jillio

You stated, and I quote, that you "wanted to determine the accuracy of my claims." You have the same internet access I do. Feel free to do the work involved to determine such.

As it stands, it is becoming increasingly obvious that your motive is not to determine accuracy, or to learn and become informed, but simply to throw around challenges and troll.

If you are not motivated enough to find the answers to your own questions, it is no one's responsibility but your own. It would be my suggestion, if you want to engage in productive discussion and exchange of information, they you find those answers prior to attempting discussion. You will then be capapble of actually engaging in discussion from an informed perspective instead of having to play silly, adolescent games to cover your gaps.

Deafness

__________________
This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members.
Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

TXgolfer

That is not exactly precedent, the SC could still go either way. That is why I tell people to have a plan for either decision and be prepared to capitalize if the SC upholds the law.

__________________
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. - Romans 12:21


Sometimes at night, I see their faces. I feel the traces they've left on my soul

Buffalo

Then find a reliable link to prove Jillio wrong.

__________________

“The problem is not that the (deaf) students do not hear. The problem is that the hearing world does not listen. “- Rev Jesse L. Jackson ( American Civil Rights Activist, Minister)

jillio

Why, pray tell, would that not be considered legal precedent? It is a legal decision made regarding the same question before the Federal Supreme Court. That is what precedent consists of. Previous legal decision regarding similar legal matters.

jillio

The bills are available online. There are two of them concerning health care reform that are currently before the Supreme Court.

TXgolfer

Meh, people are attempting to engage in discussion. Personally, I see making claims and refusing to back them up as an adolescent game. In my experience people who are on "up and up" and seeking intelligent conversation are willing to support their claims.

As I said early if you don't want to support your claims that is your choice. No reason to go on and on about it.

__________________
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. - Romans 12:21


Sometimes at night, I see their faces. I feel the traces they've left on my soul

jillio

**shrug** You stated that you "wanted to verify the accuracy". You are finding 1001 ways not to do that.

I ssupported my claims. You can, too, if you will simply find the motivation to make a bit of effort. I don't see it forthcoming, however. As expected.

Come back when you have made the effort, and we will be able to engage in productive discussion. Until then, the merry go round has stopped.

TXgolfer

No need, I merely asked a member if they could support their position. If she is unwilling, that is her choice.

__________________
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. - Romans 12:21


Sometimes at night, I see their faces. I feel the traces they've left on my soul

jillio

Nope, you said you "wanted to verify the accuracy". That puts the ball squarely in your court.

I have already supported my claims. You are just having to exert effort to find it and you aren't up to the task. Maybe you can find someone else to do your work for you. It won't be me.

TXgolfer

There have been court findings siding with both sides. I don't think the SC is going to feel bound by either.

__________________
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. - Romans 12:21


Sometimes at night, I see their faces. I feel the traces they've left on my soul

Reba

Personally, any posts that I read about public current events that aren't backed up with a reliable source, I dismiss. I'm sure that I'm not the only one.

When I make my posts about such events, I try to include at least a link to the source so no one has to search for the information (unless they want to do additional research).

I consider it perfectly reasonable to request supporting information to statements that purport to be factual. If someone says, "This is my opinion," that's a different matter.

jillio

No one said they were bound. I said it sets precedence. And a finding in a higher court, which this was, carries much more weight as a precedent than a finding in a lower court, for obvious reasons.

jillio

Your choice. In fact, I have provided sources for the claims I have made regarding health care reform. If you, or anyone else, chooses not to access those sources, then that is your choice. Knowlege doesn't come with a link. Sometimes you have to make a bit of an effort to locate it. Telling you where to find it should be sufficient if you are motivated to find the answers. If you aren't motivated, oh well. That falls directly on your shoulders. I personally, find the unwillingness to exert a bit of effort unreasonable. If you have questions, the answers are more readily available now than at any other time in history. No one is being asked to go to the local library and search through micro fiche for hours on end. The lack of personal responsibility for stating that you "want" to veryfiy something, and then the refusal to make the effort to do so is no less than refusing to satisfy your own "wants" simply because you need to make a bit of effort to do so. That tells me that either you simply are not truly interested in finding the answers to your own questions, or your demands that others do it for you are empty challenges borne of an inactive mind.

And the "you" I am referring to is the generalized "you".

Steinhauer

airportcop has you pegged.

He also used the word "narcissist" correctly.

Steinhauer

When asked for a link supporting what you have claimed- your answer is what is generally called a "cop out".

Troll!

Steinhauer

Woudn't she first need to provide a reliable link proving she is right?

She has been asked several times already.

jillio

Nope and nope.

jillio

I've told everyone where to find the information they seek. If they choose not to access it, it is not my problem.

You calling someone a troll, when your posts show that the only reason you are in this thread is to try to start a silly little argument with me?

Find a therapist and deal with your tendency to hold onto grudges.

jillio

Again, everyone has been told where to find the information. And anyone with the IQ you claim to have shouldn't need to be spoon fed through a link.

So, why don't you go to the source I provided and find something to add to the discussion instead of playing your silly little games?

deafskeptic

I found it quite easily and I will attempt to read as much of it as I can.

__________________
Left ear implanted with Med-El on April 24 2007.
Activated on May 9th.
Upgraded to Opus 2 9/10/2010
Think Pink.
FREE JILLIO!

deafskeptic

Just realized I may not have enough paper tp print all of it

__________________
Left ear implanted with Med-El on April 24 2007.
Activated on May 9th.
Upgraded to Opus 2 9/10/2010
Think Pink.
FREE JILLIO!

jillio

It is not difficult to locate at all. There are only 3 reasons for continuing to demand a link:

1. No intention of even bothering to read the document.
2. Complete inability to use the internet effectively.
3. Trolling.

The first one is probable, and no doubt a combined reason with #3.
I find #2 to be implausible, as the ones demanding the link seem to be able to find their way around all the right wing sites they want to find. If they can accomplish that, then surely they can locate the most recent version of the health care reform bill. Took me approximately 15 seconds.

deafskeptic

I'm afraid I have to agree. I decided to stick with the PDF format as I don't want to pay 70 dollars to replace my ink.

__________________
Left ear implanted with Med-El on April 24 2007.
Activated on May 9th.
Upgraded to Opus 2 9/10/2010
Think Pink.
FREE JILLIO!

jillio

I rarely print anything out. I just save and read from the computer or send it to my Kindle.

It is not such lengthy reading though, if you have been reading the document from the start. It is just a matter of locating and reading the changes made. Unfortunately for some, they have never bothered to read any of the versions. I know that you have read at least partially some of the past versions, because I remember sending you sections and subsections.

jillio

No doubt! Ink is too expensive! I try to save mine for must print situations.

deafskeptic

Yeah, true. I won't attempt to read a 1k page document in one sitting like I can with 1k page books. and Ill use the I've been known to finish 1k page books in one sitting but I will grant those books were lightweight reading instead of books like War and Peace or Decline and Fall of Rome.
I figure that to make it easier for me to digest this bill is to refer to the sections, titles and subtitles and take it slow and make plenty of notes.

__________________
Left ear implanted with Med-El on April 24 2007.
Activated on May 9th.
Upgraded to Opus 2 9/10/2010
Think Pink.
FREE JILLIO!

jillio

There you go. Reading for information is different than reading for pleasure. But it seems you have the skills and the technique down.

TXgolfer

Locating the document is easy. Determining what part of the document you are referring to, not so much. Providing sources is a matter of courtesy to fellow ADers and leads to a conversation rather than this silly game. But again, it is your choice whether you would like to be courteous to other ADers. Perhaps you don't want to have a conversation on this subject.

Even your claim is vague...

Fact of the matter is, they are already cutting corners. As I mentioned before...

Obama drops long-term health care program - CNN


The "safeguards" you claim didn't prevent this and most of the law hasn't even taken effect yet. And THIS was a pretty big corner.

__________________
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. - Romans 12:21


Sometimes at night, I see their faces. I feel the traces they've left on my soul

jillio

And again, I have provided the sources. Given that we were discussing one particular facet of health care reform, it is a simple matter of matching the section to the topic being discussed. See, you have even referred to the safeguards I referred to, so obviously you know what the topic was. Just match it to the section covering such. Pretty simple stuff, really.

TXgolfer

Nah I said "safeguards" And the fact is either there are none or they are completely ineffective because they have already started cutting major chunks of the law. And this chunk was cut by HHS.....can't blame Republicans.

__________________
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. - Romans 12:21


Sometimes at night, I see their faces. I feel the traces they've left on my soul