What do liberals want the US to be?

[Dad2three]

Gotcha FooledByO, wanting to keep that which you earned is "selfishness" and taking what you didn't by force is generosity. Actually, it's armed robbery.

Yeah, you didn't 'earn' the money because of the system WE set up right? No, it was just working harder. NOT like the US system helped at all. Read BF quote again dumbass, then go to China or Russia and do it!!!

Bull, you did nothing to "set up" the system. I created my company, I funded "the system." You are just a parasite.

Right, you didn't BENEFIT from our roads, schools, military, etc.

Fukkking dumbass, go do it in a 3rd world nation then!!

That isn't what I said, Einstein. You had nothing to do with roads, schools and the military. I funded those. Businesses drive our economy. You had nothing to do with providing them. Illiteracy sucks. If you went to college, you should sue them to get your money back.

More bullshit. I'm shocked. No really, I am... lol

IF you funded them, why do our engineers give a D to the infrastructure and we have $17+ trillion in debt?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Thanks to everyone who has posted so far on this thread. I was very serious with the question in the OP. But so far not one liberal has been able to provide a specific cogent response. Billo came the closest.

It seems to me that liberals want everyone to have the same material things, for the government to care for everyone, and for everyone to love everyone else. The want a crime free nation that takes care of the poor and destitute of the entire world.

Simply stated, liberals live in a fantasy world where everyone puts flowers in their hair and dances around the may pole singing "I'd like to buy the world a coke" and "imagine".

The goal of the thread was worthy.

The problem is that Left-think; "Relativism" is an irrational, unsustainable species of reasoning, thus the adherents to such have no means to reason soundly, therefore where an intellectual pursuit requiring sound reason will consistently realize the Left being incapable of participating.

Which is why the Left is incapable of providing a lucid response. Sadly even where it may appear that one has stumbled over something close, inevitably you'll come to find that the response was empty, with the one who advanced it in no way having any authority to speak for any other socialist... as the foundation of Left-think rejects the objectivity essential to continuity of thought.

So, at the end of everyday, the Ideological Left is a lie... comprised entirely of liars. There is no concept for 'honor' on the left... it's just a litany of loosely conjured nonsense which has no means to practically applied in reality.

 

[SAYIT]

this is a serious question, please only reply with serious comments.

what specifically do liberals want the US to become?
Tell us exactly what you want changed, and why.

Seriously?

Liberals want a country that provides a level playing field for all people regardless of race, sex, sexuality or social class
Liberals want to help those who need helping

everyone wants to help those who need help. Where in the USA today is the playing field not level? Do you want more affrimative action that penalizes the majorities?

I asked for specifics, you provided generalizations. What exactly do you want?

OK...let's look at where the playing field is not level
We have a wealthy class who get a disproportional say in how legislation is crafted and who it helps. Specific legislation includes tax structure, deductions, labor laws
Affirmative action was an immensely successful liberal program that helped all people. Yes, it did level the playing field

Did it help the people who got passed over due to adding points to the people who got in due to it?

It helped those who were never given an opportunity to fill management or Complex jobs. In a society where blacks were only allowed menial jobs and women were only allowed subservient jobs, affirmative action was necessary
Affirmative action worked

That it was necessary and successful doesn't mean it didn't trample the rights of those who were pushed aside. It was justice for those who needed a gov't hand up but not for those who lost out.

 

[kaz]

We have a political party and *news* channel that caters to people who live in Black-n-White World

LOL, of the three areas of politics, fiscal, social and military, I agree with Republicans on one of them. At least in theory, I am different in fiscal in that I am actually fiscally conservative. And you keep calling me a Republican. And Republicans are black and white? LOL, take your head out of the kool-aid bowl, you're not getting enough oxygen.

True, your a guy who believes in myths and fairy tales, a system that has NEVER worked ANYWHERE, EVER. But you keep hoping...

I don't care if you don't call yourself a Repug, ALL you vote is Repug

The US Constitution.

As for voting, for President I voted for:

Reagan, HW, (then left the party), Perot, Browne, Browne, Nader, Romney. Nope, once again you're clueless, but then you are FooledByO. I wasn't, not after for years of Obama delivering on his Marxist promises, which is why I did vote Republican for the first time since I left the party. Not a pattern I plan to continue. Democrats would help if you'd stop nominating Marxists. Obviously you aren't in favor of doing that.

Sure Bubba, sure

You're so stupid it's funny. The point of this discussion is I mocked you for saying Republicans are Black and White. And you're repeating, duh, dar, you're not a Democrat (true) so you're a Republican (false). Drool, there are nothing but Republicans and Democrats, so if you're not a Democrat you have to be a Republican? What are you talking about?

That's your answer to my mocking you for being black and white, that you are black and white? Classic. What a moron.

 

[Roadrunner]

Seriously?

Liberals want a country that provides a level playing field for all people regardless of race, sex, sexuality or social class
Liberals want to help those who need helping

everyone wants to help those who need help. Where in the USA today is the playing field not level? Do you want more affrimative action that penalizes the majorities?

I asked for specifics, you provided generalizations. What exactly do you want?

OK...let's look at where the playing field is not level
We have a wealthy class who get a disproportional say in how legislation is crafted and who it helps. Specific legislation includes tax structure, deductions, labor laws
Affirmative action was an immensely successful liberal program that helped all people. Yes, it did level the playing field

Did it help the people who got passed over due to adding points to the people who got in due to it?

It helped those who were never given an opportunity to fill management or Complex jobs. In a society where blacks were only allowed menial jobs and women were only allowed subservient jobs, affirmative action was necessary
Affirmative action worked

That it was necessary and successful doesn't mean it didn't trample the rights of those who were pushed aside. It was justice for those who needed a gov't hand up but not for those who lost out.

Seems women as a group took the hand up, and made it, blacks, not so much.

 

[kaz]

IF you funded them, why do our engineers give a D to the infrastructure and we have $17+ trillion in debt?

You think the $17 trillion in debt was for roads and bridges? Seriously?

The $17 in debt is for parasites. You know, you.

 

[SAYIT]

Define the difference between 'social order' and 'social justice.'

Social order refers to all the various institutions, customs and practices that tend to regulate how we behave. These are often preserved simply because they exist and do not necessarily serve to protect the rights of all individuals.

So American traditions are nothing more than bigoted customs existing, "simply because."

Social justice refers to a moral concept that operates from the assumption that all people were created equal and so deserve the same rights.

Does not it state in the 'Declaration of Independence" that "all men are created equal?"

Why would liberals have a problem that?

Our Constitution had a little different way to describe that:
"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."
Article I, Section 2, Clause 3

 

[bripat9643]

Do you spend 80% of your day fuming about this? lol

he probably does. He dreams of being Robin Hood.

I honestly never think about it, I'm too busy 'earning' my own wealth to worry about what somebody else is earning. FACT this country is the very definition of opportunity, its overflowing with opportunities. Too bad the left try to convince their base its hopeless.

The Republican sham of lower taxes and less regulation doesn't help anyone but the richest Americans and Big Business and kill jobs and opportunity for almost everyone, especially in the middle class and poor.

As Bill Maher has observed, the GOPers are good at pushing a falsehood until it's accepted as conventional wisdom

How do lower taxes kill jobs? I can't wait to see your explanation for that.

How do tax cuts create jobs???

They kill jobs by incentivizing OFF SHORRING jobs AND profits dumbass!

Maybe we should go back to the good old days when tax rates were high and the corporations save their tax money by reinvesting into their company instead of just pulling everything out.

Tax cuts are an incentive to move off shore? You really believe that corporations would rather stay here and pay higher taxes rather than pay lower taxes overseas? Does your nose run and your feet smell? You're built upside down!

Maybe we should go back to the old days when we paid about 5% of our income to the government rather than 40%. You recall those days. They called it "the industrial revolution."

 

[Dad2three]

Thanks to everyone who has posted so far on this thread. I was very serious with the question in the OP. But so far not one liberal has been able to provide a specific cogent response. Billo came the closest.

It seems to me that liberals want everyone to have the same material things, for the government to care for everyone, and for everyone to love everyone else. The want a crime free nation that takes care of the poor and destitute of the entire world.

Simply stated, liberals live in a fantasy world where everyone puts flowers in their hair and dances around the may pole singing "I'd like to buy the world a coke" and "imagine".

The goal of the thread was worthy.

The problem is that Left-think; "Relativism" is an irrational, unsustainable species of reasoning, thus the adherents to such have no means to reason soundly, therefore where an intellectual pursuit requiring sound reason will consistently realize the Left being incapable of participating.

Which is why the Left is incapable of providing a lucid response. Sadly even where it may appear that one has stumbled over something close, inevitably you'll come to find that the response was empty, with the one who advanced it in no way having any authority to speak for any other socialist... as the foundation of Left-think rejects the objectivity essential to continuity of thought.

So, at the end of everyday, the Ideological Left is a lie... comprised entirely of liars. There is no concept for 'honor' on the left... it's just a litany of loosely conjured nonsense which has no means to practically applied in reality.

Stop projecting

“The Democrats are the party of government activism, the party that says government can make you richer, smarter, taller, and get the chickweed out of your lawn. Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work, and then get elected and prove it." - P.J. O’rourke



Tax cuts do NOT pay for themselves. -Alan Greenspan Former Federal Reserve Chairman



STUDY: These Charts Show There's Almost No Correlation Between Tax Rates and GDP

These Charts Show There s Probably No Correlation Between Tax Rates and GDP - Business Insider


Capital Gains Tax Rates and Economic Growth (or not)

If you read the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal (or surf around the nether regions of Forbes.com), you may come to the conclusion that no aspect of tax policy is more important for economic growth than the way we tax capital gains. You’d be wrong

Capital Gains Tax Rates and Economic Growth or not - Forbes

 

[bripat9643]

Nope, the OP was a serious question and I wanted serious responses. I had my suspicions as to how you libs would respond and you confirmed them.

You libs have no idea what you really want. You deal in theory, emotion, and feeeeeeeeeeelings, not reality.

thanks for the confirmation.

Projection from a righty. Shocking

Keynes wrote "The End of Laissez Faire" in 1926. He was correct then, and his insight remains more valid than any economics that conservative Libertarians propound ad infinitum and ad nauseum. Laissez Faire is nothing more than a childish Christmas wish of no substance; just hope and myth, and smoke and mirrors. Fails every time we try even the tiniest bit.

So says you. Keynes' theories have been debunked by history.

lol, THAT'S why almost every nation uses it, lol

Yes, in a way. Keynes' theories justify their tax and spend like there's no tomorrow policies. If they had to use correct economic theories, they would all have to cut their spending by 90%.

Oh wait, you are trying to use PART of Keynes policies? PAYING OFF DEBT IN GOOD TIMES WAS THE OTHER PART!!!!

When do politicians do that part? Government borrowing is never good, period.

 

[Dad2three]

We have a political party and *news* channel that caters to people who live in Black-n-White World

LOL, of the three areas of politics, fiscal, social and military, I agree with Republicans on one of them. At least in theory, I am different in fiscal in that I am actually fiscally conservative. And you keep calling me a Republican. And Republicans are black and white? LOL, take your head out of the kool-aid bowl, you're not getting enough oxygen.

True, your a guy who believes in myths and fairy tales, a system that has NEVER worked ANYWHERE, EVER. But you keep hoping...

I don't care if you don't call yourself a Repug, ALL you vote is Repug

The US Constitution.

As for voting, for President I voted for:

Reagan, HW, (then left the party), Perot, Browne, Browne, Nader, Romney. Nope, once again you're clueless, but then you are FooledByO. I wasn't, not after for years of Obama delivering on his Marxist promises, which is why I did vote Republican for the first time since I left the party. Not a pattern I plan to continue. Democrats would help if you'd stop nominating Marxists. Obviously you aren't in favor of doing that.

Sure Bubba, sure

You're so stupid it's funny. The point of this discussion is I mocked you for saying Republicans are Black and White. And you're repeating, duh, dar, you're not a Democrat (true) so you're a Republican (false). Drool, there are nothing but Republicans and Democrats, so if you're not a Democrat you have to be a Republican? What are you talking about?

That's your answer to my mocking you for being black and white, that you are black and white? Classic. What a moron.

Sure Bubba, sure

There are 2 parties (PERIOD, NO 3rd party since 1992 has done squat) the US. Weird how SOOOOOO many conservatives don't support either party, lol

Libertarians are frauds and parasites. Period

 

[Dad2three]

IF you funded them, why do our engineers give a D to the infrastructure and we have $17+ trillion in debt?

You think the $17 trillion in debt was for roads and bridges? Seriously?

The $17 in debt is for parasites. You know, you.

Keep showing how ignorant you are Bubba, I love it

 

[bripat9643]

horseshit. when obama took office the national debt was 10T , it is now over 17T and will be over 20T by the time he leaves office. Obama will have added more to the national debt than all previous presidents COMBINED

Do you understand the difference between annual deficit and national debt?

You understand that most of the things that caused the trillion dollar deficits at the begining of Obama's term were put in their by Bush- Tax cuts for the rich, wars that no one was paying for, etc.

Yes, it's all BOOOOOOOOOOSH's fault. We've heard this whine about 10,000 times already.

Yes, policies like GUTTING revenues from 20%+ of GDP to below 15% (25%+ drop) don't matter, OR UNFUNDED wars or UNFUNDED Medicare expansions right? Or 'job creator' policies that failed? Or 'home ownership society' programs that Dubya cheered on, WITHOUT regulators on the beat?

What have Democrats ever passed that is "funded?"

ACA.

You gonna compare Dubya/GOP to the Dems? SERIOUSLY? lol

"Starving the beast" is a political strategy employed by American conservatives in order to limit government spending by cutting taxes in order to deprive the government of revenue in a deliberate effort to force the federal government to reduce spending.


Before his election as President, then-candidate Ronald Reagan foreshadowed the strategy during the 1980 US Presidential debates, saying "John Anderson tells us that first we've got to reduce spending before we can reduce taxes. Well, if you've got a kid that's extravagant, you can lecture him all you want to about his extravagance. Or you can cut his allowance and achieve the same end much quicker."

Starve the beast - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Nope, the ACA is not funded. When the CBO scored it, then used 10 years worth of revenues to pay for years worth of benefits. Furthermore, they raided Medicare and counted the revenue twice. The ACA is the biggest con ever perpetrated against the American public. Gruber admitted it.

 

[BlackSand]

Seriously?

Liberals want a country that provides a level playing field for all people regardless of race, sex, sexuality or social class
Liberals want to help those who need helping

Now if any of their policies could accomplish anything they set out do without the corruption, malfeasance and political pandering ... They might be worthy of note.

Truly excellent initiatives and desires ... As soon as they can offer anything that actually accomplishes any of that ... Then we have a chance of being more helpful.

.

 

[Dad2three]

everyone wants to help those who need help. Where in the USA today is the playing field not level? Do you want more affrimative action that penalizes the majorities?

I asked for specifics, you provided generalizations. What exactly do you want?

OK...let's look at where the playing field is not level
We have a wealthy class who get a disproportional say in how legislation is crafted and who it helps. Specific legislation includes tax structure, deductions, labor laws
Affirmative action was an immensely successful liberal program that helped all people. Yes, it did level the playing field

Did it help the people who got passed over due to adding points to the people who got in due to it?

It helped those who were never given an opportunity to fill management or Complex jobs. In a society where blacks were only allowed menial jobs and women were only allowed subservient jobs, affirmative action was necessary
Affirmative action worked

That it was necessary and successful doesn't mean it didn't trample the rights of those who were pushed aside. It was justice for those who needed a gov't hand up but not for those who lost out.

Seems women as a group took the hand up, and made it, blacks, not so much.

I asked for specifics, you provided generalizations. What exactly do you want?[/QUOTE]
OK...let's look at where the playing field is not level
We have a wealthy class who get a disproportional say in how legislation is crafted and who it helps. Specific legislation includes tax structure, deductions, labor laws
Affirmative action was an immensely successful liberal program that helped all people. Yes, it did level the playing field[/QUOTE]

Did it help the people who got passed over due to adding points to the people who got in due to it?[/QUOTE]

It helped those who were never given an opportunity to fill management or Complex jobs. In a society where blacks were only allowed menial jobs and women were only allowed subservient jobs, affirmative action was necessary
Affirmative action worked[/QUOTE]

That it was necessary and successful doesn't mean it didn't trample the rights of those who were pushed aside. It was justice for those who needed a gov't hand up but not for those who lost out.[/QUOTE]


Seems women as a group took the hand up, and made it, blacks, not so much.[/QUOTE]


Woman have seperate but equal until the 1960's? lol. You wing nutters are crazy

 

[kaz]

LOL, of the three areas of politics, fiscal, social and military, I agree with Republicans on one of them. At least in theory, I am different in fiscal in that I am actually fiscally conservative. And you keep calling me a Republican. And Republicans are black and white? LOL, take your head out of the kool-aid bowl, you're not getting enough oxygen.

True, your a guy who believes in myths and fairy tales, a system that has NEVER worked ANYWHERE, EVER. But you keep hoping...

I don't care if you don't call yourself a Repug, ALL you vote is Repug

The US Constitution.

As for voting, for President I voted for:

Reagan, HW, (then left the party), Perot, Browne, Browne, Nader, Romney. Nope, once again you're clueless, but then you are FooledByO. I wasn't, not after for years of Obama delivering on his Marxist promises, which is why I did vote Republican for the first time since I left the party. Not a pattern I plan to continue. Democrats would help if you'd stop nominating Marxists. Obviously you aren't in favor of doing that.

Sure Bubba, sure

You're so stupid it's funny. The point of this discussion is I mocked you for saying Republicans are Black and White. And you're repeating, duh, dar, you're not a Democrat (true) so you're a Republican (false). Drool, there are nothing but Republicans and Democrats, so if you're not a Democrat you have to be a Republican? What are you talking about?

That's your answer to my mocking you for being black and white, that you are black and white? Classic. What a moron.

Sure Bubba, sure

There are 2 parties (PERIOD, NO 3rd party since 1992 has done squat) the US. Weird how SOOOOOO many conservatives don't support either party, lol

Libertarians are frauds and parasites. Period

We are parasites, not wanting government money. LOL. you are a tool.

 

[Dad2three]

You understand that most of the things that caused the trillion dollar deficits at the begining of Obama's term were put in their by Bush- Tax cuts for the rich, wars that no one was paying for, etc.

Yes, it's all BOOOOOOOOOOSH's fault. We've heard this whine about 10,000 times already.

Yes, policies like GUTTING revenues from 20%+ of GDP to below 15% (25%+ drop) don't matter, OR UNFUNDED wars or UNFUNDED Medicare expansions right? Or 'job creator' policies that failed? Or 'home ownership society' programs that Dubya cheered on, WITHOUT regulators on the beat?

What have Democrats ever passed that is "funded?"

ACA.

You gonna compare Dubya/GOP to the Dems? SERIOUSLY? lol

"Starving the beast" is a political strategy employed by American conservatives in order to limit government spending by cutting taxes in order to deprive the government of revenue in a deliberate effort to force the federal government to reduce spending.


Before his election as President, then-candidate Ronald Reagan foreshadowed the strategy during the 1980 US Presidential debates, saying "John Anderson tells us that first we've got to reduce spending before we can reduce taxes. Well, if you've got a kid that's extravagant, you can lecture him all you want to about his extravagance. Or you can cut his allowance and achieve the same end much quicker."

Starve the beast - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Nope, the ACA is not funded. When the CBO scored it, then used 10 years worth of revenues to pay for years worth of benefits. Furthermore, they raided Medicare and counted the revenue twice. The ACA is the biggest con ever perpetrated against the American public. Gruber admitted it.

More right wing garbage. Shocking. Either it's the biggest tax increase you K/K/klowns say it is or not. Can't have it both ways. No it wasn't 10 years to pay for 1 year liar. Raided Medicare? Oh the same money the GOP used for tax cuts, slowing down the pay out to docs and hospitals (RATE OF GROWTH). Gawd I'm shocked not one thing you said was truthful, lol

 

[bripat9643]

Liberal Dictionary:
===========================================
Greed - the desire to keep the money you have earned
compassion - coveting the money earned by others and taking it by force

Benjamin Franklin, Founding Father, American diplomat, statesman, and scientist; letter to Robert Morris, December 25, 1783:

"All the property that is necessary to a Man, for the Conservation of the Individual and the Propagation of the Species, is his natural Right, which none can justly deprive him of: But all Property superfluous to such purposes is the Property of the Publick, who, by their Laws, have created it, and who may therefore by other laws dispose of it, whenever the Welfare of the Publick shall demand such Disposition. He that does not like civil Society on these Terms, let him retire and live among Savages. He can have no right to the benefits of Society, who will not pay his Club towards the Support of it."

Franklin wasn't right about everything. Your quote doesn't prove that libturds aren't greedy hypocrites.

Got it. It's liberals who call for tax cuts for the most well off and gutting social safety nets

The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

John Kenneth Galbraith

Gotcha FooledByO, wanting to keep that which you earned is "selfishness" and taking what you didn't by force is generosity. Actually, it's armed robbery.

Yeah, you didn't 'earn' the money because of the system WE set up right? No, it was just working harder. NOT like the US system helped at all. Read BF quote again dumbass, then go to China or Russia and do it!!!

Who is this "we?" The system is designed to loot the money people earn. The only "system" that allows people to prosper is declining to loot them. However, that system is going away.

 

[bripat9643]

True, your a guy who believes in myths and fairy tales, a system that has NEVER worked ANYWHERE, EVER. But you keep hoping...

I don't care if you don't call yourself a Repug, ALL you vote is Repug

The US Constitution.

As for voting, for President I voted for:

Reagan, HW, (then left the party), Perot, Browne, Browne, Nader, Romney. Nope, once again you're clueless, but then you are FooledByO. I wasn't, not after for years of Obama delivering on his Marxist promises, which is why I did vote Republican for the first time since I left the party. Not a pattern I plan to continue. Democrats would help if you'd stop nominating Marxists. Obviously you aren't in favor of doing that.

Sure Bubba, sure

You're so stupid it's funny. The point of this discussion is I mocked you for saying Republicans are Black and White. And you're repeating, duh, dar, you're not a Democrat (true) so you're a Republican (false). Drool, there are nothing but Republicans and Democrats, so if you're not a Democrat you have to be a Republican? What are you talking about?

That's your answer to my mocking you for being black and white, that you are black and white? Classic. What a moron.

Sure Bubba, sure

There are 2 parties (PERIOD, NO 3rd party since 1992 has done squat) the US. Weird how SOOOOOO many conservatives don't support either party, lol

Libertarians are frauds and parasites. Period

We are parasites, not wanting government money. LOL. you are a tool.

Yeah, I just love that "logic." Of course, it's just another example of the liberal propaganda technique where they accuse their critics of everything they are guilty of.

 

[bripat9643]

Yes, it's all BOOOOOOOOOOSH's fault. We've heard this whine about 10,000 times already.

Yes, policies like GUTTING revenues from 20%+ of GDP to below 15% (25%+ drop) don't matter, OR UNFUNDED wars or UNFUNDED Medicare expansions right? Or 'job creator' policies that failed? Or 'home ownership society' programs that Dubya cheered on, WITHOUT regulators on the beat?

What have Democrats ever passed that is "funded?"

ACA.

You gonna compare Dubya/GOP to the Dems? SERIOUSLY? lol

"Starving the beast" is a political strategy employed by American conservatives in order to limit government spending by cutting taxes in order to deprive the government of revenue in a deliberate effort to force the federal government to reduce spending.


Before his election as President, then-candidate Ronald Reagan foreshadowed the strategy during the 1980 US Presidential debates, saying "John Anderson tells us that first we've got to reduce spending before we can reduce taxes. Well, if you've got a kid that's extravagant, you can lecture him all you want to about his extravagance. Or you can cut his allowance and achieve the same end much quicker."

Starve the beast - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Nope, the ACA is not funded. When the CBO scored it, then used 10 years worth of revenues to pay for years worth of benefits. Furthermore, they raided Medicare and counted the revenue twice. The ACA is the biggest con ever perpetrated against the American public. Gruber admitted it.

More right wing garbage. Shocking. Either it's the biggest tax increase you K/K/klowns say it is or not. Can't have it both ways. No it wasn't 10 years to pay for 1 year liar. Raided Medicare? Oh the same money the GOP used for tax cuts, slowing down the pay out to docs and hospitals (RATE OF GROWTH). Gawd I'm shocked not one thing you said was truthful, lol

I meant to say for 6 years of benefits, but I posted a typo. That is exactly what the ACA con artists did. A for the rest of your swill, I leave the rest of the forum to laugh at it.