# Don't be on the wrong side of history



## Chris (Jul 21, 2009)

Today it would be hard to find one member of Congress who openly advocates the abolition of Medicare or Social Security. It's true that during the Bush Presidency, right-wing Republicans tried to weaken, dilute and privatize both. But their proposals were always passed off as attempts to "strengthen" these programs that have become two of the most popular and widely respected institutions of government.

Of course it wasn't always so. Both Social Security and Medicare were incredibly controversial when they were passed - the first in 1937 and the second in 1964. In fact, their opponents sounded very much like today's Republicans as they denounced them for being "big government takeovers" - or, in the case of Medicare, "socialized medicine."

But it wasn't long after they were enacted that Social Security and Medicare became "third rails" in American politics. Former Senator Bob Dole once made a speech where he said: "I was there, fighting against Medicare." The TV spot reprising that speech during his 1996 campaign against Bill Clinton helped seal Dole's defeat. 

The view shared by most Americans - and all senior citizens - was summed up in the slogan for the 2005 campaign to defeat Bush's privatization program: "Hands off my Social Security."

No one brags that their father or grandfather lead the fight to oppose Social Security or Medicare - any more than they brag that their forbearer lead the fight against civil rights. But of course in the 1960's, civil rights did not have the universal acclaim it has today. 

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. had many detractors who thought his agitation for justice was downright subversive. Others thought that he wanted to move too fast. That extended to the Pastors - many men of good will - who asked him to call off his protests in Birmingham, Alabama in 1963. It was to those Pastors that he wrote his famous letter from the Birmingham jail: "Why We Can't Wait." 

In 1963 most people would not have dreamed that just a few decades hence, a national holiday would be named after the young organizer and agitator, Martin Luther King. 

Every major social advance is surrounded by controversy and conflict. That's because every time there is change in the status quo there are winners and losers. The controversy over President Obama's health care reform does not center mainly on "differences in approach" or academic disagreements over the way that health care systems should be designed in some ideal world. They center instead on battles over wealth and power - just as they did when the Congress created Social Security or Medicare, or passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Robert Creamer: Memo to Members of Congress: Don't Be on the Wrong Side of History


----------



## xsited1 (Jul 21, 2009)

The race card rears it's ugly head again from a self-loathing white man.  Didn't see that coming!


----------



## Oddball (Jul 21, 2009)

The bankrupt Medicare/Medicaid and nearly bankrupt Social Security  are being touted as evidence of success??

Desperation _*really*_ must be setting in!


----------



## Chris (Jul 21, 2009)

xsited1 said:


> The race card rears it's ugly head again from a self-loathing white man.  Didn't see that coming!



Speaking of being on the wrong side of history....


----------



## Xenophon (Jul 21, 2009)

How long before Adolph and his goose steppers are brought into it?


----------



## Chris (Jul 21, 2009)

Dude said:


> The bankrupt and Medicare/Medicaid and nearly bankrupt Social Security  are being touted as evidence of success??
> 
> Desperation _*really*_ must be setting in!



Social Security and Medicare has taken care of my father and my mother for years and is not bankrupt.

Nice try, though.


----------



## Oddball (Jul 21, 2009)

Irrelevant to the fact that those programs are both headed for a financial train wreck.

But you're always disregarding facts that don't fit into your collectivist authoritarian dogma, so the non sequitur deflection isn't surprising.


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 21, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > The bankrupt and Medicare/Medicaid and nearly bankrupt Social Security  are being touted as evidence of success??
> ...


really?
you mean not yet


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 21, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > The bankrupt and Medicare/Medicaid and nearly bankrupt Social Security  are being touted as evidence of success??
> ...



Nice antecdotal evidence......

The numbers, not only its stupid inception, are unsustainable with the aging of the Baby Boomer generation. Might be doing fine for YOUR mother and father.....but will not work well for you.

BTW, where is health care and retirement benefits a right under the Constitution?


----------



## hjmick (Jul 21, 2009)

Dude said:


> The bankrupt Medicare/Medicaid and nearly bankrupt Social Security  are being touted as evidence of success??
> 
> Desperation _*really*_ must be setting in!



At least he didn't mention Amtrak.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 21, 2009)

Arawyn said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



Where is the CDC in the Constitution? Really freakin' stupid point!


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 21, 2009)

Dude said:


> Irrelevant to the fact that those programs are both headed for a financial train wreck.
> 
> But you're always disregarding facts that don't fit into your collectivist authoritarian dogma, so the non sequitur deflection isn't surprising.



Not at all. We will just make the personal part of SS go right up the scale on all earnings


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 21, 2009)

Old Rocks said:


> Arawyn said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Where did I say I advocated the CDC. What is a more freakin' stupid point? Me pointing out no Constitutional backing, or you assuming I support other non-Constitutional programs? Hmmmm....:think:


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 21, 2009)

Let's see, if nothing changes, Social Security will have to reduce benefits by 25% in 2040. I will be 97 that year. Damn, am I ever worried! In the meantime, just work real hard, and pay all your taxes, I really enjoy that SS check coming in every month!


----------



## Oddball (Jul 21, 2009)

IOW, as long as you get your piece of the graft, it's all good.

Well, at least you're an honest lamprey.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 21, 2009)

LOL. Worked enough at high enough wages to get nearly the max amount of SS. And I am still working at said wages. Just keep flippin' burgers, Dude, and paying your taxes.


----------



## Oddball (Jul 21, 2009)

I don't pay SSI, ya moocher.

My business affairs are run through corporate and trust entities, and I take my pay in dividends.

Old Diumbass.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 22, 2009)

Dude said:


> I don't pay SSI, ya moocher.
> 
> My business affairs are run through corporate and trust entities, and I take my pay in dividends.
> 
> Old Diumbass.



in other words old dumbfuck....YOU keep cleaning the Head at the Country Club....Dude likes a clean toilet, to take a Old Rock when he has too...


----------



## Chris (Jul 22, 2009)

Dude said:


> I don't pay SSI, ya moocher.
> 
> My business affairs are run through corporate and trust entities, and I take my pay in dividends.
> 
> Old Diumbass.



Sure you do....


----------



## Lumpy 1 (Jul 22, 2009)

Old Rocks, Word to the not so wise, quit picking on Arawyn unless you enjoy a sword up the backside!


----------



## Oddball (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > I don't pay SSI, ya moocher.
> ...


Go ahead.....Keep paying your taxes as W-4 employee, fool.


----------



## Chris (Jul 22, 2009)

Dude said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



Sorry, I'm not an employee. I'm an independent contractor.

And I don't mind paying my taxes. 

Ya moocher.


----------



## elvis (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



you don't mind ripping off veterans either.


----------



## Chris (Jul 22, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



You really need to find another crush.

You following me around is getting embarassing.


----------



## Oddball (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


I pay all the taxes I'm required to.

But I'm smart enough to pay at least 15+% less than you....lawfully.

Sucker.


----------



## Chris (Jul 22, 2009)

Dude said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



Ya moocher.


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


how is he a moocher if he is paying what he is required to?


----------



## elvis (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



How noble of you to stick up for Old Roxy in this thread.  It must be true love.


----------



## elvis (Jul 22, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



because he isn't paying for Chris' parasitic ass.


----------



## Oddball (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


I'm following the law.....The same law you could follow if you weren't such a fool.


----------



## Chris (Jul 22, 2009)

Perfect example of why we have to raise taxes on the wealthy.


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



How is he mooching?

If he doesn't pay in to SS and FICA, what is he mooching? He pays his taxes. He has no opportunity to claim SSD or SSR.......and I'm betting he has a retirement set up that means no governmental involvement.


----------



## elvis (Jul 22, 2009)

Dude said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



He's too busy peddling shit properties.


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Perfect example of why we have to raise taxes on the wealthy.


you are fucking nuts
HE is not mooching off anyone
like you do
you were making money off the bailouts


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 22, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


for government bailout money


----------



## Oddball (Jul 22, 2009)

Arawyn said:


> How is he mooching?
> 
> If he doesn't pay in to SS and FICA, what is he mooching? He pays his taxes. He has no opportunity to claim SSD or SSR.......and I'm betting he has a retirement set up that means no governmental involvement.


Fuckin-A right!!

No gubbament cheez for this little black duck.

FWIW, my OASI account is only vetted for a little more than the minimum, which I either won't get or the USD will be so inflated that it's useless.


----------



## Chris (Jul 22, 2009)

Dude said:


> Arawyn said:
> 
> 
> > How is he mooching?
> ...



As I suspected...


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Arawyn said:
> ...


what the fuck are you talkin about
YOU are moochin of the government, not him


----------



## Oddball (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Perfect example of why we have to raise taxes on the wealthy.


I'm nowhere near wealthy.

But I will be because I deal in quality properties and projects, and use all the tools the wealthy (like Ted Kennedy) use to maintain and grow wealth.

Good luck with your OASI checks and Medicare, loser.


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Arawyn said:
> ...



And you proved........what exactly? 

That your posts were irrelevant?


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Perfect example of why we have to raise taxes on the wealthy.



So they can spread their wealth? So you and others can dip into what they worked for?


----------



## elvis (Jul 22, 2009)

Arawyn said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Perfect example of why we have to raise taxes on the wealthy.
> ...



pretty much.  once chris gets hurt and goes bankrupt from not having any insurance (he's too much of a shitstain to purchase it), you and i will be fitting the bill for his medical expenses.


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 22, 2009)

Dude said:


> Arawyn said:
> 
> 
> > How is he mooching?
> ...



IMO, that's the route everyone should take......


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 22, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> Arawyn said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Which would explain this thread's advocation of nationalized healthcare, maybe?


----------



## elvis (Jul 22, 2009)

Arawyn said:


> elvis3577 said:
> 
> 
> > Arawyn said:
> ...



socialism promotes free-loading behavior that Chris demonstrates ,so  probably.


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 22, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> Arawyn said:
> 
> 
> > elvis3577 said:
> ...



Well, his comments in his own thread tend to give credibility to the idea


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 22, 2009)

Arawyn said:


> elvis3577 said:
> 
> 
> > Arawyn said:
> ...


thats it exactly
chris is too damn cheap to buy his own coverage so he expects everyone else to foot his bill


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 22, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> Arawyn said:
> 
> 
> > elvis3577 said:
> ...



damn must be suck to be so jealous of anyone else's achievements.


----------



## elvis (Jul 22, 2009)

Arawyn said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Arawyn said:
> ...



he's a pathetic little bastard.


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 22, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> Arawyn said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


that he is


----------



## Oddball (Jul 22, 2009)

Looks like a couple of dummies ended up on the wrong side of both the facts and tax law!


----------



## Avatar4321 (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Today it would be hard to find one member of Congress who openly advocates the abolition of Medicare or Social Security. It's true that during the Bush Presidency, right-wing Republicans tried to weaken, dilute and privatize both. But their proposals were always passed off as attempts to "strengthen" these programs that have become two of the most popular and widely respected institutions of government.



Ron Paul. That was really tough. And He is far from the only one. And no Im not a Paulite. I simply think that your statement that it would be difficult to find one was incredibly stupid considering the cult following Dr. Paul has.



> Of course it wasn't always so. Both Social Security and Medicare were incredibly controversial when they were passed - the first in 1937 and the second in 1964. In fact, their opponents sounded very much like today's Republicans as they denounced them for being "big government takeovers" - or, in the case of Medicare, "socialized medicine."



They still are controversial. They are bankrupting the nation. And they were big government take overs. Look at it.




> But it wasn't long after they were enacted that Social Security and Medicare became "third rails" in American politics. Former Senator Bob Dole once made a speech where he said: "I was there, fighting against Medicare." The TV spot reprising that speech during his 1996 campaign against Bill Clinton helped seal Dole's defeat.



I highly doubt that was the reason for Senator Dole's defeat.




> The view shared by most Americans - and all senior citizens - was summed up in the slogan for the 2005 campaign to defeat Bush's privatization program: "Hands off my Social Security."



That's because they were misinformed.

See they thought that their money was actually there. In reality, the government spent it decades ago. If they had any left, it would have been spent in Obama's budget.

In reality, it was the Bush plan that suggested government take their hands off social security by giving people private accounts and letting them control it.



> No one brags that their father or grandfather lead the fight to oppose Social Security or Medicare - any more than they brag that their forbearer lead the fight against civil rights. But of course in the 1960's, civil rights did not have the universal acclaim it has today


. 

I would if they had. To be honest, I have no clue what my grandfather thought politically. I know what my dad thinks though. And Im very proud he has the right view.



> Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. had many detractors who thought his agitation for justice was downright subversive. Others thought that he wanted to move too fast. That extended to the Pastors - many men of good will - who asked him to call off his protests in Birmingham, Alabama in 1963. It was to those Pastors that he wrote his famous letter from the Birmingham jail: "Why We Can't Wait."



What the hell does equal treatment for all men have to do with the government controling our lives?



> In 1963 most people would not have dreamed that just a few decades hence, a national holiday would be named after the young organizer and agitator, Martin Luther King.



No, your probably right there. No one usually dreams of what holidays future generations might have. It's a stupid thing to dream about.

However, it still has nothing to do with medicare/social security. Appealing to the emotion of the civil rights movement doesnt support the stupidity of government expansion over our lives.



> Every major social advance is surrounded by controversy and conflict. That's because every time there is change in the status quo there are winners and losers. The controversy over President Obama's health care reform does not center mainly on "differences in approach" or academic disagreements over the way that health care systems should be designed in some ideal world. They center instead on battles over wealth and power - just as they did when the Congress created Social Security or Medicare, or passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.



How does our government spending money it doesnt have advance society?

You are also wrong. There arent always winners and losers.

When everyones taxes are lowered, everyone wins. They keep more of their money and the economy is stimulated. This benefits every single citizen in the nation.

Conversely, if Obamacare passes, everyone loses. Standard of medical care decreases. Prices increase. Efficiency decreases. Not to mention the deficit explodes and inflation destroys the economy. 25% unemployment benefits no one.

One might argue that the politicians will benefit. But after the people riot and string them up, they wont really be winners either.

You are right about one thing, this is about wealth and power and not at all about the people being served.


----------



## Avatar4321 (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Social Security and Medicare has taken care of my father and my mother for years and is not bankrupt.
> 
> Nice try, though.



Our national budget is $7 Trillion dollars in the Hole. Exactly, how do you think we have any money in either of those programs when we have to borrow trillions of dollars to pay the budget?

How about you get off your ass and take care of your mother and father instead of expecting everyone else to?


----------



## Avatar4321 (Jul 22, 2009)

Old Rocks said:


> Where is the CDC in the Constitution? Really freakin' stupid point!



No one claimed it was.


----------



## Avatar4321 (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Sorry, I'm not an employee. I'm an independent contractor.
> 
> And I don't mind paying my taxes.
> 
> Ya moocher.



Youre advocating the rich pay for your health care and calling him a moocher?

I will never understand the insanity of people.


----------



## Avatar4321 (Jul 22, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> how is he a moocher if he is paying what he is required to?



An even better question is "How is he a moocher if he is paying what he is required to and doesnt want government handouts to be given to anyone?"


----------



## Avatar4321 (Jul 22, 2009)

Arawyn said:


> So they can spread their wealth? So you and others can dip into what they worked for?



I already love this poster. Let me formally welcome you and thank you for your wise insights.


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 22, 2009)

Avatar4321 said:


> Arawyn said:
> 
> 
> > So they can spread their wealth? So you and others can dip into what they worked for?
> ...



LOL, thank you.


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 22, 2009)

xsited1 said:


> The race card rears it's ugly head again from a self-loathing white man.  Didn't see that coming!



You missed the point.  Expected.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 22, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



i bet Chrissy is the catcher in the relationship...


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 22, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



in places were you need a gun....


----------



## Avatar4321 (Jul 22, 2009)

sealybobo said:


> You missed the point.  Expected.



Actually, the point was very obvious. Appeal to an extremely emotional period in history to support your controversial political agenda even though they have absolutely nothing to do with each other. In fact, I could argue that they did the exact opposite.

The Civil rights movement was a movement to provide African Americans and other minorities with the same rights/responsibilities as others in our Republic.

They current healthcare "reform" movement to tae away our rights and responsibilities and give all that power to the government.

The civil rights movement, for the most part, benefited all Americans.

Obama care will benefit no one.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 22, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> Arawyn said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



dont you just love cockaroaches.....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 22, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> Arawyn said:
> 
> 
> > elvis3577 said:
> ...



you wanna get rid of Chrissy....turn on the lights...


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 22, 2009)

Avatar4321 said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry, I'm not an employee. I'm an independent contractor.
> ...



cocaroaches are not sane...human ones anyway...


----------



## Navy1960 (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Today it would be hard to find one member of Congress who openly advocates the abolition of Medicare or Social Security. It's true that during the Bush Presidency, right-wing Republicans tried to weaken, dilute and privatize both. But their proposals were always passed off as attempts to "strengthen" these programs that have become two of the most popular and widely respected institutions of government.
> 
> Of course it wasn't always so. Both Social Security and Medicare were incredibly controversial when they were passed - the first in 1937 and the second in 1964. In fact, their opponents sounded very much like today's Republicans as they denounced them for being "big government takeovers" - or, in the case of Medicare, "socialized medicine."
> 
> ...



"Experience teaches us to be most on our guard to protect
 liberty when the government's purposes are beneficent. Men
 born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their
 liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty
 lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning
 but without understanding."
 -- Justice Louis Brandeis


Chris, in the age where many Americans have grown up with a television and a personal computer as their parents and in a education system that teaches children social studies and not the history of this nation it does not suprise me that people would expect from their Govt. things that they are not empowered to do.  A lot of  Americans  who would rather not seek out  in life their own self security and that of their family, look to the Govt. to do these things for them and admire the Govt. when it passes these things out. What people do not realize is that this  expectation leads to laziness  and dependance on the Govt. and takes from the citizen the ability to choose their own destiny. That is a fundimental principle on which this nation was founded and has guided this nation for over  200 years. While every nation should take care of it's elderly and disabled as that is the mark of an advanced society, a nation that provides all the needs for it's citizens  does not trust it's citizens.  So if you wish to call that being on the wrong side of history then be my guest, I would put it this way,  I am on the right side of the constitution in which the nation I defended  was founded and  am taking a postion where  my daughter and her children will have the ability to make a life in this nation free to choose their own destiny.  It's you and those that support this sort of legislation who are on the wrong side of  the constitution and  your nation and you do so because  you feel because  your nation owe's you this "right" when then clearly do not.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 22, 2009)

Navy1960 said:


> Chris, in the age where many Americans have grown up with a television and a personal computer as their parents and in a education system that teaches children social studies and not the history of this nation it does not suprise me that people would expect from their Govt. things that they are not empowered to do.  A lot of  Americans  who would rather not seek out  in life their own self security and that of their family, look to the Govt. to do these things for them and admire the Govt. when it passes these things out. What people do not realize is that this  expectation leads to laziness  and dependance on the Govt. and takes from the citizen the ability to choose their own destiny. That is a fundimental principle on which this nation was founded and has guided this nation for over  200 years. While every nation should take care of it's elderly and disabled as that is the mark of an advanced society, a nation that provides all the needs for it's citizens  does not trust it's citizens.  So if you wish to call that being on the wrong side of history then be my guest, I would put it this way,  I am on the right side of the constitution in which the nation I defended  was founded and  am taking a postion where  my daughter and her children will have the ability to make a life in this nation free to choose their own destiny.  It's you and those that support this sort of legislation who are on the wrong side of  the constitution and  your nation and you do so because  you feel because  your nation owe's you this "right" when then clearly do not.



you just wasted however long it took you to type this Navy.....Christina does not want to hear anything about having to look out for himself.....he wants the tax payer to pay for his lazy cockroach ass....


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 22, 2009)

Avatar4321 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > You missed the point.  Expected.
> ...



Nonsense.  The Democrats don't want to take on the lobbyists and corporations who will donate to their opponents the next election.  Are you really this stupid?   

The Dems want to fix healthcare because that is what we elected them to do.  The ones that don't want to put single payer on the table have been bribed to obstruct.  That's why you are right when you say there is no difference between Dems and Reps because some Dems do act just like Republicans.  Notice the Dems that are obstructing have taken money from the healthcare insurance companies, just like the GOP who also work for those companies.  And the corporate media works with them too on spinning the facts.  

So don't say stupid things.  People are dying and/or going bankrupt because of our healthcare system.  We elected the Dems to fix it because we knew the GOP would not get in the way of good thing the insurance companies have going.  

And if oil goes to $4 a gallon and the Dems deal with it, that doesn't mean they want to take over oil companies, even though that's a great fucking idea.

And they don't want to run the banks, but if the bankers keep fucking us, they might have to.  The government should run our finances, not for profit bankers.  But good luck dealing with them.  

And the GOP all but killed GM and Chrysler the last 8 years.  The Dems don't want to own them.  They want to save jobs.  

So don't act like the Dems enjoy taking on the lobbyists.  Just look at how hard this is.  Obama's popularity is taking a hit.  You think he wants this fight?  Don't be a schmuck.


----------



## Oddball (Jul 22, 2009)

Get back to work, you lazy bum.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 22, 2009)

sealybobo said:


> Nonsense.  The Democrats don't want to take on the lobbyists and corporations who will donate to their opponents the next election.  Are you really this stupid?
> 
> The Dems want to fix healthcare because that is what we elected them to do.  The ones that don't want to put single payer on the table have been bribed to obstruct.  That's why you are right when you say there is no difference between Dems and Reps because some Dems do act just like Republicans.  Notice the Dems that are obstructing have taken money from the healthcare insurance companies, just like the GOP who also work for those companies.  And the corporate media works with them too on spinning the facts.
> 
> ...



Bobo....one minute you say the Dems are doing this and that.....and then in the next your saying they are a bunch of sell outs......which are they?....if they are no different then your teabagging Republican friends.....then why are you acting like they are in there fighting for us...when they are not?


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 22, 2009)

Dude said:


> Get back to work, you lazy bum.



he has already sold his allotment of Pelosi bobble head dolls for the day.....now he can fuck around....


----------



## Navy1960 (Jul 22, 2009)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyHt25Rfrjg&feature=related]YouTube - Is San Francisco a Model for Health Care Reform?[/ame]

Do you know everywhere you see this sort of mandated healthcare the one thing that stands out the most is cutting your nose off to spite your face. Let me explain, these businesses all cut back to pay for mandatory healthcare costs in services and  employee's so what you have is the economic engine that creates jobs punished for this socialized idea of having that which you don't earn. Then these same people turn around and complain because of the lack of jobs.  So is it any wonder comming from a state thats social programs have led it to the point where  it has to issue IOUS that we would have it championed by members of congress from that very same state?


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 22, 2009)

Navy1960 said:


> YouTube - Is San Francisco a Model for Health Care Reform?
> 
> Do you know everywhere you see this sort of mandated healthcare the one thing that stands out the most is cutting your nose off to spite your face. Let me explain, these businesses all cut back to pay for mandatory healthcare costs in services and  employee's so what you have is the economic engine that creates jobs punished for this socialized idea of having that which you don't earn. Then these same people turn around and complain because of the lack of jobs.  So is it any wonder comming from a state thats social programs have led it to the point where  it has to issue IOUS that we would have it championed by members of congress from that very same state?



Navy... California is right now and has been for sometime ....UNGOVERNABLE.....way to many entitlement programs that are now biting them in the ass.....State Union deals way out of line....Arnie was foolish to think he was going to make a difference....


----------



## Chris (Jul 22, 2009)

Avatar4321 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > You missed the point.  Expected.
> ...



Why do you lie?

Every other Western democracy has a single payer system and they pay HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare, and they cover everyone with results that are as good or better than ours. 

It is whinny little liars like you that are holding America back.


----------



## elvis (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Avatar4321 said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



and they all have double the unemployment rate.  it is parasitic fucks like you that are trying to bring america DOWN.


----------



## Chris (Jul 22, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Avatar4321 said:
> ...



Why do you lie?

Every Western democracy doesn't have 20% unemployment!

All the right does is lie.


----------



## Chris (Jul 22, 2009)

Published: June 2, 2009 
PARIS &#8212; The unemployment rate in the European Union pushed higher in April, indicating that nascent signs of economic recovery had yet to be felt in the labor market.

The seasonally adjusted unemployment rate for the 16 countries that use the euro currency rose to 9.2 percent in April, the highest rate since September 1999, from 8.9 percent in March, the Eurostat agency, the bloc&#8217;s statistics office, said Tuesday. In April 2008, the unemployment rate was 7.3 percent. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/03/business/global/03euro.html?_r=1


----------



## elvis (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> elvis3577 said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



they have had CONSISTENT unemployment in the double digits for the last FIFTEEN YEARS.  try again, shitstain.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Why do you lie?
> 
> Every Western democracy doesn't have 20% unemployment!
> 
> All the right does is lie.



so Chris help me out here....are you saying the left does not lie?...only the right?...


----------



## Oddball (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Every other Western democracy has a single payer system and they pay HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare, and they cover everyone with results that are as good or better than ours.
> 
> It is whinny little liars like you that are holding America back.


Move to one of those socialist worker's paradises, then.

Problem solved, you simpering little pussy.


----------



## Navy1960 (Jul 22, 2009)

UK Unemployment

The employment rate and the number of people in employment have fallen. The number of unemployed people, the unemployment rate and the claimant count have all increased. The number of vacancies has fallen. The number of inactive people of working age and the inactivity rate have increased. Growth in average earnings, excluding bonuses, has fallen but earnings growth including bonuses has increased.

The employment rate for people of working age was 72.9 per cent for the three months to May 2009, down 0.9 from the previous quarter and down 2.0 over the year. This is the largest quarterly fall in the working age employment rate since comparable records began in 1971. The total number of people in employment for the three months to May 2009 was just under 29 million, down 269,000 over the quarter and down 543,000 over the year.
National Statistics Online

France Unemployment

AFP - France's unemployment rate shot up to 8.7 percent in the first quarter of 2009, fresh data from the national statistics agency INSEE showed on Thursday.

"It's clearly a bad figure," Economy Minister Christine Lagarde said on French radio. "There has been a deterioration in the job situation which is quite simply a consequence of a deterioration in the economic situation."

The unemployment rate was 7.6 percent in the fourth quarter of 2008, she said, revising downward an earlier figure of 7.8.

The figures refer to mainland France, excluding overseas departments such as the Caribbean islands of Guadeloupe and Martinique which were crippled by weeks of strikes over pay earlier this year.

Including the overseas territories, the unemployment rate was 9.1 percent, according to INSEE.

France had a longstanding problem of a high underlying rate of joblessness even before the economic crisis, and economists have forecast that unemployment will pass 10 percent at the start of 2010.
France 24 | Unemployment jumps to 8.7 percent | France 24

On Thursday the BLS released the unemployment data for the month of June. A total of 467,000 jobs were lost in June and the unemployment rate remained almost the same at 9.5%.

The Eurostat also released the unemployment report for the EU but for the month of May. The unemployment rate in the Euro area stood at 9.5% (seasonally-adjusted) in May. In the expanded EU 27 states, the unemployment rate was 8.9% in May. An estimated 21.462 million in the EU27, of which 15.013 million were in the Euro area, were unemployed last month.

The lowest unemployment rates were in:
The Netherlands - 3.2%
Austria - 4.3%

The highest unemployment rates were in:
Spain - 18.7%
Latvia - 16.3%
Estonia - 15.6%
Spain: Highest Unemployment Rate in EU at 18.7% -- Seeking Alpha


Hardly a ringing endorsment of European Govt. sponsored medicine.  In fact if you look a the numbers  and the claims made that socialized medicine like the EU will bring about a positive result  in the economy it really says that socialized medicine has had  little impact on helping those economies.  The NYT article aside which I'm sure had no agenda or bias when it was written, I tend to tust the figures from the EU and those nations themselves.


----------



## Gunny (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Today it would be hard to find one member of Congress who openly advocates the abolition of Medicare or Social Security. It's true that during the Bush Presidency, right-wing Republicans tried to weaken, dilute and privatize both. But their proposals were always passed off as attempts to "strengthen" these programs that have become two of the most popular and widely respected institutions of government.
> 
> Of course it wasn't always so. Both Social Security and Medicare were incredibly controversial when they were passed - the first in 1937 and the second in 1964. In fact, their opponents sounded very much like today's Republicans as they denounced them for being "big government takeovers" - or, in the case of Medicare, "socialized medicine."
> 
> ...



Good idea.  Don't be on the wrong side of history.  Say no to unconstitutional, federal government meddling in healthcare and the private sector as a whole.


----------



## Chris (Jul 22, 2009)

Dude said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Every other Western democracy has a single payer system and they pay HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare, and they cover everyone with results that are as good or better than ours.
> ...



First you lie, then you call me a pussy for calling you on your lie.

You are still a liar.


----------



## Chris (Jul 22, 2009)

Published: June 2, 2009 
PARIS &#8212; The unemployment rate in the European Union pushed higher in April, indicating that nascent signs of economic recovery had yet to be felt in the labor market.

*The seasonally adjusted unemployment rate for the 16 countries that use the euro currency rose to 9.2 percent in April, the highest rate since September 1999, from 8.9 percent in March, the Eurostat agency, the bloc&#8217;s statistics office, said Tuesday. In April 2008, the unemployment rate was 7.3 percent. *

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/03/bu...euro.html?_r=1

U.S. unemployment rate hits 9.5%, a 26-year high
In June, 467,000 jobs were lost; analysts had predicted 350,000. Despite positive signs for the economy in recent weeks, the report is evidence that the jobs market remains troubled.
By Don Lee 
9:09 AM PDT, July 2, 2009 
Reporting from Washington -- *The nation's unemployment rate edged up to a 26-year high of 9.5% in June as employers slashed nearly half a million jobs over the month across a wide spectrum of industries, the Labor Department reported today.*

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-us-unemployment3-2009jul03,0,5237342.story


----------



## Oddball (Jul 22, 2009)

Lie?? What lie??

If the grass is really so much greener on the other side of the pond, it behooves you to shut your sniveling pussy yap and get the hell over to where you'll be happier.

My ancestors had more nerve in their toe nails than you have in your entire body. They left Europe because they wanted a better life, where all you do is piss and moan about how much America sucks.

You give "pussy" a whole new meaning.


----------



## Chris (Jul 22, 2009)

Dude said:


> Lie?? What lie??
> 
> If the grass is really so much greener on the other side of the pond, it behooves you to shut your sniveling pussy yap and get the hell over to where you'll be happier.
> 
> ...



This is the ridiculous get out of America because Dude can't admit that another country in this planet of 6 billion people does something better than we do.

How sad for you.


----------



## Oddball (Jul 22, 2009)

If what the rest of the world is doing is so great, and what America is doing is so wrong, get the fuck out...You should have plenty of options.


----------



## Chris (Jul 22, 2009)

Dude said:


> If what the rest of the world is doing is so great, and what America is doing is so wrong, get the fuck out...You should have plenty of options.



No, I would rather stay here and help by opposing people like you.


----------



## AVG-JOE (Jul 22, 2009)

Dude said:


> The bankrupt Medicare/Medicaid and nearly bankrupt Social Security  are being touted as evidence of success??
> 
> Desperation _*really*_ must be setting in!



Social Security Rocks!

It runs at an efficiency of less than 1% FICA taxes collected for all overhead, in addition to handling all of the paperwork for SSI.  It is a dedicated tax for a dedicated program.  It is one of the few taxes we pay that we know the destination of.  It is part of the 5% of the federal government We, The People of the United *States* should keep when all this is over.

-Joe


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Lie?? What lie??
> ...


and as usual, you missed the point of what he said


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 22, 2009)

AVG-JOE said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > The bankrupt Medicare/Medicaid and nearly bankrupt Social Security  are being touted as evidence of success??
> ...


except its NOT protected, they use it for other things


----------



## Oddball (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > If what the rest of the world is doing is so great, and what America is doing is so wrong, get the fuck out...You should have plenty of options.
> ...


Yeah...It's much easier to piss, whine, moan, bitch, and kvetch than it is to do anything about improving your life with your own actions.

BTW....You've still failed to point out where I lied.


----------



## Chris (Jul 22, 2009)

AVG-JOE said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > The bankrupt Medicare/Medicaid and nearly bankrupt Social Security  are being touted as evidence of success??
> ...



Shhh....

Taking care of the old and the sick is against Republican core values.


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> AVG-JOE said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...


another liberal lie


----------



## AVG-JOE (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > The bankrupt and Medicare/Medicaid and nearly bankrupt Social Security  are being touted as evidence of success??
> ...



Medicare is hamstrung by the private insurance companies getting to do the health care paperwork for workers between the ages of just born and 65, reaping the cream of premium-paying years and then dumping us into the arms of the the tax payers when we start to need more services from the health care industry.

Social Security, on the other hand insures 96% of Americas legal workers against disability during their working years and makes a tidy nest egg for the winners who are smart enough remain healthy while they're forced to pay into the system all their working lives.

Social Security Rocks!

-Joe


----------



## AVG-JOE (Jul 22, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> AVG-JOE said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



Who is this 'they' you speak of?  I thought it went *"We"* The People?  

-Joe


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 22, 2009)

AVG-JOE said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > AVG-JOE said:
> ...


"they" being our congresscritters


----------



## Chris (Jul 22, 2009)

Dude said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



Go back and read your post.

And my life is excellent by the way. I own a home, have a beautiful GF, am in good health, and make lots of money in a job I love.


----------



## Oddball (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


No, you point out where I lied and provide proof.

And if your life is so great, why do spend a couple of hours a night here, whining-n-crying about how much everything in America sucks, huh??


----------



## AVG-JOE (Jul 22, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> AVG-JOE said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...




"Then by (insert your Deity here) we take it back."​
_-Kevin Costner, as 'Robin Hood'_​


----------



## Chris (Jul 22, 2009)

Dude said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



Because that is what is great about America, Dude.


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 22, 2009)

AVG-JOE said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > AVG-JOE said:
> ...


ok, that got a chuckle


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 22, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


when are you going to point out the lie you claim he said


----------



## Oddball (Jul 22, 2009)

Being a spoiled rotten little  child, for whom _*nothing*_ is _*ever*_ good enough, is what makes America great.

Wooooah Nellie!!


----------



## Oddball (Jul 23, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> when are you going to point out the lie you claim he said


Well, asshelmet, we're waiting.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 23, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > If what the rest of the world is doing is so great, and what America is doing is so wrong, get the fuck out...You should have plenty of options.
> ...



your not opposing, your Whinning like like Dude said, a little sniveling pussy....


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 23, 2009)

Chris said:


> AVG-JOE said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



Yep, it is my turn today to push the old people in wheelchairs off the cliff.


----------



## Navy1960 (Jul 23, 2009)

Chris said:


> Published: June 2, 2009
> PARIS  The unemployment rate in the European Union pushed higher in April, indicating that nascent signs of economic recovery had yet to be felt in the labor market.
> 
> *The seasonally adjusted unemployment rate for the 16 countries that use the euro currency rose to 9.2 percent in April, the highest rate since September 1999, from 8.9 percent in March, the Eurostat agency, the blocs statistics office, said Tuesday. In April 2008, the unemployment rate was 7.3 percent. *
> ...



Chris , you do understand the point made I assume? and that is socialized medicine does not have a positive impact on the economies of those nations and in fact their  unemployment  is as high as ours and  in some cases such as Spain twice has high.  So to make a statement that Govt. healthcare has a postive impact on the economy doesn't hold up to data.  In fact when you look at the spending as a percent of  GDP for those nations you will also see an every increasing tax burden on those nations that in some cases  inflates  unemployment even more.  In some EU nations they spend clost  on healthcare as a percent of  GDP that we do on defense.  While I'm sure that most people that support  a Govt. mandated  healthcare system are also under the impression that we as a nation should rid ourselves of all weapons and  hold hands with the rest of the world  and  thereby have money to spend on healthcare, that thinking always indicates a clear lack of understading of constitution of the very nation in which they live.


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 23, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Notice how their arguments have gotten really vague and lame after Obama came on tv and gave the facts?  Yesterday they were saying all kinds of lies and today they have fallen back to their bullshit arguments of, "you're just whiners who want handouts". 

These guys are sooo scared that their healthcare is going to get worse because everyone is going to be covered.  And they think their costs are going to go up.  

They don't realize that is impossible.  We are gettin ripped off right now.


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 23, 2009)

Navy1960 said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Published: June 2, 2009
> ...



We can either argue back and forth about why we can't or we can start talking about the MUSTS and go from there.

Getting costs down.  A must.

Getting rid of pre existing conditions.

Not allowing the insurance providers to come up with new ways to jack up their prices

Covering everyone




Like the Auto company employees just went from $35 to $15 hr, the insurance company CEO's should start cutting their own salaries and lowering our costs.  If they were smart, like the oil companies, they wouldn't push us too far.


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 23, 2009)

sealybobo said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



I see reading comphrension is not your strong suit.


----------



## Navy1960 (Jul 23, 2009)

Do you know, I watched  Obama last night and he said nothing  that would have changed  my mind as to the merits of this issue. In fact all he  said was the same thing he has been saying, and has been proven incorrect.  "If you like your healthcare you can keep it", "healthcare costs  can be brought down with giving healthcare to everyone", et al,  all of which has been proven wrong and continues to be proven wrong.  I often think that when people listen to President Obama they sometimes fail to question what he say's and that a big mistake.  A. cutting costs I agree with B. getting rid of pre-existing conditions I sort of agree with to a point. , let me explain.  If you allow that everyone is the same regardless of condition then you havea  system whereby a small percentage are using more of the assests of the system than others.  So there must be an allowence and incentive for those that are healthy be it lower premiums or lower costs.   I don't think anyone should be outright denied healthcare coverage for pre-existing conditions, however, I do not think it's  fair or financially viable to force companies to cover everyone  equally when it comes to premiums. C. Insurance companies are subject to regulations, however "allowing or not allowing" an insurance company to operate a business in a profitable manner because you or the president has an aversion to the profit motive in healthcare is  illegal and I would not support this.  D. I think I have made it clear on the last issue, that while it's noble to cover as many people as you can, to cover everyone takes away an individuals "right" to make that choice. I will NEVER support a Govt. mandated insurance program for every citizen.   In fact sealy  I'm so stern on this last issue, if a bill comes out of congress with this sort of mandate, myself and about 20 others  here in Arizona intend to go into Federal court and file an injunction to stop it  until the legal merits can be heard in Federal court.


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 23, 2009)

Arawyn said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...




I just see you guys are ganging up on my boy Chris.  

One question.  Do you guys all meet each morning and discuss what position you will all take?  Because you guys all seem to be right on message everyday.  

Whether its:

You're just looking for a handout or
Socialism or
obama works for the man too or
who's responsible for you or
Real Americans.

It's like you all get an email each day telling you exactly what to say.


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 23, 2009)

Navy1960 said:


> Do you know, I watched  Obama last night and he said nothing  that would have changed  my mind as to the merits of this issue. In fact all he  said was the same thing he has been saying, and has been proven incorrect.  "If you like your healthcare you can keep it", "healthcare costs  can be brought down with giving healthcare to everyone", et al,  all of which has been proven wrong and continues to be proven wrong.  I often think that when people listen to President Obama they sometimes fail to question what he say's and that a big mistake.  A. cutting costs I agree with B. getting rid of pre-existing conditions I sort of agree with to a point. , let me explain.  If you allow that everyone is the same regardless of condition then you havea  system whereby a small percentage are using more of the assests of the system than others.  So there must be an allowence and incentive for those that are healthy be it lower premiums or lower costs.   I don't think anyone should be outright denied healthcare coverage for pre-existing conditions, however, I do not think it's  fair or financially viable to force companies to cover everyone  equally when it comes to premiums. C. Insurance companies are subject to regulations, however "allowing or not allowing" an insurance company to operate a business in a profitable manner because you or the president has an aversion to the profit motive in healthcare is  illegal and I would not support this.  D. I think I have made it clear on the last issue, that while it's noble to cover as many people as you can, to cover everyone takes away an individuals "right" to make that choice. I will NEVER support a Govt. mandated insurance program for every citizen.   In fact sealy  I'm so stern on this last issue, if a bill comes out of congress with this sort of mandate, myself and about 20 others  here in Arizona intend to go into Federal court and file an injunction to stop it  until the legal merits can be heard in Federal court.



Under normal circumstances, no, you could not get more for less.  But in this case, we can, and we will.  

Are we or are we not paying more than any other country (per citizen) for healthcare and are we getting less?  Prove it.  Links please.


----------



## Meister (Jul 23, 2009)

sealybobo said:


> Navy1960 said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



I don't think there is one adult in America that disagrees with you on these points booboo.  The difference is how do we get there, you say government, and the other side says it can be done without the government take over.  Booboo there are more ways than just the government to get this done, and have the results that we all want.


----------



## Oddball (Jul 23, 2009)

sealybobo said:


> One question.  Do you guys all meet each morning and discuss what position you will all take?  Because you guys all seem to be right on message everyday.
> 
> ....
> 
> It's like you all get an email each day telling you exactly what to say.


Mr. Pot, meet Miss Kettle!!


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 23, 2009)

Dude said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > One question.  Do you guys all meet each morning and discuss what position you will all take?  Because you guys all seem to be right on message everyday.
> ...


ironic, isn't it?


----------



## Meister (Jul 23, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



lol, very ironic


----------



## AVG-JOE (Jul 23, 2009)

Meister said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Navy1960 said:
> ...



The Private Insurance Bureaucracy has no interest in insuring older Americans - they're the ones making all the claims.

The Private Insurance Bureaucracy has no interest in covering pre-existing conditions, they're not profitable.

The only way to make it work, be it managed via a public bureaucracy or private bureaucracies is for We, The People to insist that the health-care pool of funds cover everyone who is willing to buy into the pool from cradle to grave, because cradle to 65 is when you put money into the pool and 65 to grave is when you claim benefits from the pool, at least in general terms.

Government involvement is necessary.

-Joe


----------



## Meister (Jul 23, 2009)

AVG-JOE said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Joe, Joe,  we're in agreement on this, I might not have clarified this.  But, what I'm saying is not having a government take over of healthcare.  I believe that the elderly will be the ones to suffer the most under government healthcare.  But, I am all for government oversight in the healthcare industry.  It can be done.


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 23, 2009)

Meister said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Navy1960 said:
> ...



The other side is fighting to keep the status quo.  They did nothing the 6 years they were in charge.  Now don't just blow that comment off.  The Democrats tried to introduce healthcare reform bills to the floor and the GOP laughed at them.  Now they want to go about fixing the problems, just in a different way?    I don't believe them.  Neither should you.  The Democrats were elected to fix healthcare.  This is the best solution.  Hell, even the Dems tried to shit on single payer at first.  Guys like Max Baucus didn't even want to give them a seat at the table.  That should tell you that single payer is the best/only real option.  Not a compromise, not a coop and certainly not a bill that the GOP or lobbyists help write.

We already know the insurance companies have gotten to the Democrats.  Its only a matter of if the politicians fear they will lose their jobs if they don't get something passed.  So they will pass some bullshit that won't work, and you wonder why government sucks.  Get the god damned lobbyists out of washington.  But that will never happen, so fuck it.  I guess we will just stay with the status quo.  Now if/when that happens, notice who will be laughing and happy.  Willow Dive and Dude.  All right wingers happy to stay with the status quo.  So you want to find people who will disagree with me, there are three assholes right there.

And compromising on a strong public option is why nothing will get done.  It has to be a strong public option.  It needs to compete with the insurance companies to keep their costs down.  Without this competition, they will keep jacking up their rates.  And eventually the insurance companies should just go away.  Go do something else.  Go back to school.  This is America.  You can do it!!  Quit whining.  Sound familiar?  

We need to take the for profits out of the equasion.

Or, there needs to be more competition.  But they're all in collusion with each other.  Its another monopoly like gas or electricity or banks.  Sure they aren't true monopolies but you know what they're doing.  Just like the capitalism we have sucks and the russian communism was corrupt.

We have said about communism, "its a good theory, but not good in practice".  Well Capitalists are starting to give free market capitalism a bad name too.  They want to socialize the losses and privatize the profits.


----------



## Meister (Jul 23, 2009)

sealybobo said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Booboo, I just don't think the government could ever get it right with healthcare, for a numbert of reasons.  I think they could get it right with oversight of the healthcare.
The rest of your rant goes in one ear and out the other.  I've heard it so many times from you that it's just old, and your opinion.  It's OK, I get it, but I feel differently than you.  You have a good day booboo.  Buy the way, spend some money and buy a computer for the condo, then we can diagree on the weekends.


----------



## AVG-JOE (Jul 23, 2009)

Meister said:


> AVG-JOE said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



In the humble opinion of this average Joe, we need little government involvement in *health care*.  Health *care* is a service industry that is best guided by competition, private enterprise and market forces... the government involvement is desperately needed in the private bureaucracies commonly referred to as health *insurance*. 

Which do you want as _your_ hired paper-pushers.....Million dollar executives with pet lobbyists or middle class bureaucrats?!?

-Joe


----------



## Navy1960 (Jul 23, 2009)

Congresswoman Barbara Lee criticized two Republican measures considered in the House this week, saying the bills fail to lower health care costs or do anything meaningful to provide access to health insurance to the more than 45 million Americans who are uninsured.

"These bills are nothing more than window dressing, designed to hide the fact that when it comes to our nation's healthcare crisis, Republican policies are more of a poison than a cure," said Lee. "These bills do nothing to reduce healthcare costs or provide significant coverage to the more than 45 million Americans who live in fear of getting sick, because they have no insurance and can't afford to go to the doctor."

H.R.525, which the House considered on Tuesday, is designed to create Association Health plans and allow businesses to purchase health insurance policies at lower rates. According to the Congressional Budget Office, however, millions of small business would actually see their health insurance premiums increase due to cost shifting and cherry picking by AHPs.


Lee also criticized H.R. 5, a measure to limit medical malpractice awards, particularly citing provisions that exempt drug makers from liability for products approved by the FDA.

"Not only does this measure limit the rights of legitimate malpractice victims, it fails to address insurance industry abuses and does nothing to lower healthcare costs," said Lee.
American Chronicle | Rep. Lee Slams Republican Healthcare Bills

sealy please don't  make blanket statements that one party is exactly right and the other is exactly wrong.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 23, 2009)

sealybobo said:


> Arawyn said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



same can be said for you and your "boy" Chrissy Bo.....just sayin...


----------



## Oddball (Jul 23, 2009)

AVG-JOE said:


> In the humble opinion of this average Joe, we need little government involvement in *health care*.  Health *care* is a service industry that is best guided by competition, private enterprise and market forces... the government involvement is desperately needed in the private bureaucracies commonly referred to as health *insurance*.
> 
> Which do you want as _your_ hired paper-pushers.....Million dollar executives with pet lobbyists or middle class bureaucrats?!?
> 
> -Joe


Problem being is that gubbament involvement and regulation has_* quashed competition*_, by allowing states to prohibit shopping out of state for insurance.


----------



## AVG-JOE (Jul 23, 2009)

Dude said:


> AVG-JOE said:
> 
> 
> > In the humble opinion of this average Joe, we need little government involvement in *health care*.  Health *care* is a service industry that is best guided by competition, private enterprise and market forces... the government involvement is desperately needed in the private bureaucracies commonly referred to as health *insurance*.
> ...



Proving that there is a huge difference between 'bad' government involvement and 'good' government involvement.

In theory, the difference is 'We', as in 'We', The People.

-Joe


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 23, 2009)

Dude said:


> AVG-JOE said:
> 
> 
> > In the humble opinion of this average Joe, we need little government involvement in *health care*.  Health *care* is a service industry that is best guided by competition, private enterprise and market forces... the government involvement is desperately needed in the private bureaucracies commonly referred to as health *insurance*.
> ...



Not to mention that government involvement (i.e., Medicare/Medicaid) helped create a dependence upon insurance. Dependence upon insurance and government programs have a lion's share of blame in today's medical costs.


----------



## Oddball (Jul 23, 2009)

BTW....Has Christine linked to the post where I allegedly lied and the evidence to prove it??


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 23, 2009)

Dude said:


> BTW....Has Christine linked to the post where I allegedly lied and the evidence to prove it??



Not that I've seen.


----------



## hjmick (Jul 23, 2009)

Dude said:


> BTW....Has Christine linked to the post where I allegedly lied and the evidence to prove it??



You're kidding, right?


----------



## Oddball (Jul 23, 2009)

No, I'm not.

If Christine has any proof that I did in fact lie, I'm all too willing to confront the evidence and clear the air.


----------



## AVG-JOE (Jul 23, 2009)

Arawyn said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > AVG-JOE said:
> ...



Untrue.  Medical costs are not the problem... insurance costs are.  Private bureaucracies spend 20 to 25 cents of your health care dollar on overhead and profits.  Social Security, the best example of a public insurance company, spends less than 1 cent of your FICA tax dollar to administer the program.  

If you could cut your food bill by 19 - 24%, would you?

If you could cut your fuel bill by 19 - 24%, would you?

If you could cut your taxes by 19 - 24%, would you?

It's not rocket science.  Demand an end to professional, mercenary lobbying by the private insurance bureaucracies.

-Joe


----------



## Oddball (Jul 23, 2009)

AVG-JOE said:


> Arawyn said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...


The largest part of the high costs of insurance are the captive customers they have because you cannot shop out of state.

If I wanted to cut my food and fuel bills, I damn shure wouldn't put Washinton politicians and bureaucrats in charge of them.


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 23, 2009)

AVG-JOE said:


> Arawyn said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...


you seem to forget that a lot of those costs are passed on from medicare/medicaid to the private insurance companies


----------



## AVG-JOE (Jul 23, 2009)

Dude said:


> AVG-JOE said:
> 
> 
> > Arawyn said:
> ...



Good point, but would you buy lower cost food / fuel if the same stuff you were buying now were available from another source for 20% less?  

Would you band together with your neighbors to share the cost of a sewage treatment facility big enough to take care of the whole neighborhood, instead of having everyone spend three times as much to buy or develop their own smaller plants?

Good government is not rocket science.  Demand an end to professional lobbying.

-Joe


----------



## Oddball (Jul 23, 2009)

AVG-JOE said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > The largest part of the high costs of insurance are the captive customers they have because you cannot shop out of state.
> ...


Apples and atom bombs.....Water and sewer is a local deal and some of that is even privatized.

Professional lobbying isn't the problem....Politicians selling their power to those lobbyists is.

If you don't want politicians to be bought, take away what they're selling.


----------



## Meister (Jul 23, 2009)

AVG-JOE said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > AVG-JOE said:
> ...



Lobbying will not end in yours or my lifetime Joe...that's the reality.

I think our government is trying to write a check it can't cover.  We will not still get the quality of care that we have now with a government run healthcare system.  The healthcare Doctors as a profession will wane, as people that would have gotten into the profession will go where the money is.  The specialists will be at a decline because of the time and money they need to seek a specialist position..just won't be payoff in the end for them.  Also, there will be less of them needed in a government run healthcare system.
No matter what the left says....people come to our country for life saving treatment that they can't get in a timely manner in their own country which has government run universal healthcare.  We have a much higher survival rate with cancers, and heart disease because of the low wait time for tests and procedures.
But like I stated, I'm all for government oversight that will help reduce the cost and get the people who need insurance their just due.  We have to eliminate frivolous lawsuites against the industry.  Another poster mentioned with illegals, get them stabilized and deport them.  We can't afford our citizens, and Mexico's also.


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 23, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> AVG-JOE said:
> 
> 
> > Arawyn said:
> ...



Ding, ding, ding!!!

Because costs must be absorbed in someway, AND the government (medicare/medicaid) have made not costs adjustments in over ten years. Furthermore, insurances also drive down costs, which get passed to the uninsured. Not to mention, government programs do not pay timely.


----------



## manu1959 (Jul 23, 2009)

hjmick said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > The bankrupt Medicare/Medicaid and nearly bankrupt Social Security  are being touted as evidence of success??
> ...



or the us post office........


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 24, 2009)

manu1959 said:


> hjmick said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



When I was very young, a candy bar was a nickle, as was a stamp for a letter. Today, the candy bar is smaller, and costs 50 cents or more. The stamp for the letter costs far less than a candy bar, now. So I would have to say the Post Office has done rather well in keeping costs down. If a government run Health Care System could run that well, we will be very lucky.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 24, 2009)

Meister said:


> AVG-JOE said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



Our government, like any government is funded by it's citizens. So if we write a check for a real Health Care System, then someone, some Americans, will have to pay for it. That should come from a tax on all of us. And SS would be solvent for the foreseeable future if all Americans paid the percentage of their income that comes out of my check for SS.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 24, 2009)

Arawyn said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > AVG-JOE said:
> ...



OK. Make Medicare universal. Everyone has it. Now you have a whole bunch of young healthy people in the insurance pool, and the costs go way down. Might even be able to make those cost adjustments. Make the big pharmaceuticals bid for supplying the drugs. That alone would be a major cost saver.


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 24, 2009)

Meister said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



I got way better things to do on the weekends.  Tonight I'm partying with my old highschool wrestling buddies who came in from out of town for a sort of reunion.  Bar tonight, golf tomorrow.  Then Sunday I'm going on the lake with my new neighbor/girlfriend and we're going to make deer jerkey with the last of my venison.  I can't wait to put lotion on her!


----------



## Meister (Jul 24, 2009)

Old Rocks said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > AVG-JOE said:
> ...



I was using a metaphor Old Rocks, but that's OK.  Glad to see you pay into social security, though.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 24, 2009)

What I love about Libruls is that they are too stupid to realize that they will be ones who bear the brunt of the collapse of our Social programs.  Raise you right hand if you got one of them new "Green Technology"Jobs or your Bag o' Free Stuff from Obama

Ahhh, that's why Marxists Love their Useful Idiots.


----------



## Douger (Jul 24, 2009)

Dude said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Perfect example of why we have to raise taxes on the wealthy.
> ...


Hey That's funny !
You're gonna be living in a tent soon !
" Duh Amurkin Dreem"
Go take a nap............


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 24, 2009)

Douger said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



They told Dude that the free markets would save him money and the oil companies and insurance companies raised their rates.  And the private companies are over in Iraq/Afganistan bankrupting us too. 

And dudes house is worth less and his 401K took a dumb.  Yea, let the free markets run the show.  

And the private bankers stole our savings and then had us bail them out in the end.  

Hell, even the car companies fucked us.  They were able to write off billions in debt while simultaniously renigging on pensions, sending jobs overseas and breaking the unions.  

Dude is an idiot.  He thinks he's going to be rich.    He doesn't even know what rich is.  And he doesn't realize that the gap between the rich and middle class got wider.  That means it will be harder for him to make it.


----------



## Oddball (Jul 24, 2009)

Douger said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


Nope....Both my personal condo and the family's spread in the north woods are paid for in full.

You lose, Buckwheat.


----------



## Oddball (Jul 24, 2009)

sealybobo said:


> Douger said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...


Thanks for chiming in here to prove for one and all what a totally clueless blithering idiot you are.

You know absolutely zero about my personal finances, and will never know, dipshit.


----------



## Bern80 (Jul 24, 2009)

Chris said:


> Why do you lie?
> 
> Every other Western democracy has a single payer system and they pay HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare, and they cover everyone with results that are as good or better than ours.
> 
> It is whinny little liars like you that are holding America back.



Okay.....trying to keep my HEAD from exploding here.....for the umteenth gazilionth time......plus one.

STOP MAKING THE MOST RETARDED ARGUMENT IN THE HISOTRY OF RETARDED ARGUMENTS.

CHEAPER DOES NOT EQUAL BETTER, THEY DO NOT RUN BETTER THAN OURS AS IT HAS BEEN SHOWN TIME AND TIME AGAN PEOPLE IN YOUR 'UTOPIA' COUNTRIES WAIT LONGER. AND THEY AREN'T COMPARABLE IN THE FIRST PLACE. WE (THE U.S.) ARE NOT EVERY OTHER COUNTRY. YOU CAN'T COMPARE APPLES TO ORANGES AND EXPECT TO HAVE ANYTHING REMOTELY RESEMBLING CREDIBILITY IN AN ARGUMENT.


----------



## elvis (Jul 24, 2009)

sealybobo said:


> Douger said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



fuck off, Marxist.  oh and get back to work, you lazy fuck.


----------



## ba1614 (Jul 24, 2009)

Dude said:


> Douger said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



Good for you dude. If more people looked after themselves responsibly like you and your family have the whole country would be in a lot better shape.
 I've lived without many extravagances myself to get my place paid for 3yrs ago, and it's paying off now. There's some great opportunities out there right now if a person is in the position to take advantage of it.


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 24, 2009)

ba1614 said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Douger said:
> ...



Yea, that's why the GOP and this shitty economy were really good for a few  rich people.  The top 2% maybe.

But for the rest of us, it sucked.  Even if I make money on the foreclosure market, how much did my home and 401K tank?

PS.  My union worker dad has two homes paid off. 

Dude's daddy has 2 homes and you're congratulating Dude?  Yea dude, way to be born with a silver spoon in your mouth.  Consider many people don't grow up spoiled like you were.


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 24, 2009)

Bern80 said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Why do you lie?
> ...



They aren't retarded.  Your arguments are.  

But you are right.  More expensive doesn't always mean better either.  

And yes they do run better than ours.  Their people live longer and pay less.  And everyone is covered.  

How many Canadians would prefer our system to theirs?  A little over 10%.  That makes no sense if ours is better.  

American cars are the best cars on earth.  Maybe if I say it enough times you'll believe this too.


----------



## Oddball (Jul 24, 2009)

This isn't about my daddy, asshole. This is about people, like myself, who put their financial houses in order, so we won't need gummint cheez.....Like you will.

Now, get back to work, you lazy fuck.


----------



## Meister (Jul 24, 2009)

sealybobo said:


> Bern80 said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Link?


----------



## Bern80 (Jul 24, 2009)

sealybobo said:


> These guys are sooo scared that their healthcare is going to get worse because everyone is going to be covered.  And they think their costs are going to go up.
> 
> They don't realize that is impossible.  We are gettin ripped off right now.



So the CBO is just plain wrong huh. Have YOU noticed that it is ONLY the dems saying saying costs will not rise. 

How exaclty is it impossible that costs won't go up. You dont get that it is not enough to be covered. Being covered does not equal access bobo. 

No one argues that the system needs a change. Everyone, accept the dems, can see (or more likely the refuse to admit, or didn't take basic math or econ) however that their plan doesn't have much of a chance of hell of improving the health care system because that isn't what this has ever been about for them. It is about government running the system and masking some 3% of the population that is uninsured as a crisis.


----------



## Bern80 (Jul 24, 2009)

sealybobo said:


> And yes they do run better than ours.  Their people live longer and pay less.  And everyone is covered.



Exhibit A of the second most retarded argument in the history of arguments. I'm gonna give you a chance here. You're really going to try to tell us that a countries healthcare system is the reason its citizens live longer?



sealybobo said:


> How many Canadians would prefer our system to theirs?  A little over 10%.  That makes no sense if ours is better.



You didn't do well in debate did ya. Can you provide evidence of that number. Probably not, but lets assume it's true for the hell of it. How exactly does not wanting our system automatically translate into 90% of them liking their system.



sealybobo said:


> American cars are the best cars on earth.  Maybe if I say it enough times you'll believe this too.



When you actually get access to it it most definately is. Access is the issue and what you don't seem to get is that making it cheap won't improve that.


----------



## elvis (Jul 24, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > Douger said:
> ...



Wow.  a neg rep from bobo.  I must be doing something right.


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 24, 2009)

Bern80 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > And yes they do run better than ours.  Their people live longer and pay less.  And everyone is covered.
> ...



You didn't do well in debate, did ya.  Can you provide evidence that they have an access problem?  

I found it:

By an overwhelming margin, Canadians prefer the Canadian health care system to the American one.  Overall, 82% said they preferred the Canadian system, fully ten times the number who said the American system is superior (8%). 

Open Left:: Canadians Love Their Health Care and Want it to be Even More Socialized


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 24, 2009)

Bern80 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> > These guys are sooo scared that their healthcare is going to get worse because everyone is going to be covered.  And they think their costs are going to go up.
> ...



Do you notice that only right wing assholes say what you say?  

Costs will rise in one area and lower in others.  

A strong public option will cover everyone and cost less than the for profits are costing us now.  Factoid.


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 24, 2009)

sealybobo said:


> Bern80 said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...


have you noticed that only left wing moronic assholes say what you say?


----------



## Meister (Jul 24, 2009)

sealybobo said:


> Bern80 said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



Open Left?  WTF booboo?  Come on...were suppose to believe that?  
Hey...what's with your 0 reps?


----------



## Bern80 (Jul 24, 2009)

sealybobo said:


> Bern80 said:
> 
> 
> > sealybobo said:
> ...



You're not listening bobo. What good is coverage without the ability to actually obtain health care? They are not one in the same.


----------



## Douger (Jul 24, 2009)

ba1614 said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Douger said:
> ...



no family


----------



## Meister (Jul 24, 2009)

Douger said:


> ba1614 said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...




Hey Goober...do you have PMS today?  If this is the best that you can post with any relevance...maybe you should just stick to the humor forum...because your a joke.  Try taking some Midol...it might help.   Next time try not to flame, but bring an opinion to your post.


----------



## Chris (Jul 24, 2009)

Meister said:


> Douger said:
> 
> 
> > ba1614 said:
> ...



Maybe you can lend him some of yours.


----------



## Meister (Jul 24, 2009)

Chris said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Douger said:
> ...




Christine, what happened to your reps?


----------



## Chris (Jul 24, 2009)

Meister said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



I don't know, and I don't care.

Is that ignorance or apathy?


----------



## Oddball (Jul 24, 2009)

Meister said:


> Christine, what happened to your reps?


Ain't that a goddamn shame!!


----------



## Meister (Jul 24, 2009)

Chris said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



From what I see, that's justice served.


----------



## Chris (Jul 24, 2009)

Meister said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



God is the only justice, my friend.

Not the mods here.


----------



## Meister (Jul 24, 2009)

Chris said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Maybe I should clarify....Justice served on this board.


----------



## Chris (Jul 24, 2009)

Meister said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



Not really.

This is a pretty right wing board. 

Haven't you noticed?


----------



## Meister (Jul 24, 2009)

Chris said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Your joking right?  I don't see that at all.
You don't think that your negging the way you were had anything to do with the end results we all see?


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 24, 2009)

Chris said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


both


----------



## KittenKoder (Jul 25, 2009)

Okay ... one *huge* fucking question ... since when did I become "right wing"?


----------



## KittenKoder (Jul 25, 2009)

Okay ... one *huge* fucking question ... since when did I become "right wing"?


----------



## Chris (Jul 25, 2009)

KittenKoder said:


> Okay ... one *huge* fucking question ... since when did I become "right wing"?



Since you were born?


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 25, 2009)

Chris said:


> KittenKoder said:
> 
> 
> > Okay ... one *huge* fucking question ... since when did I become "right wing"?
> ...


see, you are so far out in left field, you cant see center


----------



## KittenKoder (Jul 25, 2009)

Chris said:


> KittenKoder said:
> 
> 
> > Okay ... one *huge* fucking question ... since when did I become "right wing"?
> ...



 Okay ... really ... so I disagree with neolibs on something so now I am a conservative .... um, yeah ... and my 1996 laptop is worth 5,000 bucks.


----------



## Chris (Jul 25, 2009)

KittenKoder said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > KittenKoder said:
> ...



How old are you?


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 25, 2009)

Chris said:


> KittenKoder said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


like that has any bearing on the fact you dont know what the fuck you are talking about


----------



## KittenKoder (Jul 25, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > KittenKoder said:
> ...



It's pointless, as you said, so far left he can't see center.


----------



## Oddball (Jul 25, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > KittenKoder said:
> ...


To him, Castro is a reactionary.


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 25, 2009)

KittenKoder said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


not to mention his head so far up Obama's ass he can kiss his tonsils


----------



## Chris (Jul 25, 2009)

KittenKoder said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



No, it's very to the point.

Old people watch FoxNews.

Young people watch MSNBC.


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 25, 2009)

Chris said:


> KittenKoder said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


ah, old folk are wise and the young foolish



btw, based on the ratings, aint too many of ANY age group watching MSNBC


----------



## Chris (Jul 25, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > KittenKoder said:
> ...



Wrong.

Olbermann is #1 in the 18-34 group. 

The future is ours. Your group is dying off.


----------



## KittenKoder (Jul 25, 2009)

Chris said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Damn ... my generation is full of braindead American Idol fans ...


----------



## Oddball (Jul 25, 2009)

Back to the the old Fakes News strawman again, I see.


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 25, 2009)

Chris said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


link to that proof?
LOL


----------



## Chris (Jul 25, 2009)

KittenKoder said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



People over 60 watch American Idol?

Who knew?


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 25, 2009)

Dude said:


> Back to the the old Fakes News strawman again, I see.


always
LOL
its all he has


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 25, 2009)

Chris said:


> KittenKoder said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


you are too fucking stupid for words


----------



## Chris (Jul 25, 2009)

Dude said:


> Back to the the old Fakes News strawman again, I see.



Strawman?

Old people are more conservative politically.

Simple fact.


----------



## KittenKoder (Jul 25, 2009)

Chris said:


> KittenKoder said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Hmm ... something's wrong with my birth certificate then.


----------



## Oddball (Jul 25, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > KittenKoder said:
> ...


Look out...Christine might neg you!!

Ooops...False alarm!!!


----------



## hjmick (Jul 25, 2009)

Chris said:


> Wrong.
> 
> Olbermann is #1 in the 18-34 group.
> 
> The future is ours. Your group is dying off.



Olbermann?! He's a fucking hack. The left's version of Hannity, who is also a hack. He's a failed sportscaster. I couldn't stand him when he worked in L.A. and I can't stand him now. You would be better served by skipping Olbermann, Hannity and their ilk and tuning in to QVC.




_( Wait for the animation: )_


----------



## Chris (Jul 25, 2009)

Dude said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Yep, it's really cool how every day there are fewer conservatives in the world.

Look at your guys...Ben Stein, Rush, OReilly, ....old farts all.


----------



## Chris (Jul 25, 2009)

A dying breed on the wrong side of history...


----------



## Oddball (Jul 25, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


Bill O'Reilly isn't "my guy" you pedantic pifflewit....Nor is Limbag, Hannity, Kristol, Krauthammer, or the bulk of the rest of the neocon glee club.

Divey is right, you really are too fucking stupid for words,


----------



## KittenKoder (Jul 25, 2009)

Chris said:


> A dying breed on the wrong side of history...



I hope they remember that in 2012 ... after the country is in complete ruin ...

It will be funny to see you spin it.


----------



## Chris (Jul 25, 2009)

KittenKoder said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > A dying breed on the wrong side of history...
> ...



Complete ruin?

Our economy COMPLETELY COLLAPSED last year thanks to deregulation of the financial industry.

Now we are rebuilding it.

Don't you read at all?


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 25, 2009)

Chris said:


> KittenKoder said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


you are perpetually on the wrong side of everything


----------



## KittenKoder (Jul 25, 2009)

Chris said:


> KittenKoder said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Yes, I read too much ... thus why I know more of the picture than you do ... I read *both* sides.


----------



## hjmick (Jul 25, 2009)

Dude said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



I gave up on those twits years ago, myself. The only way I will watch them these days, and that ain't often, is if I tune into their counterparts on MSNBC in an effort to get both sides of the story. The truth lies in between.


----------



## Oddball (Jul 25, 2009)

hjmick said:


> I gave up on those twits years ago, myself. The only way I will watch them these days, and that ain't often, is if I tune into their counterparts on MSNBC in an effort to get both sides of the story. The truth lies in between.


I did too. 

But remember we're dealing with people whose primary line of argumentation is the ad homenim.


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 25, 2009)

Chris said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Comedy is a great draw.......and Olbermann's show is a laugh a minute....because it is hard to believe that there are people actually that stupid in the world. 

35 and above is dying off?


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 25, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > Back to the the old Fakes News strawman again, I see.
> ...



Nope, not a fact, political/social beliefs are cyclical, just like businesses. The Greatest Generation (more conservative) gave birth to a very liberal generation, Baby Boomers. Baby Boomers gave birth to a more conservative generation (my generation) Gen X. So on and so on and so on.


----------



## elvis (Jul 25, 2009)

Chris said:


> KittenKoder said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Hey Monica, that happened because of your boyfriend, dipshit.


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 25, 2009)

sealybobo said:


> Yea, that's why the GOP and this shitty economy were really good for a few  rich people.  The top 2% maybe.
> 
> But for the rest of us, it sucked.  Even if I make money on the foreclosure market, how much did my home and 401K tank?
> 
> ...



Bobo give us a fucking break will ya....you would take advantage of any situation out there if it meant Bobo is going to make a buck and you know it.....so which one of your buddies is teabagging you this weekend?.....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 25, 2009)

elvis3577 said:


> Wow.  a neg rep from bobo.  I must be doing something right.



are you serious?....come on Bo....neg reping cause someone calls you are marxist?....i thought you would be beyond neg reping for that....next thing i know im going to hear you neg rep newbies with no rep power...


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 25, 2009)

sealybobo said:


> You didn't do well in debate, did ya.  Can you provide evidence that they have an access problem?
> 
> I found it:
> 
> ...



how can someone say they prefer something they have never experianced....but just heard about it....and no doubt just the negatives?......many Canadians dont care for what they got and can afford a private plan....but guess what ....they cant have one...its illegal....thats nice aint it....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 25, 2009)

Chris said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...




gee Bobo and Christine both lost their reps.....mmmm?....oh well now Bobo has a real teabagging Buddy.....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 25, 2009)

KittenKoder said:


> Okay ... one *huge* fucking question ... since when did I become "right wing"?



when you disagree with Chrissy or Bobo or Old Shit Bag....you become right wing....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 25, 2009)

DiveCon said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > KittenKoder said:
> ...



hes fucking sitting in the bleachers.....for a pussy like you Chrissy thats the seats beyond the outfield.....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 26, 2009)

Chris said:


> Wrong.
> 
> Olbermann is #1 in the 18-34 group.
> 
> The future is ours. Your group is dying off.



following that pathetic basterd,the country will be in great shape....can you imagine a few hundred million Chrissies running the place....and having to clean up after people like Old Swinging Balls shits his pants.....frightening....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 26, 2009)

KittenKoder said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



so is Christinas....he just wont admit it....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 26, 2009)

Chris said:


> KittenKoder said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


you watch it too dipshit....you were sexually attracted to the guy who won...admit it....you wanna make him your bitch...


----------



## Meister (Jul 26, 2009)

Harry Dresden said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > KittenKoder said:
> ...




Eh....Harry,  Christine wants to be the bitch of the other guy  Just sayin...


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 26, 2009)

Dude said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 26, 2009)

hjmick said:


> Olbermann?! He's a fucking hack. The left's version of Hannity, who is also a hack. He's a failed sportscaster. I couldn't stand him when he worked in L.A. and I can't stand him now. You would be better served by skipping Olbermann, Hannity and their ilk and tuning in to QVC.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



plus you might find a good deal on some steak knives.....well Chrissy maybe some eyeliner....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 26, 2009)

Chris said:


> Dude said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



i guess that means your a right winger again Dude.....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 26, 2009)

KittenKoder said:


> Yes, I read too much ... thus why I know more of the picture than you do ... I read *both* sides.



Kitty....right now Chrissy is going..."BOTH sides?.....what a moron everyone knows there is only one side".....


----------



## Harry Dresden (Jul 26, 2009)

Meister said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



i was just trying to let him be on top for once....


----------



## Chris (Jul 26, 2009)

Arawyn said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Dude said:
> ...



Right...

That's why Fox is most popular with the over 65 set.

And why Obama won big with those under 35.

Why do you make things up?


----------



## DiveCon (Jul 26, 2009)

Chris said:


> Arawyn said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


why do you just make this shit up
LOL


----------



## probus (Jul 26, 2009)

You Stay Here While I Swim and Get Us Some Universal Health Care
Special Guest Commentary
by Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA)

The statistics are sobering: the cost of American heath care is rising almost as fast as the cold, briny water bubbling up from our floorboards. So far we have already lost the 8-track player and several Vic Damone tapes, and if allowed to continue these trends threaten to engulf all of us within the Oldsmobile. We must quickly wake up and face the facts: inaction is no longer an option. That is why it is critical for the future of all the occupants that one of us swim off and get us some kind of free health care program. I nominate me.

Why me, you ask? As I explained to you back at the party, I am passionate about many things. Politics, sailing, the art of Leroy Niemann, Dewar's, my etchings. And let's not forget that sweet tight body of yours, which I must say looks stunning in the watery glow of the dashboard lights. But did I also mention my passion for universal heath care? Hey Baby, ol' Teddy Bear is all about that. As the Conscience of the Senate, I have led the fight to win comprehensive national medical benefits for you and other vulnerable Boiler Room Girls who have been denied coverage by their heartless employers. I fervently believe we're all on this boat together. Okay, Oldsmobile. Now, if you'll just let go of my arm, I'll make a break for it and continue the fight for your health care rights back at my lawyer's office. 

Ow! Jesus! That fucking hurt! Come on now, Baby. Let's all just calm down, take a shallow breath, and look at our heath care predicament rationally. We obviously can't both stay here in our current plan, and if we both opt out of our windows at the same time it will sink the entire system. Even if we both made it out, there will be difficult questions and bureaucratic forms and red tape. Like I also told you back at the party, my wife doesn't understand me. And she sure as hell won't understand this.

Obviously the answer is some sort of window rationing system where one of us waits here while the other one swims for a comprehensive solution for both of us. Did I mention I was on the Pi Eta swim team? We won 3rd place at the Harvard Greek intramurals in '53. Ow! Fuck! Stop screaming your crazy bitch, you're using up the oxygen. See? I'm only thinking about what's best for you.  

Look, I know you have misgivings about some aspects of my plan, but the time for debate is over. As a passionate advocate for health care reform, I will have the details and alibis worked out by the time I get to the Sherriff's station. As soon as I call my lawyer and get a couple cups of coffee, I will demand they dispatch rescue vehicles back here, with CPR-certified divers. I will demand that you receive an extremely private room in the best anonymous hospital. I will... holy shit! Get your hand off that fucking window switch! 

Huh. How about that, looks like your side shorted out. Sadly, this is typical of Oldsmobile's shameful two-tier electric window standards, which is another one of my passions. As soon as this thing blows over, I am going to introduce legislation to mandate tough automotive buoyancy rules based on the European model. I don't care if it takes 40 years, every American will have access to free health care and Amphicars. 

Okay, I can tell by the way you're thrashing it's obvious you're just not willing to listen to reason. So I'm just going to go now. I'm just weighing you down, and you deserve an air pocket you can call your own. But first, can you slide over a little bit? There's a bottle of Dewar's in the glove box and I've got a long walk ahead of me.
via iowahawk-- Regards, probus


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 26, 2009)

Chris said:


> Arawyn said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Me, make things up? 

Project much?


----------



## Chris (Jul 26, 2009)

Arawyn said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Arawyn said:
> ...



Like I said, Obama killed McCain in the under 35 vote.

Do some reading...


----------



## Arawyn (Jul 26, 2009)

Chris said:


> Arawyn said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Under 35 is not the entire Gen Xers. Generation X - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gen Dems: The Party's Advantage Among Young Voters Widens - Pew Research Center



> Perhaps the most striking change since 2004 has come among voters born between 1956 and 1976 -- the members of Generation X and the later Baby Boomers. *People in this age group tended to be more Republican during the 1990s, and the GOP still maintained a slight edge in partisan affiliation among Gen X and the late boomers in 2004 (47% identified with or leaned toward the GOP while 44% described themselves as Democrats or leaned Democratic).*



And one election does change the core of the Gen X political beliefs. If you knew anything about Gen Xer's, the switch in votes was more to do with disaffection of Bush than it was for being in love w/Obama.

Age, Vote More Strongly Related in Obama-McCain Matchup

Obama didn't kill under 35 vote. It was 18-29. And that age group is right around the break between Gen X and Gen Y. Get it right next time.

Next.


----------

