Honestly I kind of agree with Broly on this though, I don't think McCain voted against it because he actually gave a shit about people losing their health care, he essentially said he didn't mind that aspect. He did it because he didn't like "the process", but I think he kind of did it as a middle finger to Trump.
He did the right thing for the wrong reason, but still, the outcome was good.
Originally posted by BackFire
The full repeal failed because it was a ****ing joke of a bill and a total pile of shit. They had no viable alternative to the ACA and just hoped people would buy their "We'll figure it out later" idiocy. Repubs should thank their lucky stars it failed and that whole shit show ended when it did because if the bill had passed and the nonsense continued for several more months/years they probably would have lost the house even worse than they did.
Yep. McCain saved them many a seat.
Originally posted by BackFire
Honestly I kind of agree with Broly on this though, I don't think McCain voted against it because he actually gave a shit about people losing their health care, he essentially said he didn't mind that aspect. He did it because he didn't like "the process", but I think he kind of did it as a middle finger to Trump.He did the right thing for the wrong reason, but still, the outcome was good.
I don't recall him saying that, I thought he said the opposite, that he couldn't vote on the repeal when there wasn't a viable alternative ready in place ready to go?
Edit:
Found this: "While the amendment would have repealed some of Obamacare's most burdensome regulations, it offered no replacement to actually reform our health care system and deliver affordable, quality health care to our citizens." -McCain
Originally posted by Robtard
I don't recall him saying that, I thought he said the opposite, that he couldn't vote on the repeal when there wasn't a viable alternative ready in place ready to go?
That was part of it. But he mostly didn't like how it was being pushed through without much discussion and debate. He liked a lot of the individual shitty ideas being proposed by the GOP as a possible alternative. He was in favor of things like getting rid of protections for people with preexisting conditions. He just didn't like the process. But I think giving Trump a loss was a big part of that decision for him, too.
Originally posted by BackFire
Yes, but he also was in favor of getting rid of preexisting protections and stuff like that. That's what he considered to be one of those burdensome regulations.
I don't recall that bit, recall the opposite. But fair enough on that part being shitty.
edit:
"There are literally millions of people whose pre-existing conditions are protected and whose access to insurance is protected and in the state of Arizona hundreds of thousands of people who would have lost Medicaid coverage that McCain stuck up for," Slavitt said.
Originally posted by Robtard
I don't recall that bit, recall the opposite. But fair enough on that part being shitty.edit:
"There are literally millions of people whose pre-existing conditions are protected and whose access to insurance is protected and in the state of Arizona hundreds of thousands of people who would have lost Medicaid coverage that McCain stuck up for," Slavitt said.
Right. By doing what he did he preserved those protections. My point was that particular aspect was not something he was wanting to save. He did it for reasons other than protecting coverage for those people.
Originally posted by BackFire
Right. By doing what he did he preserved those protections. My point was that particular aspect was not something he was wanting to save. He did it for reasons other than protecting coverage for those people.
You're making it harder for me to rub McCain's dead dick in Broly's face
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
why not?
Flipping patties and submerging potato sticks into hot grease doesn't take much brain power.
Please don't misunderstand me: I'm not acting high and mighty. I'm not judging McEmployees. I'm no better than any human being.
I'm just saying that my years of studying and busting my ass to become the Level 2 Non-Destructive Testing Technician that I am warrants the hourly rate that I have is because I WORKED FOR IT AND DESERVE IT.
Title doesn't necessarily dictate behavior, but I firmly believe that a person who works with radioactive isotopes deserves to make more than a burger flipper based on merit, education, and the will to advance.
Originally posted by BackFire
I think it depends on the state. $15 an hour for minimum wage in California is the least they should be paid. Honestly it should probably be higher here because of how expensive it is to live here. Where as somewhere in middle america it could probably be less.
Serious question: Why is it so expensive for California living?