Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It is a favored method of propagandist for creating misinformation and disinformation texts. Truth can be turned into lies and lies turned into truth by simply omitting and editing quotes and passages. It also bombards the reader with the necessity to research and evaluate sources from which the cut and paste are derived, a time-consuming task the author knows will not be done by most of the readers. Many of the main source used by PoliticalChic would never be accepted for University credit toward a graded thesis. They are on or below the conspiracy level of standards.I appreciate cut and pastes; I learn stuff.The following, a series of talking-point defeats for Liberals....15 of 'em
A person who cuts and pastes talking points cuts and pastes talking points for other cut and pasters to use.
Free thinkers here
It is a favored method of propagandist for creating misinformation and disinformation texts. Truth can be turned into lies and lies turned into truth by simply omitting and editing quotes and passages. It also bombards the reader with the necessity to research and evaluate sources from which the cut and paste are derived, a time-consuming task the author knows will not be done by most of the readers. Many of the main source used by PoliticalChic would never be accepted for University credit toward a graded thesis. They are on or below the conspiracy level of standards.I appreciate cut and pastes; I learn stuff.The following, a series of talking-point defeats for Liberals....15 of 'em
A person who cuts and pastes talking points cuts and pastes talking points for other cut and pasters to use.
Free thinkers here
[
It is not hyperbole to call Medicaid a disgrace at its annual cost of about $450 billion, and expanding it rather than helping poor people buy private insurance is simply inexplicable.”
Helping poor people buy private insurance?
You mean like giving them subsidies, and having market based exchanges where they could go to buy the private insurance?
lolol
1. "Helping poor people buy private insurance?"
Poor????
"Middle-income as well as low-income people buying coverage in the Exchanges will be eligible for government subsidies that will come in the form of tax credits. Anyone earning between 100 and 400 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL) (now $11,490 to $45,960 for a single person, and up to $126, 360 for a family of six) will qualify. - See more at: Under Obamacare, Will You Receive a Subsidy to Help You Buy Your Own Insurance? We Now Have Real Numbers That Will Let You Calculate How Much You Will Receive | Health Beat by Maggie Mahar
2. "Typical American family earned $53,657 last year"
Typical American family earned $53,657 last year
3. Clearly, this isn't aimed at helping 'poor,' but at growing government by collectivization.....
We've seen this before:
a. Government control of private sector activity...is aptly described as Bolshevik- or Marxist, socialist, collectivist, statist, or, for that matter, fascist, too. Indeed, nationalized health care was one of the first programs enacted by the Bolsheviks after they seized power in 1917 (Banks, insurance companies and means of communications were also taken over by Soviet authorities immediately. Dziewanowski, "A History of Soviet Russia," p. 107.
b. Obama isn't the first Bolshevik to support socialized medicine. For context, there was Henry Sigerist: "He devoted himself to the study of history of medicine.Socialized Medicine in the Soviet Union(1937), andHistory of Medicinewere among his most important works. He emerged as a major spokesman for "compulsory health insurance". ...He attacked the American Medical Association because of his conflicting views onsocialized medicine." Henry E. Sigerist - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
c. And, Sigerist was one of the apologists for Stalin, including his state-engineered famine in the Ukraine. 7 million perished (The History Place - Genocide in the 20th Century: Stalin's Forced Famine 1932-33).
d. Sigerist "shared with the architects of Soviet health policy under Stalin an outlook best described as medical totalitarianism. He really believed that humanity would be better off if every individual were under the medical supervision of the state from cradle to grave....[and] Sigerist's belief in the necessity for state control over all aspects of medicine ultimately made him an apologist for state control over most aspects of human life."
Fee and Brown, eds. "Making Medical History: The Life and Times of Henry E. Sigerist," p. 252
Notice how this applies to you?
"...apologist for state control over most aspects of human life."
Ignoring the interminable irrelevancies of your repeated filibusters, which BTW and FYI, no one is reading,
you said you wanted Medicaid replaced with government funded private insurance policies.
How would that work?
"...FYI, no one is reading,..."
So....how do you post your attempted responses without reading the thread?
That must be why you are called the NYLiar, huh?
I need not labor through the entirety of your tedious posts in order to find an easy target.
It is a favored method of propagandist for creating misinformation and disinformation texts. Truth can be turned into lies and lies turned into truth by simply omitting and editing quotes and passages. It also bombards the reader with the necessity to research and evaluate sources from which the cut and paste are derived, a time-consuming task the author knows will not be done by most of the readers. Many of the main source used by PoliticalChic would never be accepted for University credit toward a graded thesis. They are on or below the conspiracy level of standards.I appreciate cut and pastes; I learn stuff.The following, a series of talking-point defeats for Liberals....15 of 'em
A person who cuts and pastes talking points cuts and pastes talking points for other cut and pasters to use.
Free thinkers here
Thank you!
One of the favorite tactics here used by people like PC is to claim something is happening and then to post a link that says nothing close to what they claim hoping that the target doesnt take the time to read through it. Or linking to something with only the link as a response without saying what their point is at all.
NO LINKS (There is a reason for that)
NO LINKS (There is a reason for that)
NO LINKS (There is a reason for that)
Every one I post has a link.
NO LINKS (There is a reason for that)
Every one I post has a link.
Why won't you debate the other people's points you post?
NO LINKS (There is a reason for that)
Every one I post has a link.
Why won't you debate the other people's points you post?
NO LINKS (There is a reason for that)
Every one I post has a link.
Why won't you debate the other people's points you post?
Because Propaganda doesnt work that way. She asserts that she is correct and thats why she is. Facts be dammed.
NO LINKS (There is a reason for that)
Every one I post has a link.
Why won't you debate the other people's points you post?
Because Propaganda doesnt work that way. She asserts that she is correct and thats why she is. Facts be dammed.
Keep up the name calling and attempts at insults. It rarely works on the net and never, ever, with me. To me when a person like you constantly resorts to those tactics it is a sign of insecurity. That means you know your arguments are weak. I have spent time exposing your dumbass phony sources and exposed them for being the junk they are. One of your main and most used sources has been Chesly Manly. I have asked you for two years, whenever you use that name, to explain who or what that source is. It is also a primary source for another of your often quoted sources, Diane West for her book Betrayal. Bullcrap sources. So tell us about your main source, Chesly Manly.It is a favored method of propagandist for creating misinformation and disinformation texts. Truth can be turned into lies and lies turned into truth by simply omitting and editing quotes and passages. It also bombards the reader with the necessity to research and evaluate sources from which the cut and paste are derived, a time-consuming task the author knows will not be done by most of the readers. Many of the main source used by PoliticalChic would never be accepted for University credit toward a graded thesis. They are on or below the conspiracy level of standards.I appreciate cut and pastes; I learn stuff.The following, a series of talking-point defeats for Liberals....15 of 'em
A person who cuts and pastes talking points cuts and pastes talking points for other cut and pasters to use.
Free thinkers here
"It also bombards the reader with the necessity to research and evaluate sources from which the cut and paste are derived, a time-consuming task..."
Jeeezzz....you oaf, you're just chock full of excuses.
Here....try again, before I add more, you lazy, lying fool....
a. The Obama attempts to flood America with Muslims from the most radicalized areas
b. America long ago deposed the Democrats who enforced racism, and there in no need for big government to shield minorities from....them.
c. ObamaCare fails in so very many ways....including that fact that it causes more health problems for the poor."
d. Obamacare has only reduced the percentage of U.S. residents without health insurance by 2.7 percentage points,
e. There is no was to pay for the expanded welfare state even by confiscating every cent the wealthy have.
f. . The failure of legalizing drugs: More people died of drug overdoses than from automobile accidents (30,196), murders (13,000) or gun accidents (700).”
Thanks, Camp; I went to college, too, and I do know how to evaluate material. Cut and pastes are still helpful as a starting point if I want to look into an issue, not to mention the endless amazement I enjoy reading other viewpoints. Don't worry about me swallowing anything whole, from either side.It is a favored method of propagandist for creating misinformation and disinformation texts. Truth can be turned into lies and lies turned into truth by simply omitting and editing quotes and passages. It also bombards the reader with the necessity to research and evaluate sources from which the cut and paste are derived, a time-consuming task the author knows will not be done by most of the readers. Many of the main source used by PoliticalChic would never be accepted for University credit toward a graded thesis. They are on or below the conspiracy level of standards.I appreciate cut and pastes; I learn stuff.The following, a series of talking-point defeats for Liberals....15 of 'em
A person who cuts and pastes talking points cuts and pastes talking points for other cut and pasters to use.
Free thinkers here
Helping poor people buy private insurance?
You mean like giving them subsidies, and having market based exchanges where they could go to buy the private insurance?
lolol
1. "Helping poor people buy private insurance?"
Poor????
"Middle-income as well as low-income people buying coverage in the Exchanges will be eligible for government subsidies that will come in the form of tax credits. Anyone earning between 100 and 400 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL) (now $11,490 to $45,960 for a single person, and up to $126, 360 for a family of six) will qualify. - See more at: Under Obamacare, Will You Receive a Subsidy to Help You Buy Your Own Insurance? We Now Have Real Numbers That Will Let You Calculate How Much You Will Receive | Health Beat by Maggie Mahar
2. "Typical American family earned $53,657 last year"
Typical American family earned $53,657 last year
3. Clearly, this isn't aimed at helping 'poor,' but at growing government by collectivization.....
We've seen this before:
a. Government control of private sector activity...is aptly described as Bolshevik- or Marxist, socialist, collectivist, statist, or, for that matter, fascist, too. Indeed, nationalized health care was one of the first programs enacted by the Bolsheviks after they seized power in 1917 (Banks, insurance companies and means of communications were also taken over by Soviet authorities immediately. Dziewanowski, "A History of Soviet Russia," p. 107.
b. Obama isn't the first Bolshevik to support socialized medicine. For context, there was Henry Sigerist: "He devoted himself to the study of history of medicine.Socialized Medicine in the Soviet Union(1937), andHistory of Medicinewere among his most important works. He emerged as a major spokesman for "compulsory health insurance". ...He attacked the American Medical Association because of his conflicting views onsocialized medicine." Henry E. Sigerist - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
c. And, Sigerist was one of the apologists for Stalin, including his state-engineered famine in the Ukraine. 7 million perished (The History Place - Genocide in the 20th Century: Stalin's Forced Famine 1932-33).
d. Sigerist "shared with the architects of Soviet health policy under Stalin an outlook best described as medical totalitarianism. He really believed that humanity would be better off if every individual were under the medical supervision of the state from cradle to grave....[and] Sigerist's belief in the necessity for state control over all aspects of medicine ultimately made him an apologist for state control over most aspects of human life."
Fee and Brown, eds. "Making Medical History: The Life and Times of Henry E. Sigerist," p. 252
Notice how this applies to you?
"...apologist for state control over most aspects of human life."
Ignoring the interminable irrelevancies of your repeated filibusters, which BTW and FYI, no one is reading,
you said you wanted Medicaid replaced with government funded private insurance policies.
How would that work?
"...FYI, no one is reading,..."
So....how do you post your attempted responses without reading the thread?
That must be why you are called the NYLiar, huh?
I need not labor through the entirety of your tedious posts in order to find an easy target.
How many lies have you cast....?
I love statistics....but once it approached Avagadro's Number, I lost count.
OK, and, I think lots of folks do like you enjoy doing, including myself.Thanks, Camp; I went to college, too, and I do know how to evaluate material. Cut and pastes are still helpful as a starting point if I want to look into an issue, not to mention the endless amazement I enjoy reading other viewpoints. Don't worry about me swallowing anything whole, from either side.It is a favored method of propagandist for creating misinformation and disinformation texts. Truth can be turned into lies and lies turned into truth by simply omitting and editing quotes and passages. It also bombards the reader with the necessity to research and evaluate sources from which the cut and paste are derived, a time-consuming task the author knows will not be done by most of the readers. Many of the main source used by PoliticalChic would never be accepted for University credit toward a graded thesis. They are on or below the conspiracy level of standards.I appreciate cut and pastes; I learn stuff.The following, a series of talking-point defeats for Liberals....15 of 'em
A person who cuts and pastes talking points cuts and pastes talking points for other cut and pasters to use.
Free thinkers here
Her cut and paste sources for this quagmire or misinformation are a long list of conservative bloggers and commentators. She is attempting to present opinions and talking points from the far right as factual academic data. Bloggers are not scholars and people who make a living writing partisan commentaries by nature and job description do not produce objective articles and essays. They produce political spin. That is what they do.NO LINKS (There is a reason for that)
Every one I post has a link.
Why won't you debate the other people's points you post?
Because Propaganda doesnt work that way. She asserts that she is correct and thats why she is. Facts be dammed.
