View Single Post
Old 08-07-2009, 06:36 PM   #448
Mavdog
Diamond Member
 
Mavdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
Mavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud ofMavdog has much to be proud of
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DirkFTW View Post
Well, the whole point of using Barney Frank's answer was to show it IS NOT innuendo and unsubstantiated... Mr. Frank was speaking to allay fears that the government was abandoning a single-payer system. After reading the bill, he assured the questioner that this program is the best way to get a single-payer system because the votes aren't there to get it directly.
yet barney frank isn't the author of the bill, nor is he a co-sponsor, he is not on either of the committees that are working on the bill.

tell me, where in the bill is there a reference to a single payer system, or any mechanism to establish a single payer system?

you won't be able to find anything about a single payer system because the bill establishes a multi payer system. it does not replace the existing providors, it suppliments the existing providors.

let's deal with the facts. the facts are the bill is not a single payer system.

Quote:
As to Obama's answer in 2008 and the context, Hillary was slamming him in an ad by juxtaposing his 2003 statements with his incompatible answers during a primary debate. Obama dodges the incompatibility by listing weird excuses ("couldn't hear" and "clip too short"). His 2003 position is that even in our current system with its current legacy, single payer can still be achieved if they can take back (i) the White House, (ii) the Senate, and (iii) the House. (Check, check, and check.) It's not a hypothetical "if we were to start from scratch in a vacuum." But because he wanted to distinguish from Hillary (and she caught him in an inconsistency), he had to take the nuanced position in 2008 that his 2003 comments were only for a theoretical, make-believe setting.

Yes, the chopping of the videos is less than ideal, but the spirit of the comments are still there. If these clips aren't germane to the discussion, not much will be.
it's not only "less than ideal", it's not the issue.

the issue is what the bill says. the bill says keep the existing system and add a public source for the uninsured. it does not mandate a single payer system, and does not require the end of the private providors that currently insure millions of americans.

obama has been open and clear that if he were to begin a system he would choose a single payer program. he has also been very open and clear that he is a realist, the system exists already so it is not his choice on what system to have, he says live with what we have got a go forward with that structure.

that's the "spirit of the comments".

Last edited by Mavdog; 08-07-2009 at 06:37 PM.
Mavdog is offline   Reply With Quote