Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (14263)	3/10/2010 6:02:21 AM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

You can write what you want, but the reconciliation can't actually be passed until the Senate bill is passed by the House. Once that's done the reconciliation bill may not pass, but if it doesn't you just get the Senate bill (as long as Obama will sign it, and he almost definitely will), you don't move back to square one. I know that. And aside - Well technically it might be, two or more people agreeing on some secret or even just unannounced plan can be called a conspiracy. But if it is a conspiracy in that technical sense its not in the sense of carrying all the connotations that normally come with the word, of being some serious malevolent secret plot. Semantic arguments are most often indirectly about the connotations. The definition is argued, but the reasons one side wants to settle on a word, and the other opposes doing so, is usually the connotations for that word. If you substituted the definition for the world (assuming the definition wasn't loaded with connotations that someone wants to avoid as well), you often wouldn't have the argument, but you usually would have clumsy phrasing. You can parse semantics with the best. The possibility that the house will pass the senate bill and not have the desired changes passed with reconciliation or by any other method is far from negligible. There is no real way to bind them to passing it. A gentleman's agreement. The Dems House/Senate are not opposition parties... and even if they were a gentleman's agreement would probably hold up. It's just more paranoid fear mongering. It too shall pass with the death panels.