Responsible Christianity and Politics:
 

If Obama's plan becomes law and all the outlandish claims and accusations regarding it don't materialize, how should we respond to those "Christians" who fed the lies and misinformation machine?

Re: Responsible Christianity and Politics:
 

what plan? What law? what claims by Christians?

Re: Responsible Christianity and Politics:
 

When the lies they proclaim do not come to pass, I would imagine that we would simply not trust them anymore. It is sad, because they are good people who have let fear color their judgment.

Personally speaking, there are several posters on here that I now have to take with a large grain of salt after hearing some of the misinformation they willingly spread and agree with.

Re: Responsible Christianity and Politics:
 

Using your own red herring, will you fess up if "it becomes law" and the claims are true?


"Misinformation" from Obama includes:

The bill doesn't use tax payer dollars for abortions
The bill will not increase taxes
No one will have to leave their doctor or insurance company if they don't want to.
"No more special interests"

To achieve health care reform, "I'm going to have all the negotiations around a big table. We'll have doctors and nurses and hospital administrators. Insurance companies, drug companies -- they'll get a seat at the table, they just won't be able to buy every chair"

Aquila, it looks like I posted some claims from the King Hussein we have already observed to be untrue. what say you?

Pot calling kettle black? Again?

Re: Responsible Christianity and Politics:
 

Who spread the lie about Obama being born in Queens hospital?

I caught Obama, you and snopes lying on that deal.

Re: Responsible Christianity and Politics:
 

New Taxes Galore

That is only the beginning.




http://www.thenewamerican.com/index....alth-care/1685

He lied. Taxes will go up and do so for every one.

Re: Responsible Christianity and Politics:
 

Let's take just one example.

During the Vietnam war an American destroyer, the USS DeHaven, DD 727 (yes, I know some of these people, now in their 80's), was involved in numerous battle engagements along the coast and in the bays, and water inlets, including sailing inland along the deep rivers of Vietnam. During these missions the ship and men were exposed to Agent Orange. A number of the crew came down with the symptoms and were diagnosed as having been infected with the toxic chemicals.

Now, thirty years later, and after many of the crew of that period have died, as far as I know, no Vietnam surviver has yet to receive VA medical benefits for their being exposed to "friendly (chemical) fire". Now, soldiers and Marines have received medical treatment. Why not the Navel personal?

Simple, it is an expression of federal bureaucrats and non medical personal being allowed to make medical decision - and imposing them on others.

Because the Navy personal did not actually set foot on Vietnamese soil, they are not authorized to receive treatment for their medical condition. Selective medical care decisions based on administrative policies. Yes, there are more examples - talk to some vets who have attempted to obtain other denied medical treatment, but this one is sufficient to prove a concept.

In regard to my other posts on this same general subject: If this is how our federal government is handling this one example of how some veterans are being denied medical treatment along "administrative" lines, what can a mere civilian expect at the hands of such folks? Remember, this proposed law is just the authorization - the policies, rules and regulations have yet to be written - or even discussed very much.

Now, can anyone give me one good reason why I should trust this same minded government with my health care - and that of my wife? After all, we see how they have continued to operate for 30 years - bureaucrats don't make policy or make mistakes, and their decisions don't allow folks to simply die off, do they?

Then, there are the many cases of people being denied both medical care and financial support through Medicare because the treatment is not approved for general use, or because that individual is disqualified for one administrative reason or another. Talk to anyone who has been denied treatment, and the struggles they have had to undertake to get some SSDI funds.

Does something need to be done about our American health care? Yes, of course. but see some of my other posts for recommendations. Do we need to push through a bill that is still full of unanswered questions? I say let's read the thing through, word by word - and make our law makers explain each and every word in simple English!

Re: Responsible Christianity and Politics:
 

Your example is perfect. The cube farm at the VA makes the decisions.

Actually this thread is based on a kernal of misinformation. H R 3200 is nat even named what Obama calls it. obama now says it is a Health Insurance reform Act.

America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 is what The house calls it.

Re: Responsible Christianity and Politics:
 

If Obama's plan becomes law and all the outlandish claims and accusations regarding it do materialize, how should we respond to those "Christians" who backed Obama's plan and did not heed the outlandish claims and accusations?

Re: Responsible Christianity and Politics:
 

Which plan? He has flip flopped so many times, please nail down the exact one you are referring to???