FNC (Fox News) showed Obama's address to Congress about his supposed health care plan

I have heard many uninformed liberals claim that FNC [1] did not show Obama's address to Congress that was supposed to be regarding his health care plan. This is a blatant lie. I would like anybody who believes that FNC didn't cover it to accept this debate and show that they didn't.

[1] http://www.foxnews.com...

Seeing as my opponent mongosse has posted a debate that is by most standards would appear to be unwinnable, so therefore this debate will have to fall victim to semantics.

Fox News did not show Obama's address to Congress about HIS health care plan because Barack Obama does not have a health care plan. There are two health care plans in the legislature to this date. HR3200 which is America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, which is consideration in the House of Representatives[1]. There other is one in the Senate which has been recently passed by the Senate Finance Committee[2].

Seeing as Barack Obama did write any of these bills they are not respectfully HIS and therefore FNC (Fox News) did not show Obama's address to Congress about HIS supposed health care plan.

Thank You.

[1] http://www.opencongress.org...
[2] http://news.yahoo.com...

My esteemed opponent seems to have negelcted the word "supposed" in the resolution. Obama claims to have a health care plan that he desribed during the address. This fulfilled the resolution.

supposed: imagined [1]

As my opponent has pointed out, there was no "Obama's health care plan," but this was accounted for. My opponent simply added to this.

[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...

Quote from my opponent's R1 opening argument:

"I have heard many uninformed liberals claim that FNC [1] did not show Obama's address to Congress that was supposed to be regarding his health care plan. This is a blatant lie."

Within the opening argument the word 'supposed' was used exactly zero times, and once in the title. He then provided a video of Barack Obama's Address to Congress as proof of this despite the fact that that he doesn't have one. So as it stands all the evidence he has that FNC did cover Barack Obama's Adress to Congress on his health care plan is a definition for the word supposed, making his R2 argument pretty weak. Mongoose presented the video of Barack Obama's address to Congress under the pretenses that it was covering his health care plan (see quoteabove), not his SUPPOSED health care plan.

Thank You.

My opponent claims that I did not mention supposed in my opening argument. I would like for my opponent to look again:

"I have heard many uninformed liberals claim that FNC [1] did not show Obama's address to Congress that was SUPPOSED to be regarding his health care plan. This is a blatant lie."

See it in capital letters? It was used once, not zero, times. In the video, Obama claims that "the reforms [he's] proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally." Clearly he has claimed this as a fact about his supposed plan.

My opponent has given no reason to believe that FNC did not show Obama's address about his supposed health care plan. He misread my argument and completely missed the work "supposed." This should be obvious. Vote PRO.

Allow me to correct myself, the word supposed was used zero times in the quote the way in which my opponent defined it (imagined).

Secondly, he stated that the reforms he was PROPOSING would not apply to illegal immigrants. Just because he proposed certain aspects of the health care bill does not give him ownership of the health care bill.

Therefore Fox News did not show Obama's address to Congress that was supposed to be regarding his health care plan.

Vote CON!