Fox News basic math via their graphics

[dank69]

But its not based on the GOP version. There are substantial differences between the bills.

Its like saying Windows is based on MacOS because they both have a mouse cursor.

That is your argument now? The GOP plan and the ACA share one minute detail?

 

[TerryMathews]

That is your argument now? The GOP plan and the ACA share one minute detail?

Well, not literally one. They aren't as similar as you are trying so desperately to convince people that they are.

 

[TerryMathews]

Just going by the link you posted: I'm sure you are some kind of expert on the bill and didn't google that. I guess to you, having something read to you is the same as discussing it.

You're making my point for me. Why did the Senate not take it up again?

Come on, its not hard.

 

[dank69]

You're making my point for me. Why did the Senate not take it up again?

Come on, its not hard.

Terry, this is way off topic and has been for some while. Your problem is simple. You think just because a bill never got voted on that automatically means the majority of GOP were against it. That isn't how the real world works. The bill was never even given a chance. There was no debate. It never got to any point that anybody could say if they were for or against it. If you want to lean on that weak argument be my guest, it isn't like I can convince you otherwise.

You similarly think that just because the Dems changed things that the bill is no longer based on the GOP version. Again, patently retarded, and again, keep living in lala land where the minute you change any design it is no longer based on the original.

I'm not wasting any more time with you in this thread. It is pointless. You aren't going to change your mind no matter how much evidence you receive.

 

[TerryMathews]

I'm not wasting any more time with you in this thread. It is pointless. You aren't going to change your mind no matter how much evidence you receive.

Pot, meet kettle.

You are right about one thing: you aren't going to change my mind any more than I am going to change yours.

The difference is though, I'm not the one saying how great this law is out of one side of my mouth and saying it's a Republican idea out of the other.

Finally, once again, you are making your point for me: the Chaffee bill wasn't given a chance because its a stupid idea. Bills are given a chance when they have a majority of support. This is simply common sense. We knew that in 1993. Why you all picked up this terrible idea and ran with it, I'll never understand. Just stop saying its ours. Its yours now, please own up to it.

 

[dank69]

Pot, meet kettle.

You are right about one thing: you aren't going to change my mind any more than I am going to change yours.

The difference is though, I'm not the one saying how great this law is out of one side of my mouth and saying it's a Republican idea out of the other.

Almost 11k posts and I have never once claimed this law is great, or even good. All I've ever done is refute false attacks, but to conservatives that makes me a left-wing hack. Anyone who doesn't buy into the right-wing propaganda is a left-wing hack.

 

[TerryMathews]

Almost 11k posts and I have never once claimed this law is great, or even good. All I've ever done is refute false attacks, but to conservatives that makes me a left-wing hack. Anyone who doesn't buy into the right-wing propaganda is a left-wing hack.

Glad to know you agree with us that this is a terrible law.

 

[dank69]

Glad to know you agree with us that this is a terrible law.

Putting words in my mouth. Par for the course for an intellectually dishonest piece of shit.

 

[TerryMathews]

Putting words in my mouth. Par for the course for an intellectually dishonest piece of shit.

So, if it's not great or even good (your exact terms) how would you describe it?

Noticed you'd rather pick nits than actually state a position. Par for the course for an intellectually dishonest piece of shit.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

I guess reading comprehension is hard for you eh? The bottom three comparisons are cost estimates not attributes of the bill and therefore should be excluded.

Rerun your math and I'm sure you'll get the same result I did.

You seem to be operating under the same mistaken impression other posters are. I don't care if Democrats have moved to the right or not. My only point was that the ACA is different than the Chaffee bill.

Its your plan you obviously like your plan. Please keep your plan, we don't want it. We didn't vote for it, you passed it. It's yours.

It's obvious you are clueless, since you don't even know my opinion of the ACA, nor if I even like it. So I'd suggest you don't put words in my mouth about what you think I think about the ACA. It just shows your ignorance.

My point stands...if you look at the initial post of mine you decided to go after, I was using the ACA of yet another example of how the democrats have moved to the right in the past 20 years. Your own argument supports my claim. Don't know why you are trying to go into a 3 page semantic argument that is irrelevant to what I was saying.

I honestly don't care about the semantics. The facts are the ACA and the 1993 GOP proposal share A LOT of the same ideas, including most of the most important ones. Nitpicking over everything else I will leave to you in your attempts to deflect from my point, which you actually helped make. The same group of GOP members that supported the 1993 proposal are now against the ACA, when the majority of the bills are the same....GOP hypocrisy at it's finest.

And as usual, the trolls like matt1970 and DSF have once again made wild unsubstantiated claims, refused to defend them in an shape or fashion, and bailed out after making their blatant lies. So typical for them and many others on this forum. But they did leave you to argue semantics for 3 pages, well done.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Why is this so important for you to believe? So that you can rationalize a worldview where Republicans are considered radical extremists?

Can you rationalize a view that the GOP are considered radical extremists?

Still waiting on you to provide ANY evidence that the Dems have moved to the left in the past 20 years. I guess you don't like to admit the truth.

You keep claiming this, you would think it would be easy to provide evidence to back up your claims. Instead, you just merrily troll along.

 

[dank69]

So, if it's not great or even good (your exact terms) how would you describe it?

I have stated in the past that I don't know enough to know if this law will turn out good, bad or if it will accomplish nothing. Of course for an idiot like you there are only three options: great, good and terrible.

Noticed you'd rather pick nits than actually state a position. Par for the course for an intellectually dishonest piece of shit.

Reminding you that I've never said what you claim I've said is picking nits? Nice try.

You claim my position is A
I tell you my position is not A
You accuse me of not stating my position and that makes me dishonest

News flash, asshole, you never ASKED me what my position is. Ask me and I will tell you. I have nothing to hide. No go back to your bubble where the ACA is not based on GOP ideas, the Dems are moving to the left, and the GOP hasn't shifted so far right that they now call Paul Ryan a RINO.