PDA

View Full Version : GOP to the uninsured: Drop dead



Mayhem
2012-07-11, 10:59
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/gop-to-the-uninsured-drop-dead/2012/07/10/gJQA4xZfbW_story.html




The House is voting (again) to repeal the Affordable Care Act on Wednesday.

Meanwhile, six Republican governors (so far) say they won’t go along with the law’s planned Medicaid expansion for 4 million uninsured people in their states, even though the feds would pick up nearly all the tab.

See the pattern here?

The Republican message to uninsured Americans in the wake of the Supreme Court’s recent ruling couldn’t be clearer: You’re on your own.

The party may not have officially adopted the “let ’em die” policy of right-wing hecklers at that CNN primary debate, when Ron Paul was asked what should be done when uninsured folks show up at the hospital. But as a practical matter, Republicans are in pretty unsavory territory. What other conclusion can we draw when Rick Perry, who presides over a state where fully one in four people lack health coverage, makes swaggering indifference to these Texans’ plight a point of sovereign pride?

Fifty million uninsured Americans would be the immediate casualties of the GOP’s “let them eat the emergency room” mentality. But all of us would be at risk. In America — alone among wealthy nations — everyone is a pink slip or job change or new illness away from finding they’ve lost coverage or are uninsurable.

This is the shameful reality behind the GOP’s rhetoric on health care. Republicans don’t want to spend a penny to insure the uninsured.

We know this because back during the original debate over Obamacare, the “boldest” GOP alternative would have extended coverage to 3 million of the 50 million uninsured, versus Obama’s 30 million (which still leaves us 20 million short of behaving like every other civilized nation, mind you).

It was not always thus. It’s striking to recall that back in 1992, George H.W. Bush put out a serious plan to cover 30 million of the then 35 million uninsured. (Democrats at the time rejected it, figuring they’d do the job on their own terms once Bill Clinton won. We know how that turned out.) So the erosion of Republican seriousness over two decades can be tracked with unusual precision. As the ranks of the uninsured have soared, the size of Republican compassion has shriveled.

Why?

Daniel Patrick Moynihan gave me the most convincing explanation not long before he died in 2003. “Those folks never vote for us,” he told me, summing up the Republican mind on the issue, “and we have our priorities for the money.”

Like trillions more in tax cuts for the best-off Americans over the next decade.

You may have noticed that Republicans have been struggling to come up with a credible alternative to the Affordable Care Act once they repeal it. Why is it so hard? Because Obamacare WAS the Republican alternative. It was the conservative-designed mandate and subsidy approach. Republicans are in such an intellectual cul-de-sac on this issue that Paul Ryan actually blasted Obamacare for being a sop to the president’s “cronies” in the insurance industry. Oy!

I feel like a broken record but some truths bear repeating. Only in America could a Democratic president pass Mitt Romney’s health plan and fund it partly through John McCain’s best idea from the last campaign (taxing some employer provided plans) and be branded a “socialist.”

In every other advanced nation, the idea that government has a central role in assuring basic health security was settled decades ago — a consensus conservatives abroad embrace. Always remember: conservative icon Margaret Thatcher would have been chased from office if she had proposed anything as radically conservative as Obamacare — which relies on private docs to deliver the medicine, after all, and still leaves 20 million people uncovered.

Here’s what you should do, Mr. President. In the debates this fall, pull out a small laminated card you’ve had made as a prop for this purpose. Then remind Mitt Romney that the ranks of the uninsured today are equal to the combined populations of Oklahoma, Connecticut, Iowa, Mississippi, Kansas, Kentucky, Arkansas, Utah, Oregon, Nevada, New Mexico, West Virginia, Nebraska, Idaho, Maine, New Hampshire, Hawaii, Rhode Island, Montana, Delaware, North Dakota, South Dakota, Alaska, Vermont and Wyoming.

Read that list slowly, Mr. President. Then ask your opponent: Would America turn its back on the citizens of these 25 states if everyone there lacked basic health coverage? That’s what we’ve been doing for decades. You knew it was right to act when you were governor of Massachusetts, Mitt. How can you pretend we don’t need to solve this for the nation? And how can you object with a straight face when your own pioneering plan was my model?

The president should also say he’d be happy to talk reform once Republicans offer a rival plan that the CBO certifies will cover 30 million people, as the Affordable Care Act does.

Today’s Republican party won’t do it. They want the money for tax cuts for the top. They don’t care.

Master Roshi
2012-07-11, 11:53
people are still gonna drop dead faster than ever even with Obamacare implemented, the quality of healthcare will go down and big pharma's drug monopoly over the allopathic model of medicine will continue to grow larger, their profits will also grow while the people's health will continue to deteriorate

meesterperfect
2012-07-11, 14:26
some people just think its the governments job to take care of them in every aspect of life.
everything they got involved with they screw up. theres a thousand examples in our lifetime alone.
now if youre a leech leeching off the system aka the taxpayers of course you'd have no problem with that, you're gonna get taken care of on their hard work and sacrifice.

and btw, obama lied and said it wasnt a tax, but in order to get it voted on by the supreme kangaroo court they had to fess up and admit it.
so they are already lying about it right from the get go.........boy that really gains my trust and confidence in it.

Will E Worm
2012-07-11, 14:44
people are still gonna drop dead faster than ever even with Obamacare implemented, the quality of healthcare will go down and big pharma's drug monopoly over the allopathic model of medicine will continue to grow larger, their profits will also grow while the people's health will continue to deteriorate

Quality care will go down. Doctors have already said they will quit.

Report: 83 percent of doctors have considered quitting over Obamacare. Link (http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/09/report-83-percent-of-doctors-have-considered-quitting-over-obamacare/)


some people just think its the governments job to take care of them in every aspect of life.
everything they got involved with they screw up. theres a thousand examples in our lifetime alone.
now if youre a leech leeching off the system aka the taxpayers of course you'd have no problem with that, you're gonna get taken care of on their hard work and sacrifice.

and btw, obama lied and said it wasnt a tax, but in order to get it voted on by the supreme kangaroo court they had to fess up and admit it.
so they are already lying about it right from the get go.........boy that really gains my trust and confidence in it.


Too many people have become dependant on the federal government. Living off the backs of others from programs that are not Constitutional. With no way of getting them back to work. Because most of them don't want to and they are able bodied.

Obamacare is one of the largest tax increases ever. People still want to give him four more years... :rolleyes:



ABC’s George Stephanopoulos did.* When he directly challenged the president on the mandate-as-tax question, he said, “Under this mandate, the government is forcing people to spend money, fining you if you don’t.* How is that not a tax?”

And if both the premium and the penalty are considered a tax, the mandate becomes the largest tax increase in U.S. history.*And that doesn’t include all of the other taxes*imposed by the legislation.

The median U.S. family income is about $50,000.* Family health coverage can easily run $20,000 a year — and rising quickly.* In that scenario, the coverage mandate is essentially a 40 percent tax on that family, which is now required by law to ensure that every family member has qualifying coverage.

And because the cost of the coverage will be similar even though incomes vary significantly, the lower the income the higher the effective tax rate — in essence, the most regressive tax in U.S. history, too.

Article (http://www.forbes.com/sites/merrillmatthews/2012/06/29/is-obamacare-the-largest-tax-increase-in-u-s-history/)

Rey C.
2012-07-11, 14:53
As I've said previously, the one who made it possible for anyone and everyone to get (emergency) medical care, with NO EXCEPTIONS, was the Conservative God, Ronald Wilson Reagan, with his Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act of 1986. With that, he used the power of the Federal government to force private businesses in the United States to provide services to people, even if they admitted that they could not pay for those services, even if they had an existing unpaid balance, even if they were known criminals or even if they were in this country illegally. So, I'm very sorry, but I find it just too funny to now be hearing generic conservatives whining about how Obama forced his socialist, communist, Nazi, Kenyan, Muslim ways on our once great nation. As one who was born at night... but not LAST night: cry me a fucking river already! :facepalm:

We had Michele Bachmann and others proposing (strictly) "free market" solutions to the health care and insurance crisis in this country a couple of years ago. And yes, I realize that she's borderline retarded and probably doesn't have as good a handle on economics as a brain damaged chimp. But instead of just recognizing that there indeed was a problem, the wingnuts on the far right used scare tactics to get less than bright people stirred up. And instead of working to solve a real problem, their ONLY mission was to block any sort of legislation and because of that, we ended up with the law that we now have. The opposition is correct, in that this bill was written rather poorly and forced through. But their present day whining falls on deaf ears in my case. It's like when my girlfriend pouts and doesn't want to offer an opinion on where we should eat. Since we both need to eat, and we both could offer an opinion, she has no one but herself to blame if I make a choice that she doesn't like. Instead of pouting and whining (like the tighty righties did), she should have been an adult and spoken up! I have a very short fuse and very little patience when it comes to irrational people.

Look! It is NOT the intended purpose of capitalism to solve social problems, unless there is a clear and defined path to profits (the actual purpose of public corporations!). I'm not crazy about this law either. It could/should have been better. And even though some don't seem to realize it, cutting taxes and deregulating is NOT a magic bullet to every issue known to mankind. So given the fact (not opinion.. it is a FACT) that every single person within the borders of the United States has a legal right to (emergency) medical care, no matter what, it really just comes down to a question of who pays for this care and how it will be paid for. Hospitals and those of us with insurance or money now shoulder that burden. Rather than seeing more hospitals close their emergency rooms on campus or my bills going up even more, my feeling is that we need a system that is supported by ALL of those who have the legal right to use these services. But as I've also said, if you want to give up that legal right to medical services, I have no problem with you not paying into the system. As one Congressman facetiously said a couple of years ago, the prospect for those people then becomes, "don't get sick... but if you do, you better die quickly."

zeeblofowl_1969
2012-07-11, 15:16
If the governors ignore a law they should be arrested by Federal officers and treated like a criminal. The law is the law weather you agree with it or not there are procedures that are well established to remove laws you disagree with and if that doesn't work you are sworn as a public servant to abide by them.

Straight Shooter
2012-07-11, 15:26
some people just think its the governments job to take care of them in every aspect of life.
everything they got involved with they screw up. theres a thousand examples in our lifetime alone.
now if youre a leech leeching off the system aka the taxpayers of course you'd have no problem with that, you're gonna get taken care of on their hard work and sacrifice.

and btw, obama lied and said it wasnt a tax, but in order to get it voted on by the supreme kangaroo court they had to fess up and admit it.
so they are already lying about it right from the get go.........boy that really gains my trust and confidence in it.

Not sure if you're in America, but does that mean you wont be taking your Social Security or Medicare? and don say yes because "I pay into it" because thats not how it works

zeeblofowl_1969
2012-07-11, 15:26
The Daily Caller?? You post a paper founded by Tucker Carlson??? A conservative Libertarian??? A FOX News commentator?? Stick to one word replies and just making stuff up its far more reliable then anything this rag reports.

Master Roshi
2012-07-11, 15:33
If the governors ignore a law they should be arrested by Federal officers and treated like a criminal. The law is the law weather you agree with it or not there are procedures that are well established to remove laws you disagree with and if that doesn't work you are sworn as a public servant to abide by them.

you know at one point in US history it was constitutional to have blacks categorized as not fully human, everything Hitler did in Germany was under color of law too, just because an edict is passed does not make it right but when the people don't open that parachute which is their mind then ignorance is the order of the day

"When ignorance reigns in society and disorder in the minds of men, laws are multiplied, legislation is expected to do everything, and each fresh law being a miscalculation, men are continually led to demand from it what can only proceed from themselves, from their own education and their own morality." – French jurist M. Dalloy, quoted by Kropotkin, Law and Authority, 1886, p. 1

Master Roshi
2012-07-11, 15:39
Not sure if you're in America, but does that mean you wont be taking your Social Security or Medicare? and don say yes because "I pay into it" because thats not how it works

I have a feeling social security won't be around by the time I'm of age to collect and if it is I will probably be receiving payment in the form of a devalued dollar that is not worth much so I wish I could opt out now, and yup social security is definitely unconstitutional and people should have the option to opt out but the powers that be would never allow this because they have to keep looting the fund to pay for other government expenditures while replacing the SS fund with a bunch of IOUs, its an unsustainable system considering all the baby boomers are coming of age to collect and they don't have enough workers in the present day generation to keep up the payments into this fraud

Will E Worm
2012-07-11, 15:40
Not sure if you're in America, but does that mean you wont be taking your Social Security or Medicare? and don say yes because "I pay into it" because thats not how it works

Yes, it is. :hatsoff:


The Daily Caller?? You post a paper founded by Tucker Carlson??? A conservative Libertarian??? A FOX News commentator?? Stick to one word replies and just making stuff up its far more reliable then anything this rag reports.

Color of law. :tongue:


you know at one point in US history it was constitutional to have blacks categorized as not fully human, everything Hitler did in Germany was under color of law too, just because an edict is passed does not make it right but when the people don't open that parachute which is their mind then ignorance is the order of the day

"When ignorance reigns in society and disorder in the minds of men, laws are multiplied, legislation is expected to do everything, and each fresh law being a miscalculation, men are continually led to demand from it what can only proceed from themselves, from their own education and their own morality." – French jurist M. Dalloy, quoted by Kropotkin, Law and Authority, 1886, p. 1

:goodpost: Unconstitutional laws do not have to be followed. People need to learn that. No more income tax!

Rey C.
2012-07-11, 16:00
It is not up to individual Americans to decide for themselves which laws are or are not constitutional. That is not how it works. Whether it is this law or the Dred Scott decision, until the Supreme Court decides that a law is indeed unconstitutional, it remains the law of the land. "Unconstitutional" does not mean a law that some people don't like. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. Our system is not perfect. But having a nation full of armchair, amateur lawyers making up their own High Court decisions is not what we want or need.

Will E Worm
2012-07-11, 16:53
It is not up to individual Americans to decide for themselves which laws are or are not constitutional. That is not how it works. Whether it is this law or the Dred Scott decision, until the Supreme Court decides that a law is indeed unconstitutional, it remains the law of the land. "Unconstitutional" does not mean a law that some people don't like. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. Our system is not perfect. But having a nation full of armchair, amateur lawyers making up their own High Court decisions is not what we want or need.

No, the Law of the land is the Constitution. Not the kangaroo court in the District of Columbia. It is unconstitutional.

They need to repeal it soon, or I hope war breaks out. I'm tired of the lies and everything that goes on in Washington.

zeeblofowl_1969
2012-07-11, 17:35
you know at one point in US history it was constitutional to have blacks categorized as not fully human, everything Hitler did in Germany was under color of law too, just because an edict is passed does not make it right but when the people don't open that parachute which is their mind then ignorance is the order of the day

"When ignorance reigns in society and disorder in the minds of men, laws are multiplied, legislation is expected to do everything, and each fresh law being a miscalculation, men are continually led to demand from it what can only proceed from themselves, from their own education and their own morality." – French jurist M. Dalloy, quoted by Kropotkin, Law and Authority, 1886, p. 1

Then act like a civilized human and go through proper channels. Your comparisons are a reach at best, Hitler?? Really??

toddsmoke
2012-07-11, 17:43
Black Agenda Report is the best. Check it out.

http://blackagendareport.com/content/freedom-rider-nixoncare-finally-wins


Freedom Rider: Nixoncare Finally Wins
Wed, 07/11/2012 - 06:10 — Margaret Kimberley

single payer health care |
Obamacare |
Medicare for all |
Affordable Care Act

Printer-friendly version



by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley

The euphoria in the Obama camp over their health care victory at the U.S. Supreme Court shows “the Democrats of the 21st century are akin to the Republicans of forty years ago.” Back then, Richard Nixon proposed a health care plan very much resembling – and, in some ways, superior to – Obamacare. When the Obama plan goes into effect in 2014, “there will still be nothing to prevent health insurance companies from manipulating the market place and giving Americans access to inferior coverage with high deductibles.”

continued......

zeeblofowl_1969
2012-07-11, 17:43
No, the Law of the land is the Constitution. Not the kangaroo court in the District of Columbia. It is unconstitutional.

They need to repeal it soon, or I hope war breaks out. I'm tired of the lies and everything that goes on in Washington.

Wars begin when there is nothing left to lose and a great majority of Americans do not fall under nothing left to lose. If you root for war because not every man, woman, and child does not follow YOUR political ideology then you are far more whacked out then I ever believed. Any law found by The Supreme Court of this nation to be Constitutional is therefore Constitutional by law. Feel free to act like an American, for America and quit barking about a domestic 'WAR'. You may find yourself sitting in a cold dark prison cell if you keep spouting this kind of crap. Which, if you really want to see Americans start killing each other over a healthcare law, is where you belong.

PlumpRump
2012-07-11, 18:03
If the governors ignore a law they should be arrested by Federal officers and treated like a criminal. The law is the law weather you agree with it or not there are procedures that are well established to remove laws you disagree with and if that doesn't work you are sworn as a public servant to abide by them.

The SC ruled, in the very same decision upholding Obamacare, that the states may legally decline to participate in the federal expansion of Medicaid. So... yeah, they wouldn't really be ignoring any law.

StanScratch
2012-07-11, 18:10
you know at one point in US history it was constitutional to have blacks categorized as not fully human, everything Hitler did in Germany was under color of law too, just because an edict is passed does not make it right but when the people don't open that parachute which is their mind then ignorance is the order of the day

"When ignorance reigns in society and disorder in the minds of men, laws are multiplied, legislation is expected to do everything, and each fresh law being a miscalculation, men are continually led to demand from it what can only proceed from themselves, from their own education and their own morality." – French jurist M. Dalloy, quoted by Kropotkin, Law and Authority, 1886, p. 1


Jesus cock sucking fucking Christ, do you think you paranoid shits can go one fucking thread without pulling the whole Nazi scare tactic? It seriously makes you guys sound like the biggest bunch of fucking pussies around. The health care act is equal to the Nazi party? Are you guys actually that fucking delusional? If this is the mentality of those who vote, it is not wonder we have so many fuck tards as elected officials.

PlumpRump
2012-07-11, 18:42
Jesus cock sucking fucking Christ, do you think you paranoid shits can go one fucking thread without pulling the whole Nazi scare tactic? It seriously makes you guys sound like the biggest bunch of fucking pussies around. The health care act is equal to the Nazi party? Are you guys actually that fucking delusional? If this is the mentality of those who vote, it is not wonder we have so many fuck tards as elected officials.

Stan, are you really implying that only Repubs/Cons equate things that they dislike to Nazism? Really? No one on the left has ever called anyone on the right a Nazi? Really? The "Nazi scare tactic" is an invention and a tool solely of the right? Really? George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Ronald Reagan and about a million other Republican political figures are on line 2 for you Stan, and they disagree.

Next you're going to try to tell us that Keith Olberman (http://www.mediaite.com/tv/keith-olbermann-and-nazis-a-record-of-over-the-top-hyperbole/), Steve Cohen (D-TN) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/19/steve-cohen-republican-nazis_n_811170.html), Major Owens (D-FL) (http://cnsnews.com/node/22011), Al Sharpton (http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/middle-class-guy/2012/may/30/rev-al-sharpton-calls-republicans-nazis-video/), Michael Moore (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0361596/) and on and on and on, are actually Republicans, and we're just delusional, brainwashed fucktards for not already knowing that, right?

I'm not defending the tactic, its uninspired and diversionary at best, but to actually try to argue that the "Nazi card" is a one sided, partisan-based, conservative thing is the lamest argument you've come up with yet.

meesterperfect
2012-07-11, 19:34
Not sure if you're in America, but does that mean you wont be taking your Social Security or Medicare? and don say yes because "I pay into it" because thats not how it works

hey what's up Ice? lovely to see you again my friend.

well then I don't know what that almost 100 k or so i paid to SS and medicare in my lifetime was for. believe me, I would rather they give it back,they can even keep the interest they made off it, and take care if myself when i'm .............what is it now? 98 years old?

Master Roshi
2012-07-11, 20:24
the bottom line is that Obamacare will not solve the problems that plague US healthcare, it will only make them worse, its a another tax for a lower standard of care that is already in place, insurance companies (many owned by the banks) wrote the plan for profit and not for the welfare of the people

316sherm
2012-07-11, 20:29
Jesus cock sucking fucking Christ, do you think you paranoid shits can go one fucking thread without pulling the whole Nazi scare tactic? It seriously makes you guys sound like the biggest bunch of fucking pussies around. The health care act is equal to the Nazi party? Are you guys actually that fucking delusional? If this is the mentality of those who vote, it is not wonder we have so many fuck tards as elected officials.

:thumbsup:

"They" are so quick to judge. People like that are only worried about themselves, and could care less about anyone else.

Master Roshi
2012-07-11, 20:31
and I was making an example about the irony of Law, I was not comparing the health care act to anything

Master Roshi
2012-07-11, 20:33
:thumbsup:

"They" are so quick to judge. People like that are only worried about themselves, and could care less about anyone else.

I could not care less if the president was from Mars, he's a disaster, like the Bushes and Clinton's before him

Rey C.
2012-07-11, 23:21
No, the Law of the land is the Constitution. Not the kangaroo court in the District of Columbia. It is unconstitutional.

Yes, the law of the land is based on the Constitution. And according to the Constitution, what is the role of the Supreme Court? So no, the Constitution does not give you, me or anyone else the right to decide for ourselves what is and what is not constitutional. That role is reserved, by the Constitution, for the Supreme Court.


Hamilton had written that through the practice of judicial review the Court ensured that the will of the whole people, as expressed in their Constitution, would be supreme over the will of a legislature, whose statutes might express only the temporary will of part of the people. And Madison had written that constitutional interpretation must be left to the reasoned judgment of independent judges, rather than to the tumult and conflict of the political process. If every constitutional question were to be decided by public political bargaining, Madison argued, the Constitution would be reduced to a battleground of competing factions, political passion and partisan spirit.

Ol' James Madison was a pretty smart feller, eh? ;)

Will E Worm
2012-07-12, 13:24
the bottom line is that Obamacare will not solve the problems that plague US healthcare, it will only make them worse, its a another tax for a lower standard of care that is already in place, insurance companies (many owned by the banks) wrote the plan for profit and not for the welfare of the people

:goodpost:


Yes, the law of the land is based on the Constitution. And according to the Constitution, what is the role of the Supreme Court? So no, the Constitution does not give you, me or anyone else the right to decide for ourselves what is and what is not constitutional. That role is reserved, by the Constitution, for the Supreme Court.

Not at all. :facepalm:

Mayhem
2012-07-12, 18:30
Not at all. :facepalm:

Explain.

StanScratch
2012-07-12, 18:35
Stan, are you really implying that only Repubs/Cons equate things that they dislike to Nazism? Really? No one on the left has ever called anyone on the right a Nazi? Really? The "Nazi scare tactic" is an invention and a tool solely of the right? Really? George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Ronald Reagan and about a million other Republican political figures are on line 2 for you Stan, and they disagree.

Next you're going to try to tell us that Keith Olberman (http://www.mediaite.com/tv/keith-olbermann-and-nazis-a-record-of-over-the-top-hyperbole/), Steve Cohen (D-TN) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/19/steve-cohen-republican-nazis_n_811170.html), Major Owens (D-FL) (http://cnsnews.com/node/22011), Al Sharpton (http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/middle-class-guy/2012/may/30/rev-al-sharpton-calls-republicans-nazis-video/), Michael Moore (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0361596/) and on and on and on, are actually Republicans, and we're just delusional, brainwashed fucktards for not already knowing that, right?

I'm not defending the tactic, its uninspired and diversionary at best, but to actually try to argue that the "Nazi card" is a one sided, partisan-based, conservative thing is the lamest argument you've come up with yet.


Did I say that, or did I site this one case? Did I need to go through every case where a liberal compared whomever to a Nazi, for your entertainment?
Ok, then.
Anyone - anyone - who attempts to compare anything going on in the United States with the Nazis or the Holocaust is a fucking cowardly cunt.
Is that good enough for your tender little feelings? Does baby have his ba-ba, now?

PlumpRump
2012-07-12, 19:31
Did I say that, or did I site this one case? Did I need to go through every case where a liberal compared whomever to a Nazi, for your entertainment?
Ok, then.
Anyone - anyone - who attempts to compare anything going on in the United States with the Nazis or the Holocaust is a fucking cowardly cunt.
Is that good enough for your tender little feelings? Does baby have his ba-ba, now?

Actually, no, you didn't really "site [sic] this one case," you were speaking in generalities aimed at a group of "you guys," but, yeah, the way you restated it is - if not typically condescending - a lot better, so thank you.

I just get confused when you start using terms like "...you paranoid shits," "... makes you guys sound like," "...Are you guys actually that fucking delusional," and on and on, because it makes it sound like you're talking about a specific group of people who have different political views than you do, and how they do things that your ilk would never, ever, even consider doing. But you're right, you're usually so agreeable and non-partisan. Silly me for thinking you were labeling an entire group of politically like-minded people. I realize now that "you guys" would never do that.

zeeblofowl_1969
2012-07-12, 23:44
Explain.

He cannot. An empty headed angry little man with little to give and even less to say.

mikexmoran
2012-07-13, 00:04
Governments tend not to solve problems, only to rearrange them. Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives. We can't help everyone, but everyone can help someone. Welfare's purpose should be to eliminate, as far as possible, the need for its own existence.

StanScratch
2012-07-13, 05:19
Actually, no, you didn't really "site [sic] this one case," you were speaking in generalities aimed at a group of "you guys," but, yeah, the way you restated it is - if not typically condescending - a lot better, so thank you.

I just get confused when you start using terms like "...you paranoid shits," "... makes you guys sound like," "...Are you guys actually that fucking delusional," and on and on, because it makes it sound like you're talking about a specific group of people who have different political views than you do, and how they do things that your ilk would never, ever, even consider doing. But you're right, you're usually so agreeable and non-partisan. Silly me for thinking you were labeling an entire group of politically like-minded people. I realize now that "you guys" would never do that.

Actually, I never said I was not labeling a like-minded group, either. Since the whole Obamacare thing came to light, you guys - that would mean Republicans, conservatives, righties, whichever you wish to call yourselves (since you have seemed to willfully put yourself into the "you guy" group) have mightily increased the whole Nazi/Deathcamp thing. I compared the lefties who called Bush the next Hitler fucking idiots back when it happened, and agreed with the righties when they cried it was not right.
Of course, using that rhetoric makes you look like bigger pussies in my book. Your own use of the phrase makes you look quite unoriginal, not only does it make you look like a bunch of overreacting little pansies, not only does it make you look like a bunch of uneducated dolts with not an iota of historical context, not only does it continue your "holier-than-thou" attitude in that "they cannot do it, but we can", but to use a phrase that made you guys so angry 10 years ago now so willingly makes you look like bigger cowards.
This is not something which has only been used in a couple of uses, either, by a couple of bloggers or forum posters. No, your Beck, Rush, Hannity, Bill, FoxNews have used it quite willingly and liberally. Hell, even some of your right-leaning elected leaders have compared Obamacare to the Nazi holocaust. This is not a couple of people holding signs during protests - this has been a war drum you guys have been beating since the legislation has been introduced. And until you are able to come up with anything more realistic as a joke, you will forever be looked upon as a simplistic joke.

Mayhem
2012-07-13, 05:46
Actually, I never said I was not labeling a like-minded group, either. Since the whole Obamacare thing came to light, you guys - that would mean Republicans, conservatives, righties, whichever you wish to call yourselves (since you have seemed to willfully put yourself into the "you guy" group) have mightily increased the whole Nazi/Deathcamp thing. I compared the lefties who called Bush the next Hitler fucking idiots back when it happened, and agreed with the righties when they cried it was not right.
Of course, using that rhetoric makes you look like bigger pussies in my book. Your own use of the phrase makes you look quite unoriginal, not only does it make you look like a bunch of overreacting little pansies, not only does it make you look like a bunch of uneducated dolts with not an iota of historical context, not only does it continue your "holier-than-thou" attitude in that "they cannot do it, but we can", but to use a phrase that made you guys so angry 10 years ago now so willingly makes you look like bigger cowards.
This is not something which has only been used in a couple of uses, either, by a couple of bloggers or forum posters. No, your Beck, Rush, Hannity, Bill, FoxNews have used it quite willingly and liberally. Hell, even some of your right-leaning elected leaders have compared Obamacare to the Nazi holocaust. This is not a couple of people holding signs during protests - this has been a war drum you guys have been beating since the legislation has been introduced. And until you are able to come up with anything more realistic as a joke, you will forever be looked upon as a simplistic joke.

Stan is absolutely right and it has been noticed and reported on. Glenn Beck especially has been using Nazi analogies for years, on everything and everyone.

And something that bears repeating: Obamacare and Romneycare are the same fucking thing. Goosestep to that, whydon'tcha.

Rey C.
2012-07-13, 12:24
Yes, the law of the land is based on the Constitution. And according to the Constitution, what is the role of the Supreme Court? So no, the Constitution does not give you, me or anyone else the right to decide for ourselves what is and what is not constitutional. That role is reserved, by the Constitution, for the Supreme Court.




Not at all. :facepalm:


Explain.

I'm also awaiting that explanation.

Straight Shooter
2012-07-13, 12:39
For being known as the tough guys, Conservatives seem to shit their pants alot

PlumpRump
2012-07-13, 13:57
Actually, I never said I was not labeling a like-minded group, either. Since the whole Obamacare thing came to light, you guys - that would mean Republicans, conservatives, righties, whichever you wish to call yourselves (since you have seemed to willfully put yourself into the "you guy" group) have mightily increased the whole Nazi/Deathcamp thing. I compared the lefties who called Bush the next Hitler fucking idiots back when it happened, and agreed with the righties when they cried it was not right.
Of course, using that rhetoric makes you look like bigger pussies in my book. Your own use of the phrase makes you look quite unoriginal, not only does it make you look like a bunch of overreacting little pansies, not only does it make you look like a bunch of uneducated dolts with not an iota of historical context, not only does it continue your "holier-than-thou" attitude in that "they cannot do it, but we can", but to use a phrase that made you guys so angry 10 years ago now so willingly makes you look like bigger cowards.
This is not something which has only been used in a couple of uses, either, by a couple of bloggers or forum posters. No, your Beck, Rush, Hannity, Bill, FoxNews have used it quite willingly and liberally. Hell, even some of your right-leaning elected leaders have compared Obamacare to the Nazi holocaust. This is not a couple of people holding signs during protests - this has been a war drum you guys have been beating since the legislation has been introduced. And until you are able to come up with anything more realistic as a joke, you will forever be looked upon as a simplistic joke.

Actually, you did say you were citing the one case. Even though you really weren't, that was your argument in your first reply. So, which is it? Now you're trying to convince everyone that the right uses this tactic more than the left, again, and its just simply not true. I can find more examples of liberals calling conservatives Nazis over the healthcare debate than the other way around, easily. Calling it a war drum (speaking of overused cliches) is just a diversion from the actual fact that its the other way around, something you're quite good at doing. On par, this tactic was, and remains an invention of the left, that's just a fact, and I'm done discussing it with you. Your pretentious and condescending attitude has blinded you to a lot of the truth over the last few years - and, I imagine, most of your whole life - and your whole strategy for "debate" remains to be "Nuh-uh! That's what 'you guys' do!" Like telling me that I have a "holier than thou" attitude, while using a "holier than thou" attitude and attempting to speak down to me, just like you do to everyone that disagrees with you. Its laughable, and juvenile. A liberal calling someone "holier than thou" and claiming that people on the right use double standards? You've got to be kidding me.

You can lump me in with whatever group you like if it helps you sleep at night. Fact is, all of the things that you have accused "us guys" of doing, have nothing to do with me and I challenge you to do some actual research to show me where I've called someone a Nazi, or the like, or even where I was the least bit upset when people called Bush a Nazi. Your childish, inarticulate arguments are nothing but veiled name calling, and broad sweeping generalities, and contrary to your own belief, you're not making any real points, but rather distracting from them. You're an absolute joke.

StanScratch
2012-07-13, 14:33
Actually, you did say you were citing the one case. Even though you really weren't, that was your argument in your first reply. So, which is it? Now you're trying to convince everyone that the right uses this tactic more than the left, again, and its just simply not true. I can find more examples of liberals calling conservatives Nazis over the healthcare debate than the other way around, easily. Calling it a war drum (speaking of overused cliches) is just a diversion from the actual fact that its the other way around, something you're quite good at doing. On par, this tactic was, and remains an invention of the left, that's just a fact, and I'm done discussing it with you. Your pretentious and condescending attitude has blinded you to a lot of the truth over the last few years - and, I imagine, most of your whole life - and your whole strategy for "debate" remains to be "Nuh-uh! That's what 'you guys' do!" Like telling me that I have a "holier than thou" attitude, while using a "holier than thou" attitude and attempting to speak down to me, just like you do to everyone that disagrees with you. Its laughable, and juvenile. A liberal calling someone "holier than thou" and claiming that people on the right use double standards? You've got to be kidding me.

You can lump me in with whatever group you like if it helps you sleep at night. Fact is, all of the things that you have accused "us guys" of doing, have nothing to do with me and I challenge you to do some actual research to show me where I've called someone a Nazi, or the like, or even where I was the least bit upset when people called Bush a Nazi. Your childish, inarticulate arguments are nothing but veiled name calling, and broad sweeping generalities, and contrary to your own belief, you're not making any real points, but rather distracting from them. You're an absolute joke.

How is it veiled name calling when I specifically call groups of people "cunts". Seriously, if you are going to try to argue points with someone, at least try to go for the jugular instead of acting like a little pussy and running away. Be a man around it, instead of trying to be a pretty little ballerina.
But, of course, you are quite right. A am a bad, bad man who calls names and attempts to bait with grammatical corrections. I am glad you have never tried to stoop to any of those levels.

PlumpRump
2012-07-13, 14:40
How is it veiled name calling when I specifically call groups of people "cunts". Seriously, if you are going to try to argue points with someone, at least try to go for the jugular instead of acting like a little pussy and running away. Be a man around it, instead of trying to be a pretty little ballerina.
But, of course, you are quite right. A am a bad, bad man who calls names and attempts to bait with grammatical corrections. I am glad you have never tried to stoop to any of those levels.

There you go again, sidestepping any actual discussion or rebuttal of points. Shocker.

vodkazvictim
2012-07-13, 17:36
Look! It is NOT the intended purpose of capitalism to solve social problems[/B][/I]
So, you're saying that we need to drop Capitalism and start addressing social problems?

Rey C.
2012-07-14, 11:51
So, you're saying that we need to drop Capitalism and start addressing social problems?

No, not at all. Capitalism is a very effective economic system. But most of the world uses mixed (or even managed) capitalism - as far as I know, there is no major nation that uses (or has ever used) pure/laissez faire capitalism. As an economic system, (mixed/managed) capitalism is just fine. I'm just saying that solving social problems is not what capitalism does, or should try to do. It relies on the profit motive. So unless there is some obvious and defined profit opportunity in solving a particular social problem, it's not going to be addressed. People on the left and the right need to recognize that limitation and find other means of addressing social problems.

Lorazepam
2012-07-14, 16:01
Not at all. :facepalm:

please try and explain

Mayhem
2012-07-14, 17:49
No, not at all. Capitalism is a very effective economic system. But most of the world uses mixed (or even managed) capitalism - as far as I know, there is no major nation that uses (or has ever used) pure/laissez faire capitalism. As an economic system, (mixed/managed) capitalism is just fine. I'm just saying that solving social problems is not what capitalism does, or should try to do. It relies on the profit motive. So unless there is some obvious and defined profit opportunity in solving a particular social problem, it's not going to be addressed. People on the left and the right need to recognize that limitation and find other means of addressing social problems.

The profit motive ( BTW, I'm not disagreeing with you) behind fixing every school we have, making sure every student has a world class education, arts, science, math, literature; should be self evident, yet it continues to be a quagmire. And now stated like Texas and Arizona are trying to make it worse.

The profit motive behind universal healthcare should be self-evident (to the point that both Romney and Obama agree on the same template), yet all we have is conflict over it.

Master Roshi
2012-07-14, 18:38
Alexander Hamilton was actually an agent of the Rothschild Dynasty and a trader to the Republic with his insistence on a central bank for the independent colonies which is why Aaron Burr ended his existence in a pistol duel