Ok, how many times is Congress going to try to pass this bill while Bush is in office? Bush has taken a stance; he has vetoed this bill in the past & will continue to veto it as long as it raises taxes. With this knowledge, why not spend time on other issues now & wait until the next president in office to try this bill again?
Health care is an important issue in this day in age, don't get me wrong. However, at this current time, I don't see how sending it back to Bush is going to get anything done. If the 2008 elections weren't so close my opinion would be completely different; but, right now, instead of trying to push something that isn't working, use that time wisely. If Clinton wins, congratulations - health care for everyone. If Giuliani wins, good luck.
Am I the only one that notices how pointless some bills are? Homosexual marriage & abortion are two controversial issues that shouldn’t be such a big problem. Wasn’t this country sought out because it offered freedom & a way out of scrutiny? Well, all those people who are so against homosexual marriage & abortion, how do these two issues directly affect you?
1. Keeping homosexuals from getting married is not going to get rid of homosexuality, sorry. You are going to see homosexual couples in public regardless if they are allowed to get married or not. What will keeping homosexuals from getting married prove? That someone could pass a bill … wow, that’s great.
2. Is getting an abortion going to ruin your life? What makes you think you can control what someone else does with their body? I may not agree with Hilary’s view of abortion or abortion at all but what makes it anyone else’s business but the person who has to make the decision?
3. Gun Control [just thought I'd add this in]. If someone takes the right steps to legally buy a gun, register it & get the correct permits, why can’t they carry it as a concealed weapon? “Guns were made to kill people” is the argument I hear a lot. Unless you are threatening someone’s life, you don’t have to worry about them shooting you – problem solved. School shootings, drive bys’, etc. are usually done by people who don’t follow these necessary steps. Virginia Tech is brought up in this situation – do you think that many people would’ve died if they were still allowed to legally carry concealed weapons? If I want to protect myself & I do take the legal actions, I should be allowed to.
I’m really tired of the people of America trying to control everyone else’s life. If no one is physically hurting you, let them live their life. When they overstep legal boundaries, and then get involved.
As far as UHC [I got really off topic, I apologize] if you have such a big opinion of it, show it in the polls. If you actually care about getting/preventing UHC vote for the correct people – don’t just leave it up to Congress; they obviously aren’t getting too close.
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Childrens-Health.html?_r=1&hp&oref...
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
You do realize UHC - as in Universal - would affect everyone in this country, right? Not just the "correct people" who "need help"? They take away your current plan, raise your taxes, and lower the quality of care in the country with the best medical care in the world? I'll pay my high premiums, thank you very much.
This is an issue that affects everyone. The private health care system saved my mother's life. It caught her type IV brain tumor early. She received an MRI the day after she went in for "sinus headaches" (would never happen in a country with UHC, it takes weeks to schedule an MRI) because of an alert private health care provider not inundated with patients, and received top level care because she required it from a surgeon out of our insurance company's system. We appealed and won. That's the way the screening system works.
I'll be damned if I'll let the government take it away from me and countless others whose lives have been saved or touched by private health care. It's the best in the world. I am a crusader for private health care. It has it's issues, but socialist UHC is not the answer.
I never said I was an advocate of UHC - I actually oppose it if you must know - I focused more on the fact that the bill keeps coming up with no progress, thus wasting time Congress could've used for other bills.
Instead of trying to get UHC [something I think is ubsurd, I don't think it is my obligation to pay for someone else's expenses & lower the standards of the provided health care] Congress could've been reforming the NCLB Act or getting rid of it for that matter. Basically, doing something progressive with their time instead of trying to fight a losing battle.
Just pointing out your use of the phrase "correct people" - I found it a little bit odd.
Then I sorta went off on a tangent relaying my personal agenda against the issue. I apologize if you felt I was attacking you or your blog - that was not intentional.
I agree with you about Congress - it seems they are completely useless these days. It's been months since they actually accomplished something.
Oh, I see! I was saying the "correct people" as in presidential candidate for what ever your stance may be, whether it be advocate of or prevention of. Sorry that wasn't clearer!
Don't worry, I like it when people have passion & reason for beliefs instead of just following the heard [ie parents, friends, what they see on tv]
I agree about Congress and Bush. It's like trying to get a horse to pull a five ton boulder. You can do whatever you want to the horse, but it's not going to move that boulder an inch.
Now, homosexuality. I don't think it's so much as wanting to get rid of homosexuality. Well, for me at least it's not. Love whoever you want and be happy, yay. But to me marriage truly is a thing for a man and a woman, and that's my personal opinion. I am not going to throw my Bible at anyone and scream "LOOK! HOMOSEXUALITY IS A SIN!!!!!!!11111OMG." That's for God [or whoever your higher being is] to decide. Not me or anyone else. I do feel that homosexuals should get their own kind of union. A civil union is what gives a person all their "marriage" rights, not the actual marriage ceremony. That just means that it's accepted by the church. I don't think you should force something that has had it's own rules and principles for thousands of years to suddenly start accepting a different view just because "we're in a modern age."
Abortion. Again, I don't want to control someone else's body or take away their rights. I just think that it should be taken into consideration that after a certain amount of time, there is actually life in the womb, and taking that away is as good as murder. Abortion is fine, as long as it's within limits.
Gun control. We actually agree on that, heh.
I tried to refrain from using "you" so it wouldn't seem like I was attacking YOU. I'm just throwing in my two cents, not trying to stage a personal attack against you so I hope that's not how this came across...
Thanks for not attacking me =)
I know what you mean - I may not support/believe in homosexual marriage or abortion, but I don't think it's my place to tell someone what is right or wrong. Plus, I hate that government, of all things, is going to control these issues that are so personal. I'm not a fan of giving our government so much control over our lifes - I think they have enough as it is!