there ha s been no seriuos enforcement of this provision and statue other than suits filed by UAB/USA a while back to get counties to cough up. The suits were dropped when the Legislature gave them more state money, IIRC.

I want to debate issues and find solutions. Glenn Beck and his acolytes have no such interest, as they continually demonstrate, which is why I choose to disregard them. If someone who listens to Glenn Beck wants to bring policy solutions to the table, I’m happy to listen.

I don’t understand how you can believe that much of what Tim said is fact. Every major industrialized nation was forced to bailout their banks, America was not unique. Every major economic power attempted to stimulate the economy. You can disagree with the specifics, but the fact that our government acted (or continued the Bush actions) is not unique to our nation, nor does it make him any “further to the left” than people thought.

The intent of the actions taken were to save our captalist economy from meltdown, not to somehow “take over” that economy (which doesn’t even make any sense). Nor does the president want to take over 1/6 of the economy, that would be a single payer system, which is far from even what the House passed, much less what will ultimately become law.

a few things;
1) mercifully we live in a democratic republic rather than a democracy. A democracy is mob rule.
2)Why would you discount someone who listens to Glenn Beck. While I believe Mr.Beck can be a bit over the top, he does bring up valid questions and pertinentpoints. By leaving him and his views from the conversation you are advocating the stifling of debate and give lie to your belief in a democracy(which we are not) where dissenting voices need to be heard.
3) with the exception of the Soveriegnty claim, most of the other “facts” are for the most part true if incredibly general in nature.
4) Regrettable this country has elected President Obama who is further to the left than many anticipated. However, the insulting him or democrats does not further the debate and only cause individuals to harden their positions. So I agree with you in that regard. So Please everyone save the red meat for you appropriate party functions

“Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains.”

Winston Churchill

When you’re done compromising, you’ve officially left the conversation, because like it or not, we live in a Democracy and the left (as well as the right) will ALWAYS have their say. So you can amp your rhetoric up to 11, but it means absolutely nothing, because, in the end, there is always going to have to be compromise. Ain’t Democracy a bitch?

By the way, do you believe that calling the President names elevates your argument in some way? I didn’t have respect for those who did it to Bush and I don’t have respect for people who do it now.

Come with some facts next time and we can have a real discussion.

I am done compromising with the left in any way. I intend to bar the door, light the fires in the middle of the night (metaphorically speaking, of course) and oppose, stymy, block, rail against and actively stir the people into action against what this freak of a president is trying to do to my country at every opportunity. That Bush was nearly just as bad is irrelevant; Bush is GONE, thankfully. His replacement is worse.

He carried the bank bailouts forward, he has intimidated Chrysler bondholders into not exercising their property rights, he has handed the American auto industry over to the unions, and he seeks to surrender much, if not all, of our sovereignty as a free nation in December. President Obama, now spelled President Oppressor, wants to take over an additional 1/6 of the American economy through a healthcare raid, intimidating the insurance companies into going along with threats much the same as he did Chrysler bondholders.

So, you will have to excuse me if I am more than a little p!$$ed at this big earred freak of a president who bemoaned the fact that the Warren court did not go far enough in wealth redistribution and the fools who support him and kneel at his image.

I plan to hope and help that every Representative who voted for this bill is replaced in 2010 that can be replaced.

You’re looking awfully far into the future…we’ll all see how the future plays out. As for the present, this one vote in the House, we still have a long way to go to final legislation on healthcare. And an even longer time to go to the 2012 election. The president’s job approval is still above 50% in the latest Gallup poll and whatever the President’s approval rating has been, the approval for Republicans has been lower.

Alabama State Rep. (and soon to be State Senator) Cam Ward (R) wrote a great piece this week on what the 2010 elections hold. He emphasized that nothing about those elections is a foregone conclusion and that candidates in both parties have to understand that people want to know they’re being heard and that candidates intend to produce results.

Certainly Republicans will pick up seats in Congress, that almost always happens in the middle of a President’s first term, but I don’t think anyone can venture to predict much beyond that.

This legislation is opposed, I believe, by a majority of American voters. If it is rammed down their throats with a later vote by the Senate and then both chambers of Congress and President Obama. those Americans will respond by voting against many members of both chambers of Congress who vote in favor of it, possibly to the extent of putting Republicans in control of Congress in the 2010 elections, and then by defeating Obama in 2012 and voting in a Republican as our next president. As you noted, that’s just the way things work in a Representative Republic.

Also, some provisions of any bill like this that is finally approved by both chambers will likely be challenged as being unconstitutional, and finally reach the US Supreme Court where one or more challenges may be upheld by SCOTUS and this whole episode will become a thing of the past.