OK Im trying to understand this...

[cubeless]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
It's difficult to decide among the blizzard of retarded responses who to call an idiot first.

I never said that legislators should only have 10 minutes to look at a bill.
I never said we should just trust politicians because they are experts.

I never said that there shouldn't be time to peruse the bill before it was voted on, simply that posting it up on the internet for people who style themselves to be legislative geniuses to foam and froth incorrectly about isn't very important to me because I find it highly unlikely anything useful will come of it, and highly likely that a lot of stupid things will come of it.

If this board shows anything, it shows just how retarded the average American is when it comes to politics and what they think they know. I mean this place is supposed to represent those who are at least nominally interested in politics and the sheer amount of misinformation and absolute absurdity that is taken as 'fact' here is mind boggling. There are already plenty of groups both partisan and nonpartisan who evaluate the language in these bills to give you an understanding of what it's actually about, and despite everyone's high level of legal and policy knowledge you're almost certain to miss the various interactions between statutes or misunderstand the language, nefarious or not.

What I'm worried about has been shown to be absolutely true in the last few months as people have repeatedly been whipped into a frenzy about things that aren't even in the bills under consideration.

I'm not against releasing the bills to the general public, I just don't care much either way. There are plenty of other groups that fulfill the function of what you're going for.

since it seems that you are calling me an idiot first and second without even quoting me, let me sum up your post: "blah, blah, i'm smarter than you are, blah, blah, i just say i don't really care about the issue when someone calls bullshit on my posts..."

so make the bills simple enough for us poor dumb forum posters to understand... you battle the bullshit by being clear and succinct when you post or write a bill... excess verbosity and/or complexity in either is just trying to obscure things...

 

[Darwin333]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: brencat

Originally posted by: eskimospy
While I appreciate people's desire to see the bill, and I also understand that the Democrats promised this, I think the entire idea is foolish. What's going to happen is an explosion of insanity from left wing loonies that read sections of the bill that don't conform to the liberal agenda. This is how we got chain migration and the like.

See what I did there??

This is not a Dem or Repub issue. This is about putting an end to BOTH parties slipping pork past our noses in that "obscure legaleeze" the bills are written in and in the process driving up deficits, entitlements, and ultimately taxes.

Posting it online will give the armies of bloggers, think-tanks, and advocates out there from BOTH sides to scrutinize and argue its merits. And give us the people a couple days warning to have a phone surge to our reps to support or reject it.

Yes and what you did there has nothing to do with why the Democrats aren't publishing the bill. Lord only knows how you got 'chain migration' out of this. Anyways, despite all the press that pork gets, it accounts for a tiny fraction of US federal spending. There are way more important things to worry about.

You seem to be missing my point entirely. What will most likely happen is that bloggers, think-tanks, and advocates will intentionally distort parts of the bill to achieve their ends, leading to an explosion of crazy by ignorant people who are being led by the nose. This has already happened repeatedly in relation to this exact bill under consideration. There's absolutely nothing wrong with people finding out what's in the bill, everyone should, but posting it online in that form to people without the resources or expertise to understand it will lead to nothing useful.

I agree. The stupid peasants couldn't possibly understand whats in the bills so why should the ruling class even bother letting them try. Seriously, who the hell came up with an idea as dumb as allowing normal citizens easy access to bills that will impact their lives before it is actually voted on.

The ignorant masses need to sit back down and shut the hell up. Our rulers shall tell us how we will be ruled when they damn well feel like it.

 

[cubby1223]

Originally posted by: jonks
Still, I think it'd be ok if they did post the bills online. Lord knows no one would read them anyway.

Fox News will.

And honestly, I would rather have Fox News analyzing the legislation than the alternative of no one analyzing it in full, which is what happens in government, regardless of the letter beside who is in charge.

 

[cubeless]

Originally posted by: b0mbrman

Originally posted by: cubeless

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: eskimospy
~~~ What will most likely happen is that bloggers, think-tanks, and advocates will intentionally distort parts of the bill to achieve their ends, leading to an explosion of crazy by ignorant people who are being led by the nose. This has already happened repeatedly in relation to this exact bill under consideration. There's absolutely nothing wrong with people finding out what's in the bill, everyone should, but posting it online in that form to people without the resources or expertise to understand it will lead to nothing useful.

This.

And most likely members of Congress have no idea what the final bill will look like at this time, anyway. There are literally hundreds of pieces of legislation, parts of which may be incorporated into the final bill. If the OP is interested go to THOMAS, type in 'health care' and read to his heart's content.

The same goes for the Washington Examiner and the Heritage Foundation, or any other American. Are we really so lazy that we have to depend upon the media and political action groups for information and opinions to engage us? (Don't answer that.)

The process ain't pretty (or easy) --- never has been. There is a lot of arm twisting going on and deals being made. I'm guessing there are also some serious discussions going on between the Senate and House to avoid a protracted 'conference' on the final legislation.

heavy sigh... then they should break it down into some number of separate bills that can be understood...

y'all are really pushing it with your "just let them do what they want and we should be happy with it" attitude...

Do I have to hold your hand through every step?

click.JPG

ok... i surrender... i was of the, obviously mistaken, belief that this was discussing the fact that the changes/amendments to the posted bill were not to be posted...

that seems to be the original bill... is it actually being annotated in something like real time? i don't see timestamps...

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: cubeless
so make the bills simple enough for us poor dumb forum posters to understand... you battle the bullshit by being clear and succinct when you post or write a bill... excess verbosity and/or complexity in either is just trying to obscure things...

That can't be done any more than a lawyer could draft a "simple" merger contract between two multinational conglomerates. You're in fantasy land, and asking for an "easy to read bill" just shows how much you completely do not understand what is entailed in such laws. Sorry if that sounds elitist or condescending.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
It's difficult to decide among the blizzard of retarded responses who to call an idiot first.

I never said that legislators should only have 10 minutes to look at a bill.
I never said we should just trust politicians because they are experts.

I never said that there shouldn't be time to peruse the bill before it was voted on, simply that posting it up on the internet for people who style themselves to be legislative geniuses to foam and froth incorrectly about isn't very important to me because I find it highly unlikely anything useful will come of it, and highly likely that a lot of stupid things will come of it.

If this board shows anything, it shows just how retarded the average American is when it comes to politics and what they think they know. I mean this place is supposed to represent those who are at least nominally interested in politics and the sheer amount of misinformation and absolute absurdity that is taken as 'fact' here is mind boggling. There are already plenty of groups both partisan and nonpartisan who evaluate the language in these bills to give you an understanding of what it's actually about, and despite everyone's high level of legal and policy knowledge you're almost certain to miss the various interactions between statutes or misunderstand the language, nefarious or not.

What I'm worried about has been shown to be absolutely true in the last few months as people have repeatedly been whipped into a frenzy about things that aren't even in the bills under consideration.

I'm not against releasing the bills to the general public, I just don't care much either way. There are plenty of other groups that fulfill the function of what you're going for.

you post something reeking of arrogance and contempt for the average american, retract a bit, insult us, and then reiterate your contempt for the average american. awesome post :thumbsup:

 

[bfdd]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
It's difficult to decide among the blizzard of retarded responses who to call an idiot first.

I never said that legislators should only have 10 minutes to look at a bill.
I never said we should just trust politicians because they are experts.

I never said that there shouldn't be time to peruse the bill before it was voted on, simply that posting it up on the internet for people who style themselves to be legislative geniuses to foam and froth incorrectly about isn't very important to me because I find it highly unlikely anything useful will come of it, and highly likely that a lot of stupid things will come of it.

If this board shows anything, it shows just how retarded the average American is when it comes to politics and what they think they know. I mean this place is supposed to represent those who are at least nominally interested in politics and the sheer amount of misinformation and absolute absurdity that is taken as 'fact' here is mind boggling. There are already plenty of groups both partisan and nonpartisan who evaluate the language in these bills to give you an understanding of what it's actually about, and despite everyone's high level of legal and policy knowledge you're almost certain to miss the various interactions between statutes or misunderstand the language, nefarious or not.

What I'm worried about has been shown to be absolutely true in the last few months as people have repeatedly been whipped into a frenzy about things that aren't even in the bills under consideration.

I'm not against releasing the bills to the general public, I just don't care much either way. There are plenty of other groups that fulfill the function of what you're going for.

This all goes for you too right? Maybe Moonbeam is right about the self hate thing...

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: jonks
While I lean towards disclosure in this case, intent to deceive is not the "only rationale." Statutory language is dense and prone to misinterpretation, EX. A: Death Panels. Even after the bill provision was fully explained people STILL didn't understand it. Throwing open bills to a public untrained in statutory deconstruction will only confuse and anger them even more. Shit reads like stereo instructions. We elect representatives to vote for us. Don't like their votes, then next time vote for someone else. That's how this country works. I think it's perfectly plausible to argue that having an open discussion with uninformed and untrained people on the nitty gritty details of such legislation can and will lead to deadlock and partisan hyperventilating. Plus, these pols have a very good idea what their constituents want, it's why they keep getting reelected, so opening the bill to "discussion" will not cause reps to change their votes.

Still, I think it'd be ok if they did post the bills online. Lord knows no one would read them anyway.

Whether they are prone to interpretation errors or not, I can't think of any legitimate reason why they shouldn't be available. If it isn't available, I will always assume that something is being hidden that they don't want me to see, which is worse than them snowballing me with something I don't understand. I write scientific papers for a living and I make them available to as broad an audience as I can, even though less than 0.01% of the population will understand anything in it without spending a great deal of time to understand what's going on. Still, I feel it's important for it to be out there for anyone who A) can understand it and/or B) anyone who is simply interested in the content, even if they won't understand it all.

As far as simply electing someone different next time, that doesn't always work. Part of the reason this healthcare debate has caused such a strong response from the public is that a bill which institutes drastic change could be effectively irreversible. If it will take 5 years to get any meaningful change accomplished, then it will take 20 to undo any negative bits of that legislation: I can't just flip a switch and reboot the process. In the case of healthcare in particular, we need to take extra care because people will inevitably get lost in the shuffle from one system to another. The more times we shuffle back and forth, the more people will get lost. So it's worth taking the time to do it right. This BS about crisis, crisis, crisis! is BS. Slow, evolutionary changes have been occurring for some time, so changing course requires a careful, thoughtful approach that covers all the bases since we will realistically only get one crack at it.

 

[cubeless]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: cubeless
so make the bills simple enough for us poor dumb forum posters to understand... you battle the bullshit by being clear and succinct when you post or write a bill... excess verbosity and/or complexity in either is just trying to obscure things...

That can't be done any more than a lawyer could draft a "simple" merger contract between two multinational conglomerates. You're in fantasy land, and asking for an "easy to read bill" just shows how much you completely do not understand what is entailed in such laws. Sorry if that sounds elitist or condescending.

i gotta respond to this, then i'll crawl back into my trailer and watch my tivo'd glenn beck episodes...

people who write complicated things usually get paid to be the interpreters of complcated things... funny how that is... they also usually get paid by interests who want to be able to use the aforementioned complexity to be able to further their interests...

this stuff ain't rocket science, and it isn't actually as complex as a multinational merger (and even in a multinational merger they have groups working individual subject areas)... it should be a series of bills to address the components of the issue...

but then i'm not getting paid by anyone, so what do i know???

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: cubeless

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: cubeless
so make the bills simple enough for us poor dumb forum posters to understand... you battle the bullshit by being clear and succinct when you post or write a bill... excess verbosity and/or complexity in either is just trying to obscure things...

That can't be done any more than a lawyer could draft a "simple" merger contract between two multinational conglomerates. You're in fantasy land, and asking for an "easy to read bill" just shows how much you completely do not understand what is entailed in such laws. Sorry if that sounds elitist or condescending.

i gotta respond to this, then i'll crawl back into my trailer and watch my tivo'd glenn beck episodes...

people who write complicated things usually get paid to be the interpreters of complcated things... funny how that is... they also usually get paid by interests who want to be able to use the aforementioned complexity to be able to further their interests...

this stuff ain't rocket science, and it isn't actually as complex as a multinational merger (and even in a multinational merger they have groups working individual subject areas)... it should be a series of bills to address the components of the issue...

but then i'm not getting paid by anyone, so what do i know???

And then some things are actually complicated. I think a healthcare overhaul implicating the rights and obligations of 300 million citizens and dozens of insurance corporations falls into that category. Again, I lean towards disclosure, but it's not like millions of americans are going to read the bills anyway and if they did, comprehension would be low. Not because people are dumb, but because they don't have the training to parse the language, nor the time to do so even if they did. They got jobs to do.

 

[monovillage]

This Bill would make it harder to pass legislation. It would make it much, much harder to pass bad legislation. It would put a crimp in the politicians ability to make back room deals and make it harder for veteran legislators to manipulate the system. The best thing that can be said about anyone voting against this Bill is that it will be easier to get them voted out in 2010.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: jonks
While I lean towards disclosure in this case, intent to deceive is not the "only rationale." Statutory language is dense and prone to misinterpretation, EX. A: Death Panels. Even after the bill provision was fully explained people STILL didn't understand it. Throwing open bills to a public untrained in statutory deconstruction will only confuse and anger them even more. Shit reads like stereo instructions. We elect representatives to vote for us. Don't like their votes, then next time vote for someone else. That's how this country works. I think it's perfectly plausible to argue that having an open discussion with uninformed and untrained people on the nitty gritty details of such legislation can and will lead to deadlock and partisan hyperventilating. Plus, these pols have a very good idea what their constituents want, it's why they keep getting reelected, so opening the bill to "discussion" will not cause reps to change their votes.

Still, I think it'd be ok if they did post the bills online. Lord knows no one would read them anyway.

Whether they are prone to interpretation errors or not, I can't think of any legitimate reason why they shouldn't be available. If it isn't available, I will always assume that something is being hidden that they don't want me to see, which is worse than them snowballing me with something I don't understand. I write scientific papers for a living and I make them available to as broad an audience as I can, even though less than 0.01% of the population will understand anything in it without spending a great deal of time to understand what's going on. Still, I feel it's important for it to be out there for anyone who A) can understand it and/or B) anyone who is simply interested in the content, even if they won't understand it all.

As far as simply electing someone different next time, that doesn't always work. Part of the reason this healthcare debate has caused such a strong response from the public is that a bill which institutes drastic change could be effectively irreversible. If it will take 5 years to get any meaningful change accomplished, then it will take 20 to undo any negative bits of that legislation: I can't just flip a switch and reboot the process. In the case of healthcare in particular, we need to take extra care because people will inevitably get lost in the shuffle from one system to another. The more times we shuffle back and forth, the more people will get lost. So it's worth taking the time to do it right. This BS about crisis, crisis, crisis! is BS. Slow, evolutionary changes have been occurring for some time, so changing course requires a careful, thoughtful approach that covers all the bases since we will realistically only get one crack at it.

This is my position. The idea that the average American may not be able to understand the language is arrogant at best. There are many people who CAN understand it, and it DOES need to be analyzed by someone other than congress.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: eskimospy
It's difficult to decide among the blizzard of retarded responses who to call an idiot first.

I never said that legislators should only have 10 minutes to look at a bill.
I never said we should just trust politicians because they are experts.

I never said that there shouldn't be time to peruse the bill before it was voted on, simply that posting it up on the internet for people who style themselves to be legislative geniuses to foam and froth incorrectly about isn't very important to me because I find it highly unlikely anything useful will come of it, and highly likely that a lot of stupid things will come of it.

If this board shows anything, it shows just how retarded the average American is when it comes to politics and what they think they know. I mean this place is supposed to represent those who are at least nominally interested in politics and the sheer amount of misinformation and absolute absurdity that is taken as 'fact' here is mind boggling. There are already plenty of groups both partisan and nonpartisan who evaluate the language in these bills to give you an understanding of what it's actually about, and despite everyone's high level of legal and policy knowledge you're almost certain to miss the various interactions between statutes or misunderstand the language, nefarious or not.

What I'm worried about has been shown to be absolutely true in the last few months as people have repeatedly been whipped into a frenzy about things that aren't even in the bills under consideration.

I'm not against releasing the bills to the general public, I just don't care much either way. There are plenty of other groups that fulfill the function of what you're going for.

you post something reeking of arrogance and contempt for the average american, retract a bit, insult us, and then reiterate your contempt for the average american. awesome post :thumbsup:

He's a Democrat. Disdain for their fellow citizen is par for the course.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
It's difficult to decide among the blizzard of retarded responses who to call an idiot first.

I never said that legislators should only have 10 minutes to look at a bill.
I never said we should just trust politicians because they are experts.

I never said that there shouldn't be time to peruse the bill before it was voted on, simply that posting it up on the internet for people who style themselves to be legislative geniuses to foam and froth incorrectly about isn't very important to me because I find it highly unlikely anything useful will come of it, and highly likely that a lot of stupid things will come of it.

If this board shows anything, it shows just how retarded the average American is when it comes to politics and what they think they know. I mean this place is supposed to represent those who are at least nominally interested in politics and the sheer amount of misinformation and absolute absurdity that is taken as 'fact' here is mind boggling. There are already plenty of groups both partisan and nonpartisan who evaluate the language in these bills to give you an understanding of what it's actually about, and despite everyone's high level of legal and policy knowledge you're almost certain to miss the various interactions between statutes or misunderstand the language, nefarious or not.

What I'm worried about has been shown to be absolutely true in the last few months as people have repeatedly been whipped into a frenzy about things that aren't even in the bills under consideration.

I'm not against releasing the bills to the general public, I just don't care much either way. There are plenty of other groups that fulfill the function of what you're going for.

Oh My!! this has to be the most arrogant posting of yours. this posting of your reeks of ultra left bullshit. "you are all dumb Americans, we know better so just shut-up and let us rule" :| you may not "care" if the bills are posted but is sure does sound like you are in favor of our lawmakers voteing on a bill before they had a chance to read it.

I don't give a flying fuck what groups reviewed what bill, As Americans we all have the right to view bills before they are voted on and there absolutely should be a wait period before the bill is voted on and the bills absolutely should be posted for the Citizens of this country to read.

 

[Patranus]

I love the part where the Democrats said it would take them 2 weeks to get it posted on line.

So you are telling me that you want control of +20% of the economy AND health care but you can't figure out how to post legislation on line in under 2 weeks?

Really? Are they serious?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Not surprisingly I know more about health care and the real world consequences thereof than almost everyone who participated in this lesiglation. Certainly there are hundreds of thousands of health care providers like me. It's amusing (and completely unsuprising) that we peons can't be expected to get it.

As bad as the reps are they may yet pull off 2012. It's a foot shooting race folks with neither side caring a bit about us.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: eskimospy
It's difficult to decide among the blizzard of retarded responses who to call an idiot first.

I never said that legislators should only have 10 minutes to look at a bill.
I never said we should just trust politicians because they are experts.

I never said that there shouldn't be time to peruse the bill before it was voted on, simply that posting it up on the internet for people who style themselves to be legislative geniuses to foam and froth incorrectly about isn't very important to me because I find it highly unlikely anything useful will come of it, and highly likely that a lot of stupid things will come of it.

If this board shows anything, it shows just how retarded the average American is when it comes to politics and what they think they know. I mean this place is supposed to represent those who are at least nominally interested in politics and the sheer amount of misinformation and absolute absurdity that is taken as 'fact' here is mind boggling. There are already plenty of groups both partisan and nonpartisan who evaluate the language in these bills to give you an understanding of what it's actually about, and despite everyone's high level of legal and policy knowledge you're almost certain to miss the various interactions between statutes or misunderstand the language, nefarious or not.

What I'm worried about has been shown to be absolutely true in the last few months as people have repeatedly been whipped into a frenzy about things that aren't even in the bills under consideration.

I'm not against releasing the bills to the general public, I just don't care much either way. There are plenty of other groups that fulfill the function of what you're going for.

you post something reeking of arrogance and contempt for the average american, retract a bit, insult us, and then reiterate your contempt for the average american. awesome post :thumbsup:

Go read some studies on political behavior and how political opinions are formulated and you will see that my contempt for the political knowledge of the average American is well deserved. I really retracted nothing by the way, releasing these bills in that form is a dumb idea. Whatever is gained from increased transparency is outweighed by the crazies. The only real dumb part here is that the Democrats made that promise to begin with.

I like how people don't expect to understand physics equasions or complex electrical schematics, but they expect to understand complex legislation. I guess this is the reason why religion and politics are topics to avoid at parties, everyone thinks they know what they're talking about without any real reason to.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Oh My!! this has to be the most arrogant posting of yours. this posting of your reeks of ultra left bullshit. "you are all dumb Americans, we know better so just shut-up and let us rule" :| you may not "care" if the bills are posted but is sure does sound like you are in favor of our lawmakers voteing on a bill before they had a chance to read it.

I don't give a flying fuck what groups reviewed what bill, As Americans we all have the right to view bills before they are voted on and there absolutely should be a wait period before the bill is voted on and the bills absolutely should be posted for the Citizens of this country to read.

How you would possibly think that from what I posted is beyond me. If our lawmakers are getting the copies of what they are voting on from releases to the public, the problem is not with the document release to us, but a dissemination problem in Congress. I also said nothing about letting anyone 'rule'. Your posting reeks of a lack of reading comprehension.

Oh and by the way you don't actually have a right to read the bills that Congress passes. (don't start inventing rights all of a sudden, are you going all liberal on me?) In fact there are many things Congress does that you are explicitly barred from seeing, sorry to rain on your parade.

 

[TheSkinsFan]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
And, most likely members of Congress have no idea what the final bill will look like at this time, nor will they when they actually have to vote on it, anyway.

fixed.

This is bullshit. There is simply no justification for hiding such an important bill -- or any bill, for that matter -- from the public. None. :|

 

[Xellos2099]

Maybe they don;t want us to read on the part concerning end of life consulting at pages 400 something.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: eskimospy
It's difficult to decide among the blizzard of retarded responses who to call an idiot first.

I never said that legislators should only have 10 minutes to look at a bill.
I never said we should just trust politicians because they are experts.

I never said that there shouldn't be time to peruse the bill before it was voted on, simply that posting it up on the internet for people who style themselves to be legislative geniuses to foam and froth incorrectly about isn't very important to me because I find it highly unlikely anything useful will come of it, and highly likely that a lot of stupid things will come of it.

If this board shows anything, it shows just how retarded the average American is when it comes to politics and what they think they know. I mean this place is supposed to represent those who are at least nominally interested in politics and the sheer amount of misinformation and absolute absurdity that is taken as 'fact' here is mind boggling. There are already plenty of groups both partisan and nonpartisan who evaluate the language in these bills to give you an understanding of what it's actually about, and despite everyone's high level of legal and policy knowledge you're almost certain to miss the various interactions between statutes or misunderstand the language, nefarious or not.

What I'm worried about has been shown to be absolutely true in the last few months as people have repeatedly been whipped into a frenzy about things that aren't even in the bills under consideration.

I'm not against releasing the bills to the general public, I just don't care much either way. There are plenty of other groups that fulfill the function of what you're going for.

you post something reeking of arrogance and contempt for the average american, retract a bit, insult us, and then reiterate your contempt for the average american. awesome post :thumbsup:

Sometimes the truth just hurts, doesn't it?

Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
And, most likely members of Congress have no idea what the final bill will look like at this time, nor will they when they actually have to vote on it, anyway.

fixed.

This is bullshit. There is simply no justification for hiding such an important bill -- or any bill, for that matter -- from the public. None. :|

Yup.

Angry? Check.

And not very bright, either.

Feel free to censor and take my post out of context again ... here it is:

Originally posted by: eskimospy
~~~ What will most likely happen is that bloggers, think-tanks, and advocates will intentionally distort parts of the bill to achieve their ends, leading to an explosion of crazy by ignorant people who are being led by the nose. This has already happened repeatedly in relation to this exact bill under consideration. There's absolutely nothing wrong with people finding out what's in the bill, everyone should, but posting it online in that form to people without the resources or expertise to understand it will lead to nothing useful.

This.

And most likely members of Congress have no idea what the final bill will look like at this time, anyway. There are literally hundreds of pieces of legislation, parts of which may be incorporated into the final bill. If the OP is interested go to THOMAS, type in 'health care' and read to his heart's content.
~~~

Please keep your anger, propaganda and censorship for the uniformed and ignorant, Dr Goebbels. This is just for you:

"" There are literally hundreds of pieces of legislation, parts of which may be incorporated into the final bill. If YOU are interested go to THOMAS, type in 'health care' and read to your heart's content. ""

There's a term, a simple word, that the Brits use for folks like you. Yup. That's right. I remember it now: Wanker.

Fits you to a "T".

 

[Patranus]

Word on the street is that the Democrats don't want the health care legislation. After all, the Democrats have a super majority in the senate, majority in the house, and controls the white house...whats the hold up?

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: cubeless

Originally posted by: b0mbrman

Do I have to hold your hand through every step?

click.JPG

ok... i surrender... i was of the, obviously mistaken, belief that this was discussing the fact that the changes/amendments to the posted bill were not to be posted...

that seems to be the original bill... is it actually being annotated in something like real time? i don't see timestamps...

http://energycommerce.house.go.../hr3200_anssummary.pdf

Cheers!

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: b0mbrman

Originally posted by: cubeless

ok... i surrender... i was of the, obviously mistaken, belief that this was discussing the fact that the changes/amendments to the posted bill were not to be posted...

that seems to be the original bill... is it actually being annotated in something like real time? i don't see timestamps...

http://energycommerce.house.go.../hr3200_anssummary.pdf

Cheers!

No sarcasm this time around because this one's buried a bit deeper

For future reference, go to the relevant committee, click markups, then find the date of when it happened.

 

[Double Trouble]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
It's difficult to decide among the blizzard of retarded responses who to call an idiot first.

I never said that legislators should only have 10 minutes to look at a bill.
I never said we should just trust politicians because they are experts.

I never said that there shouldn't be time to peruse the bill before it was voted on, simply that posting it up on the internet for people who style themselves to be legislative geniuses to foam and froth incorrectly about isn't very important to me because I find it highly unlikely anything useful will come of it, and highly likely that a lot of stupid things will come of it.

If this board shows anything, it shows just how retarded the average American is when it comes to politics and what they think they know. I mean this place is supposed to represent those who are at least nominally interested in politics and the sheer amount of misinformation and absolute absurdity that is taken as 'fact' here is mind boggling. There are already plenty of groups both partisan and nonpartisan who evaluate the language in these bills to give you an understanding of what it's actually about, and despite everyone's high level of legal and policy knowledge you're almost certain to miss the various interactions between statutes or misunderstand the language, nefarious or not.

What I'm worried about has been shown to be absolutely true in the last few months as people have repeatedly been whipped into a frenzy about things that aren't even in the bills under consideration.

I'm not against releasing the bills to the general public, I just don't care much either way. There are plenty of other groups that fulfill the function of what you're going for.

Thanks for that post, I think from now on when someone wants a good definition of "elitist", I'll just refer them to your post. That attitude of "the ruling class is smart, the peasants are just rubes that need to be kept in the dark lest they misunderstand our brilliant ideas" is exactly what people refer to when they call someone "elitist".