APP - FINALLY! Fighting the smears

Yurt said:
i called her a wimp for saying i didn't counter the "truths" when i did and then she said that she would not debate my refutations that i had to go the website to debate them....

i never merely called her points stupid, that is a lie....i gave reasons as to why the so called truths were NOT truths and i asked for specific citations which she cannot provide.....

as to the ad hom....maybe i should have simply said.....it appears you do not have the courage to debate the issues, rather, you only have the courage to post other people's talking points....i don't see how it is a straight ad hom as she was all over me for supposedly blindly accepting one and blindly criticizing the other....when that is not true, i explained myself and then asked her do the same and she said will not debate me....and instead i am to take my issues up at the link

what do you call that
Click to expand...

Post #27. Written over 6 hours ago but somehow you missed it even though you answered other posts after mine on this thread. :p
 
Yurt said:
i called her a wimp for saying i didn't counter the "truths" when i did and then she said that she would not debate my refutations that i had to go the website to debate them....

i never merely called her points stupid, that is a lie....i gave reasons as to why the so called truths were NOT truths and i asked for specific citations which she cannot provide.....

as to the ad hom....maybe i should have simply said.....it appears you do not have the courage to debate the issues, rather, you only have the courage to post other people's talking points....i don't see how it is a straight ad hom as she was all over me for supposedly blindly accepting one and blindly criticizing the other....when that is not true, i explained myself and then asked her do the same and she said will not debate me....and instead i am to take my issues up at the link

what do you call that
Click to expand...

What's wrong calling someone a wimp? Most liberals are.
 
Damocles said:
Which again, is not Fleckman. You are having a hard time with this, I understand, but there's nothing wrong with just saying, "Yes, I am a kook-aid drinking zombot!" and getting it over with.
Click to expand...

Hahahaha! Note how she did not refute any of Fleckman's summaries, only posted a list of DNC talking points which may or may not deal with what Fleckman wrote.

This is just a guy who is reading this albatross bit by bit and summarizing it. I wonder if she or anyone else can just refute point number one? How about we take these one at a time?
 
ZappasGuitar said:
So he got his info FROM the RNC. Well as long as he's not "THE" RNC, I guess Damo's got the high ground...
Click to expand...


He didn't get anything from the RNC, he is taking the time and trouble to read this himself and post a summary of what he considers to be important. You are welcome to refute just one single point he makes.
 
Watermark said:
You guys just don't care whether or not you say what is fact. All you want to do is win. You don't care about America. Republicans first!
Click to expand...



Bingo! You, sir, have hit one out of the park.
They don't give a damn about the country or the filthy tactics they use as long as Obama is beaten not only on healthcare but on everything. It must aid their psycho-sublimation brought on by the past 15 years, among other underlying problems.
 
TE=christiefan915;491594]Well, yurt, what, exactly do you want to hear? That I think RW's are stupid and gullible for not listening to both sides of the story? Okay, you've got it.
Click to expand...

i did miss this post and am answering now per your request. :)

you're generalizing....i think many of your so called RW's listen to both sides....further, there people on both sides of the aisle not listening to the other side

My opinion is the RW's are using scare tactics, outright lies, and haven't even understood the bill enough to make informed comments on its provisions. My opinion is when RW's post so-called facts from an uncredentialed hack and expect them to be taken as truth, I can post rebuttals from sites I think are more credible.
Click to expand...

the irony here is that obama is using fear tactics, yet accusing republicans or opponents of the bill of using fear tactics. you guys are running around saying this "dire" problem must be fixed or else....in fact he uses the word scary:

He added the real danger lies in failing to address the rising cost of health care that is contributing to the deficit already.


"What is truly scary, what is truly risky, is to do nothing," he said.
Click to expand...

the dems argument that this is nothing but fear tactics falls flat on its face for extreme hypocrisy


You wanted more about this claim so read below:

"Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services."

TRUTH: Pages 50-51 contain a provision stating that discrimination will not be allowed in the provision of health care services. Nowhere does the bill state that non-US citizens will be provided free health care services. The bill prohibits federal dollars from being used for undocumented immigrants.

• Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free health care services. Pants on Fire! Section 152 includes a generic nondiscrimination clause, which says insurers may not discriminate with regard to "personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services." It says nothing about "non-US citizens" or immigrants, legal or otherwise. In fact, the legislation specifically states that undocumented aliens will not be eligible for credits to help them buy health insurance, in Section 246 on page 143.
Click to expand...

thats awesome, thanks....so then "affordability credits" is the only way for anyone to get treatment under this plan? what about someone who shows up at an emergency room? great counter to that claim btw...i just wonder what affordability credits are....what they do


You said this was "just plain stupid":

"Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!"

TRUTH: This is not an "audit," it's a study. Moreover, the bill states (pp. 22-23) that the report will "include any recommendations the Commissioner deems appropriate to ensure that the law does not provide incentives for small and mid-size employers to self-insure or create adverse selection in the risk pools of large group insurers and self-insured employers." This is almost directly the opposite of the email's claim.

• Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure! False: Section 113 of the bill requires the Health Choices commissioner to conduct a study to make sure health reform does not unintentionally create incentives for businesses to self-insure or create adverse selection in the risk pools of insured plans. There is no mandated audit.
Click to expand...

that is in fact an audit....they are checking to make sure something isn't happening....an audit is an evaluation...and that is exactly what they are doing here....to fight this point is a waste of time....

I suppose by "have the kahunas to say..." you actually meant "have the cojones to say..." but it's hard to tell. You've been countered. Have at it.
Click to expand...

i thought i was being funny, but apparently not....ignore i ever tried a play on words with that, it doesn't work, fail
 
tom prendergast said:
It seems to me that you are violating your own rules by resorting to personal attack, how can others aspire to rational discourse when you provide such a bad example?
Click to expand...

He was "describing the argument", doncha know? "The argument" had its pants down and the whole entire forum of posters was laughing at "the argument".

Now I'm so nervous about posting, since Damocles said the whole entire forum lives to pounce and laugh. :rolleyes:
 
christiefan915 said:
He was "describing the argument", doncha know? "The argument" had its pants down and the whole entire forum of posters was laughing at "the argument".

Now I'm so nervous about posting, since Damocles said the whole entire forum lives to pounce and laugh. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

HOLY CRAP YOU MISSED POST 49.....AFTER YOU MADE SUCH A BIG DEAL IN TWO DIFFERENT THREADS ABOUT ME MISSING YOUR POST
 
See below.

Yurt said:
i did miss this post and am answering now per your request. :)

you're generalizing....i think many of your so called RW's listen to both sides....further, there people on both sides of the aisle not listening to the other side

Unfortunately the RW's who are listening aren't the ones getting all the publicity. Going to a town hall and screaming in the face of the legislators doesn't suggest a readiness to listen and learn. I agree that there are people on both sides who don't listen.


the irony here is that obama is using fear tactics, yet accusing republicans or opponents of the bill of using fear tactics. you guys are running around saying this "dire" problem must be fixed or else....in fact he uses the word scary:

the dems argument that this is nothing but fear tactics falls flat on its face for extreme hypocrisy

[Obama] also reiterated his determination that the plan — with a projected cost of $1 trillion over 10 years — be paid for without adding to the soaring U.S. deficit. He added the real danger lies in failing to address the rising cost of health care that is contributing to the deficit already. "What is truly scary, what is truly risky, is to do nothing," he said

I agree that both sides rely too often on scare tactics, and I've always complained about pols who project fear scenarios so far into the future that it's ridiculous. But the fact is that our country spends way too much on health care, more than any other nation, and according to a 1996 statistic, only 5% of the population accounted for more than half of the costs. Even if that number was doubled today, it still means that the overwhelming majority is facing higher and higher costs for minimal return (defining minimal return as average and ordinary services as opposed to those required to treat chronic, catastrophic, and terminal illnesses). IMO it's no more hypocrisy when it involves the dems and health care, than it is when it involves repubs and SS, for instance.

thats awesome, thanks....so then "affordability credits" is the only way for anyone to get treatment under this plan? what about someone who shows up at an emergency room? great counter to that claim btw...i just wonder what affordability credits are....what they do

The next comment referred to: "Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services." The rebuttal is that there's nothing at all in the bill that makes those people eligible for coverage. I said nothing about affordability credits.

that is in fact an audit....they are checking to make sure something isn't happening....an audit is an evaluation...and that is exactly what they are doing here....to fight this point is a waste of time....

Bottom line, what difference does it make? When I hear the word "audit" I think of an investigation of a company's books, or taking a college class without credit. The plan is using it to make sure the companies are toeing the line in regards to using incentives or finessing the risk pool. It's oversight. Again, what's the problem?

i thought i was being funny, but apparently not....ignore i ever tried a play on words with that, it doesn't work, fail
Click to expand...

If you want to spin it that way, go for it. Doesn't make sense as a play on words, but whatever floats your boat. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top