# Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in it



## Blake Bowden (Mar 10, 2010)

[video=youtube;KoE1R-xH5To]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoE1R-xH5To[/video]

Yikes!


----------



## drapetomaniac (Mar 10, 2010)

*Re: Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in *

I actually agree with this.

Consider how many people have referred to "The health care bill."

There is no healthcare bill.  There are at least three with a slew of potential amendment still outstanding.

So, which bill are people condemning when they talk about ObamaCare or "the bill"?

The media and individuals haven't filtered the extreme amount of false information like death panels and making it sound like immigrants will be actively sought out for coverage.  They actively ignore what non-partisan groups acknowledged by both sides say about the cost of the bill, instead letting partisan hacks on both sides swing it.

We don't seem to be capable of acknowledging the reality that there are at least three bills, plus other proposals still active and are doing next to no fact checking.

At least having "one bill" will allow people to focus on ripping that apart would be a more competent approach.

Consider this - people were condemning "the bill" before there even was one.


----------



## JTM (Mar 10, 2010)

*Re: Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in *



> I actually agree with this.



i just want to confirm here.  you are for passing it so we can learn what's in it?

noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.


----------



## drapetomaniac (Mar 10, 2010)

*Re: Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in *

How do you think people have been doing do far on understanding what's in  "the bill"?


----------



## JTM (Mar 10, 2010)

*Re: Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in *

lol, so their/your answer is to pass it?  wtf?  what if it says to kill anyone that reaches 65?  no way that's smart legislating.  that's a terrible way to run a country.

"what's in this bill?"  
"no idea"
"let's pass it and see what happens"

what kind of logic is that?


----------



## drapetomaniac (Mar 10, 2010)

*Re: Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in*



JTM said:


> lol, so their/your answer is to pass it?  wtf?  what if it says to kill anyone that reaches 65?  no way that's smart legislating.  that's a terrible way to run a country.
> "what's in this bill?"
> "no idea"
> "let's pass it and see what happens"
> what kind of logic is that?


 
On par with the lies being spread and used and people being comfortable with it or supporting the spread of lies.

We already know what's in the the bill(s) - plural.  We know what the many options are (there isn't one bill or one option).  The content is being rabidly lied about and people believe the lies.  People are ignoring reality anyway.

The unfortunate part is polls show support for the various bills (plural) go up when the content of the options is actually explained.  Which means people reject them up front, but then accept it when they see what's in them?

So, what are they basing the original rejection on?


----------



## Bill Lins (Mar 11, 2010)

*Re: Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in *

So, drape- you're saying that 2 wrongs make a right?


----------



## jonesvilletexas (Mar 11, 2010)

*Re: Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in *

What we need is someone in office that has their head on straight. And get read of that liar that is trying to jam that crap down our thoughts.


----------



## drapetomaniac (Mar 11, 2010)

*Re: Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in*



Bill_Lins77488 said:


> So, drape- you're saying that 2 wrongs make a right?


 
I'm saying it doesn't matter because nobody is paying attention or doing any due diligence.

The fact is Pelosi is wrong - they dont' have to pass "the bill" for us to see what's in them.  It's all out there and has been out there and people are debating non-existent portions instead of the actual bills (bills, plural).

When people are polled on vague "government takeover" they don't support anything (and neither do I).  When they are given the _actual_ options, they do.

I think she may be doubly wrong.  Nothing needs to pass to see what's there, because it's already there and people ignore it.  And secondly, once it passes people will still lie about it and act like the world has been taken over by communists - just like they did with Medicare.


----------



## JTM (Mar 11, 2010)

*Re: Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in*



drapetomaniac said:


> On par with the lies being spread and used and people being comfortable with it or supporting the spread of lies.
> 
> We already know what's in the the bill(s) - plural.  We know what the many options are (there isn't one bill or one option).  The content is being rabidly lied about and people believe the lies.  People are ignoring reality anyway.
> 
> ...



both sides are lying, i'm fine with that.

the original rejection?  this reputation that the fed has for screwing people over.  the patriot act, bills such as that.  i wonder if you could go back, you wouldn't immediately reject it?  i sure did.  a 1000+ page bill that nobody could read passed overnight?  for 200 years, every time someone says "we must pass this without going over it" it has turned bad.  

the logical and rational thing to do is to outright reject new legislation.


----------



## JTM (Mar 11, 2010)

*Re: Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in*



drapetomaniac said:


> I'm saying it doesn't matter because nobody is paying attention or doing any due diligence.
> 
> The fact is Pelosi is wrong - they dont' have to pass "the bill" for us to see what's in them.  It's all out there and has been out there and people are debating non-existent portions instead of the actual bills (bills, plural).
> 
> ...


 
wait... what?

no due diligence?  i reviewed the bill and make semi-daily calls to around 10 congressmen telling them either a) how disappointed i am in them for their continued support for the bill or b) to continue rejecting the bills.

now you're saying she's doubly wrong?  good for you


----------



## drapetomaniac (Mar 11, 2010)

*Re: Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in*



JTM said:


> a 1000+ page bill that nobody could read passed overnight?


 
One of my favorite tidbits: http://computationallegalstudies.com/2009/11/08/facts-about-the-length-of-h-r-3962/
Is this a Large or Small Number? Comparison to Harry Potter
Number of substantive words in H.R. 3962: 234,812 words
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix - 257,000 words 
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire - 190,000 words
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows â€“ 198,000 words


----------



## JTM (Mar 11, 2010)

*Re: Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in *

except that it reads like tax code.


----------



## Bill Lins (Mar 11, 2010)

*Re: Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in*



JTM said:


> except that it reads like tax code.


 
Surely that's just a coincidence.  ;-)


----------



## Traveling Man (Mar 18, 2010)

*Re: Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in*

One has to wonder if individuals that would pass a bill to see what's in it; are the same individuals who does not read those pesky "terms and conditions" that come with their credit card statements, but gladly sign on that dotted line or legally do the same by executing the next transaction. They are called IDIOTS! All of these "bills" (and your â€œbillsâ€ too) are available for reading, only the lazy and dishonest would vote on them without reading them. These individuals will pay the price, watch and see, the shame is; so will we. Of course later they will try to portray themselves as victims. (As, â€œwe was trickedâ€œ)! As we recall not too long agoâ€¦


----------



## drapetomaniac (Mar 18, 2010)

*Re: Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in*



Traveling Man said:


> All of these "bills" (and your â€œbillsâ€ too) are available for reading, only the lazy and dishonest would vote on them without reading them.


 
I agree.  The text is always available ahead of time, regardless of what others have said.

That said, it has been tradition for an EXTREMELY long time to use staff to read and fully understand complex bills varying on a wide range of law and expertise which no one person is usually able to fully grasp.

But, I'm with you on condemning the people who complain they couldn't read the bill when it's always available (three days in advance is my understanding). I've read plenty of bills and have never been elected and get paid less.


----------



## Traveling Man (Mar 18, 2010)

*Re: Pelosi: we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in*



drapetomaniac said:


> ...complex bills varying on a wide range of law and expertise which no one person is usually able to fully grasp.


And this has to be stopped too; it's absolute B.$. that bills are written with Byzantine form just to slip in the ubiquitous escape clause or to deliberately confuse the electorate.



> I've read plenty of bills and have never been elected and get paid less.


As all informed voters should. Good!


----------

