By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
ManusJustus said:
mrstickball said:
I don't think Manus pays attention to the actual bills proposed, Mafoo.

Status Quo - The existing condition or state of affairs

I dont think you pay attention to the English language.  What Republicans want to do is no different than what we have now and would not improve conditions.  Maybe conservatives can pray to their make believe god when they are sick and stay away from healthcare altogether.

Republicans don't want status quo. They want a health bill. However, they want their health bill. That isn't status quo. That means they are voting against Democratic bills because they don't like the language in the 2,000 page bills.

I've posted time and time again about bills that Republicans have offered and back that would re-vamp the healthcare system. Every time I do this, you either don't respond to my post, or selectively discuss points that only fit your interpretation of what republicans want to do.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/52896

There. That is a grand total of three bills the Republicans have offered in contrast to what has been proposed by the Democrats. If the Republcians wanted status quo, they should have a total of zero, should they not?

Here is the central bill which was proposed in November:

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/nov/05/nation/na-health-gop5

How is that bill considered being the status quo?

How many bills do the republcians need to propose for you not to consider their goals on healthcare reform status quo?



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.