding around ACA...you seem to think its political (which it is in some cases), but the majority of people who understand it the way I do oppose it from an ECONOMICAL standpoint."

1.  So you admit that it is also political.  My point is proven.

2.  So you admit that the ACA is flawed.  My point is proven. 

You keep accusing me of lacking comprehension and understanding, yet you keep admitting that my argument is correct.   

Wow, when you can't debate properly you just word play and twist things around to your own imaginings?  How quaint…

[bulbasaur]

*yawns*  Let's have you argue against yourself.

1.  You wrote, "...but I think which group holds power does influence some outcomes."  Yet, you admit that the Democrats couldn't even agree among themselves.  Why is this the Republicans fault?  Answer the question.

2.  You admit that it's not entirely the Republicans fault in the 1990's.  So, your first assessment is not entirely correct.  My point is proven. 

3.  You brought up DOMA.  Ask yourself, why do politicians even care?  They care more about this than polygamy.  Why?

4.  So you admit that I am correct.  Reading comprehension issues? 

5.  If it is obvious, then why don't you get it?

Sometimes you win and sometimes you don't. 

1. Yes, and you assumed the rest of the Democrats supported it which they didn't so not only was your math off, it was poorly thought out.

2. No, those are you words. I never said Republicans had little to do with it.  When people can't debate properly they have a tendency to imagine things up.

3. You started it...maybe if you debated the topic we wouldn't be replying to each other with cop outs.

4. I never admited it was perfect and not flawed... (Reading comprehension issues?)

5.  Uhh, ok...thanks Mr. Obvious.

Sometimes you win sometimes you don't...

[bulbasaur]

Wow, when you can't debate properly you just attack the person.  How quaint...

You don't seem to realize that you actually admitted that I am correct.  You're just not happy about it. 

Wow, when you can't debate properly you just word play and twist things around to your own imaginings?  How quaint…

[Evil_K_Man]

*yawns*  Let's have you argue against yourself.

1.  You wrote, "...but I think which group holds power does influence some outcomes."  Yet, you admit that the Democrats couldn't even agree among themselves.  Why is this the Republicans fault?  Answer the question.

2.  You admit that it's not entirely the Republicans fault in the 1990's.  So, your first assessment is not entirely correct.  My point is proven. 

3.  You brought up DOMA.  Ask yourself, why do politicians even care?  They care more about this than polygamy.  Why?

4.  So you admit that I am correct.  Reading comprehension issues? 

5.  If it is obvious, then why don't you get it?

Sometimes you win and sometimes you don't.

Let me give you an example of how you debate...

You can't seem to read basic english and comprehend it...My point is proven.

[Evil_K_Man]

Wow, when you can't debate properly you just attack the person.  How quaint...

You don't seem to realize that you actually admitted that I am correct.  You're just not happy about it.

Word playing isn't a debate when you cut and paste out of context.  Its not a personal attack, its an observation.

[bulbasaur]

Facts are not a personal attack.  They're facts. 

Fact:  You said, "...I think which group holds power does influence some outcomes."
Fact:  You used the ACA as an example displaying the Demcrats' influence.
Fact:  The ACA is a poor example because Democrats once failed to pass healthcare reform in the 1990s when they had power. 

You can argue the many reasons why, but facts are facts.  Maybe your initial claim may be true, but the examples you used to support it is not. 

Word playing isn't a debate when you cut and paste out of context.  Its not a personal attack, its an observation.

[Evil_K_Man]

However, let us not digress, we should get back to the subject at hand so we can have a healthy debate.  I will highlight key words for you, since you seem to skim over them.

1.  I said "I think which group holds power does influence some outcomes"...the operative part of this sentence is the last part where I mentioned "influence SOME outcomes" In basic English comprehension this statement says that a desired outcome "may" or "may not" come to fruition.  A perfect example is ACA, which passed, and the healthcare reform laws in the 1990s, which didn't.  As we can see one passed due to a groups power over one that did not, even when they were in power.  So if we go back to that simple sentence we see that a group had SOME influence in the outcome.

2.  Yes the republicans weren’t the only opposition party, there were libertarians, and other interest groups beside from the Democrats which I had mentioned OVER and OVER and OVER again.  It fits the criteria above statement in point one since Democrats in the 90s were not able to influence the outcome.  You lose SOME you win SOME.

3.  DOMA, I brought it up because I was trying to illustrate the point that a group can control the influences of SOME outcomes…such as the Obama administration not appealing the verdict that has been in place for 17 years and still remains.

4.  No, you still have reading comprehension issues since you have a tendency to skip everything that is important and just read what you want

5.  It’s obvious, but I’m not sure how that helps your argument…which is why I didn’t bother to really think this point out.

[Evil_K_Man]

Facts are not a personal attack.  They're facts. 

Fact:  You said, "...I think which group holds power does influence some outcomes."
Fact:  You used the ACA as an example displaying the Demcrats' influence.
Fact:  The ACA is a poor example because Democrats once failed to pass healthcare reform in the 1990s when they had power. 

You can argue the many reasons why, but facts are facts.  Maybe your initial claim may be true, but the examples you used to support it is not.

Sigh...its like I'm talking to a wall.  You seem to think that the world of politics is only Democrats this and Republicans that, Liberal this Conservative that...there is a spectrum of political ideologies within those groups with EVOLVING external influences that affects their decisions.  The Clintons first initiated their healthcare reform in 1993, to when ACA passed, which was what about 20 years later? Do you honestly think the politics of the 1990s would remain the same as today?

Really?

[bulbasaur]

Sigh, it's like talking to a wall.  Do you realize that you aren't actually disagreeing with me?  Do you realize that everything you are writing is only supporting me?  You already acknowledged that I am right, and yet, you mad. 

[Evil_K_Man]

Sigh, it's like talking to a wall.  Do you realize that you aren't actually disagreeing with me?  Do you realize that everything you are writing is only supporting me?  You already acknowledged that I am right, and yet, you mad.

Here's a red ball, its round and it bounces when you throw it against a hard surface...go play with the red ball.

[bulbasaur]

However, let us not digress, we should get back to the subject at hand so we can have a healthy debate.

Here's a red ball, its round and it bounces when you throw it against a hard surface...go play with the red ball.