What's the Fear?

[eagle1462010]

You're ass-u-me-ing that I'm impressed with the ACA. You raise great points. Points, among others, that I for one would like to see a reasonable legislature iron out through debate and compromise.

Is the current republican strategy going to foment those discussions? I don't think so... nobody wants to negotiate with a gun to their head.

You give all indications that you think this law will succeed and it seemed to me you wanted it to, given that you just tried to pitch it to me, AVG. Have I caught you in a lie? Nobody likes being lied to. And this is exactly what you did, and what this law is doing. The cruel reality of this law is awaiting the unwitting masses just on the other side of the "submit" button.

Whoa! What riveting prose!

Joe has not lied to you, dummy. Just like the Doc was not lying to you the other day.

I am also not in favor of the employer mandate. It makes little sense. The law may still succeed, though. And...you'd better hope so. If shit goes back to the way it was, a slacker like you will never be able to get insurance.

The employer mandate and 30 hour rule is what happens when idiots write laws based on their IDEOLOGIES rather than LOGIC AND REASON.

Our Founding Fathers stated so in the Constitution. Taxes should be Uniform. Your side will state it is UNIFORM, as they EXEMPT THOSE THEY DEEM WORTHY, which to me VIOLATES THE UNIFORMITY CLAUSE.

NO ONE SHOULD GET EXEMPTIONS if the law is worth the paper it's written on.

Had they applied the law, as given in attempt to find a solution post, the taxes would have been applied UNIFORMLY on the entire populace. It would have LESSENED THE DAMAGE of the new TAXES by distributing it across the board, and it doesn't allow loop holes.

 

[LoneLaugher]

You give all indications that you think this law will succeed and it seemed to me you wanted it to, given that you just tried to pitch it to me, AVG. Have I caught you in a lie? Nobody likes being lied to. And this is exactly what you did, and what this law is doing. The cruel reality of this law is awaiting the unwitting masses just on the other side of the "submit" button.

Whoa! What riveting prose!

Joe has not lied to you, dummy. Just like the Doc was not lying to you the other day.

I am also not in favor of the employer mandate. It makes little sense. The law may still succeed, though. And...you'd better hope so. If shit goes back to the way it was, a slacker like you will never be able to get insurance.

The employer mandate and 30 hour rule is what happens when idiots write laws based on their IDEOLOGIES rather than LOGIC AND REASON.

Our Founding Fathers stated so in the Constitution. Taxes should be Uniform. Your side will state it is UNIFORM, as they EXEMPT THOSE THEY DEEM WORTHY, which to me VIOLATES THE UNIFORMITY CLAUSE.

NO ONE SHOULD GET EXEMPTIONS if the law is worth the paper it's written on.

Had they applied the law, as given in attempt to find a solution post, the taxes would have been applied UNIFORMLY on the entire populace. It would have LESSENED THE DAMAGE of the new TAXES by distributing it across the board, and it doesn't allow loop holes.

You are confused. Corporations are not people, my friend.

Ideologically, the left wants single payer......with ZERO employer activity. So this law, with the mandate, is not based on liberal ideology. I wonder whose ideology it represents?

 

[eagle1462010]

Whoa! What riveting prose!

Joe has not lied to you, dummy. Just like the Doc was not lying to you the other day.

I am also not in favor of the employer mandate. It makes little sense. The law may still succeed, though. And...you'd better hope so. If shit goes back to the way it was, a slacker like you will never be able to get insurance.

The employer mandate and 30 hour rule is what happens when idiots write laws based on their IDEOLOGIES rather than LOGIC AND REASON.

Our Founding Fathers stated so in the Constitution. Taxes should be Uniform. Your side will state it is UNIFORM, as they EXEMPT THOSE THEY DEEM WORTHY, which to me VIOLATES THE UNIFORMITY CLAUSE.

NO ONE SHOULD GET EXEMPTIONS if the law is worth the paper it's written on.

Had they applied the law, as given in attempt to find a solution post, the taxes would have been applied UNIFORMLY on the entire populace. It would have LESSENED THE DAMAGE of the new TAXES by distributing it across the board, and it doesn't allow loop holes.

You are confused. Corporations are not people, my friend.

Ideologically, the left wants single payer......with ZERO employer activity. So this law, with the mandate, is not based on liberal ideology. I wonder whose ideology it represents?

Corporations are not people. LOL

They are made up of people, and these people decide the Taxes paid by the Corp. You are taxing the people in the corp, by taxing the Corp.

We do not agree on Single payer.

 

[eagle1462010]

KISS principle.

KEEP
IT
SIMPLE
STUPID..................

Any large problem can be solved by looking at smaller problems. Fixing smaller problems locally are easier to see. As you continue to fix small problems the larger ones eventually go away.

If you look at the whole thing at once, it looks insolvable.

Bottom line, the Dems wrote a SCREWED UP LAW and it is doing damage to the economy. Had they had the common sense to write a law with Uniform taxation to lessen the impact on each business we possibly wouldn't be seeing the damage by creating part time America.

Which is why I consider those who wrote the law to be BLITHERING IDIOTS.

 

[Seawytch]

Here's a couple of quick questions:

Why are the Republican now the ones willing to talk? Why are the Democrats scared of negotiating?

Plus one more:

Just what exactly has it improved thus far?

Why should the Democrats "negotiate" on settled law just because the crazy wing of the GOP can't get what they want legislatively?

Do you really think this is a precedent you want to set just in case there is ever a chance of a GOP president ever again? (not looking likely, but there's always a chance)

Would you support the GOP "negotiating" if a Democratic speaker, who could not get their "agenda" passed legislatively, just decided to shut down the government when they couldn't get their way? You'd be behind that would you, especially if they telegraphed for months that they were going to shut down the government if they didn't get their way? You'd be onboard with that?

1. Well, why shouldn't they? Or does this show how closed minded and stubborn they are? "Its our way, or the government gets it!"

2. I didn't set any precedent. But Obama has set many precedents with his behavior already. Should the Republicans get supermajorities in both houses and a Republican President like you guys did, don't whine when they shove an anti abortion bill or something similar down the throats of Democrats.

3. Your paradoxes are convoluted. Applying a dilemma to me is pointless. Here's one, why are the Democrats willing to prolong the shutdown until the Republicans capitulate?

The Democrats are not the ones saying "do this or the country gets it, the GOP is. They've been planning to do it for weeks. http://m.comedycentral.com/videos/video.rbml?id=2skfmh&nbck=999-001-001

My paradox is right on the money. Faux bobble heads like you would be apoplectic if Pelosi had said "defund Medicare part D or we will shut down the government".

 

[TemplarKormac]

Why should the Democrats "negotiate" on settled law just because the crazy wing of the GOP can't get what they want legislatively?

Do you really think this is a precedent you want to set just in case there is ever a chance of a GOP president ever again? (not looking likely, but there's always a chance)

Would you support the GOP "negotiating" if a Democratic speaker, who could not get their "agenda" passed legislatively, just decided to shut down the government when they couldn't get their way? You'd be behind that would you, especially if they telegraphed for months that they were going to shut down the government if they didn't get their way? You'd be onboard with that?

Because when Democrats passed this "law", they didn't include a way to fund it.

We don't have the money for this new welfare program. But you libs don't care....just borrow another trillion...that's your solution.

Uh, yeah they did actually. You think the GOP is trying to stop the medical device and tanning bed taxes for shits and giggles? http://www.acponline.org/advocacy/where_we_stand/assets/i2-how-is-the-aca-funded.pdf

The ACA lowers the deficit. CBO | CBO?s Estimate of the Net Budgetary Impact of the Affordable Care Act?s Health Insurance Coverage Provisions Has Not Changed Much Over Time I thought that was y'all's big bugaboo, the deficit.

One problem. Obama promised it wouldn't exceed $1 trillion. It's set to run $1.32 trillion over the 2014-2023 time span. So nice spin, but no dice. Our concern is still there, because he still lied.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Why should the Democrats "negotiate" on settled law just because the crazy wing of the GOP can't get what they want legislatively?

Do you really think this is a precedent you want to set just in case there is ever a chance of a GOP president ever again? (not looking likely, but there's always a chance)

Would you support the GOP "negotiating" if a Democratic speaker, who could not get their "agenda" passed legislatively, just decided to shut down the government when they couldn't get their way? You'd be behind that would you, especially if they telegraphed for months that they were going to shut down the government if they didn't get their way? You'd be onboard with that?

1. Well, why shouldn't they? Or does this show how closed minded and stubborn they are? "Its our way, or the government gets it!"

2. I didn't set any precedent. But Obama has set many precedents with his behavior already. Should the Republicans get supermajorities in both houses and a Republican President like you guys did, don't whine when they shove an anti abortion bill or something similar down the throats of Democrats.

3. Your paradoxes are convoluted. Applying a dilemma to me is pointless. Here's one, why are the Democrats willing to prolong the shutdown until the Republicans capitulate?

The Democrats are not the ones saying "do this or the country gets it, the GOP is. They've been planning to do it for weeks. http://m.comedycentral.com/videos/video.rbml?id=2skfmh&nbck=999-001-001

My paradox is right on the money. Faux bobble heads like you would be apoplectic if Pelosi had said "defund Medicare part D or we will shut down the government".

You're the one citing Comedy Central to me as a legitimate source. Given that I'm 25 years of age, I wouldn't be too concerned about her doing anything to Medicare Part D. My grandmother would sure raise hell about it.

"The Democrats are not the ones saying 'do this or the country gets it' the GOP is."

Okay then, why aren't they at the table negotiating then?

 

[Seawytch]

1. Well, why shouldn't they? Or does this show how closed minded and stubborn they are? "Its our way, or the government gets it!"

2. I didn't set any precedent. But Obama has set many precedents with his behavior already. Should the Republicans get supermajorities in both houses and a Republican President like you guys did, don't whine when they shove an anti abortion bill or something similar down the throats of Democrats.

3. Your paradoxes are convoluted. Applying a dilemma to me is pointless. Here's one, why are the Democrats willing to prolong the shutdown until the Republicans capitulate?

The Democrats are not the ones saying "do this or the country gets it, the GOP is. They've been planning to do it for weeks. http://m.comedycentral.com/videos/video.rbml?id=2skfmh&nbck=999-001-001

My paradox is right on the money. Faux bobble heads like you would be apoplectic if Pelosi had said "defund Medicare part D or we will shut down the government".

You're the one citing Comedy Central to me as a legitimate source. Given that I'm 25 years of age, I wouldn't be too concerned about her doing anything to Medicare Part D. My grandmother would sure raise hell about it.

"The Democrats are not the ones saying 'do this or the country gets it' the GOP is."

Okay then, why aren't they at the table negotiating then?

Did you bother watching? Did you see the "we're gonna shut er down" letter that 80 GOP members signed.

Do you support the party not in power shutting down the government over laws they cannot change through the legislative process, yes or no?

 

[TemplarKormac]

The Democrats are not the ones saying "do this or the country gets it, the GOP is. They've been planning to do it for weeks. http://m.comedycentral.com/videos/video.rbml?id=2skfmh&nbck=999-001-001

My paradox is right on the money. Faux bobble heads like you would be apoplectic if Pelosi had said "defund Medicare part D or we will shut down the government".

You're the one citing Comedy Central to me as a legitimate source. Given that I'm 25 years of age, I wouldn't be too concerned about her doing anything to Medicare Part D. My grandmother would sure raise hell about it.

"The Democrats are not the ones saying 'do this or the country gets it' the GOP is."

Okay then, why aren't they at the table negotiating then?

Did you bother watching? Did you see the "we're gonna shut er down" letter that 80 GOP members signed.

Do you support the party not in power shutting down the government over laws they cannot change through the legislative process, yes or no?

Do you support people in power refusing to sit down and negotiate? Yes or no? I will never take anything from Comedy Central seriously. Post from a more serious source and I may answer your question.

 

[TemplarKormac]

One other thing, Seawytch:

All . . . will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect and to violate would be oppression.

-Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, 1801

 

[eagle1462010]

The Democrats are not the ones saying "do this or the country gets it, the GOP is. They've been planning to do it for weeks. http://m.comedycentral.com/videos/video.rbml?id=2skfmh&nbck=999-001-001

My paradox is right on the money. Faux bobble heads like you would be apoplectic if Pelosi had said "defund Medicare part D or we will shut down the government".

You're the one citing Comedy Central to me as a legitimate source. Given that I'm 25 years of age, I wouldn't be too concerned about her doing anything to Medicare Part D. My grandmother would sure raise hell about it.

"The Democrats are not the ones saying 'do this or the country gets it' the GOP is."

Okay then, why aren't they at the table negotiating then?

Did you bother watching? Did you see the "we're gonna shut er down" letter that 80 GOP members signed.

Do you support the party not in power shutting down the government over laws they cannot change through the legislative process, yes or no?

I support the Constitution of the United States..................

It purposely gave the House the Power of the Purse.............

Obamacare is against the will of the people, which is why you guys lost the house.........

Madison stated it could be used as a Weapon with an out of control Gov't. We have an out of control Gov't with a shitty economy to boot.

YES shut it down and FORCE THE DAMN ISSUE.

 

[TemplarKormac]

[MENTION=24452]Seawytch[/MENTION] claims Obamacare lowers the deficit. Not a chance:

Promise: "I will not sign a plan that add one dime to our deficits--either now or in the future." -Barack Obama

Reality: In 2010, the Congressional Budget Office calculated that the ten-year cost of Obamacare, in terms of its spending increases, was $940 billion. In 2013, CBO's ten-year spending estimate was $1.88 trillion. By 2015, the CBO's ten-year spending projections are likely to exceed $2.5 trillion. Our federal debt exceeds $16 trillion today. A recent report by the GAO suggests that, under the most realistic scenarios, Obamacare will end up adding $6.2 trillion to the deficit over the next 75 years.

http://energycommerce.house.gov/sit...mages/President Obama's Broken Promises 2.pdf

 

[Seawytch]

You're the one citing Comedy Central to me as a legitimate source. Given that I'm 25 years of age, I wouldn't be too concerned about her doing anything to Medicare Part D. My grandmother would sure raise hell about it.

"The Democrats are not the ones saying 'do this or the country gets it' the GOP is."

Okay then, why aren't they at the table negotiating then?

Did you bother watching? Did you see the "we're gonna shut er down" letter that 80 GOP members signed.

Do you support the party not in power shutting down the government over laws they cannot change through the legislative process, yes or no?

I support the Constitution of the United States..................

It purposely gave the House the Power of the Purse.............

Obamacare is against the will of the people, which is why you guys lost the house.........

Madison stated it could be used as a Weapon with an out of control Gov't. We have an out of control Gov't with a shitty economy to boot.

YES shut it down and FORCE THE DAMN ISSUE.

So if a Democratic House does this to a GOP President, you're gonna be just peachy with it. Not that I believe the Democrats would ever do a ludicrous thing like this, but it's good to know you'll support it if they do. I won't, but they'll have yours.

 

[TemplarKormac]

LOL.

This is how Democrats negotiate:

 

[Seawytch]

You're the one citing Comedy Central to me as a legitimate source. Given that I'm 25 years of age, I wouldn't be too concerned about her doing anything to Medicare Part D. My grandmother would sure raise hell about it.

"The Democrats are not the ones saying 'do this or the country gets it' the GOP is."

Okay then, why aren't they at the table negotiating then?

Did you bother watching? Did you see the "we're gonna shut er down" letter that 80 GOP members signed.

Do you support the party not in power shutting down the government over laws they cannot change through the legislative process, yes or no?

Do you support people in power refusing to sit down and negotiate? Yes or no? I will never take anything from Comedy Central seriously. Post from a more serious source and I may answer your question.

Yes, I support legislators sitting down and compromising on laws...not shutting down the government when there's one they don't like. They are only doing it because they don't have the votes legislatively.

Whether you "take it seriously" or not, the letter exists and there is even a lovely shot of it in the clip. Does a Buffalo New York paper scare you as much as Jon Stewart?

From a letter ... to a train wreck: How the GOP derailed the government

Negotiations don't start with "do this or the country gets it"...

 

[TemplarKormac]

Did you bother watching? Did you see the "we're gonna shut er down" letter that 80 GOP members signed.

Do you support the party not in power shutting down the government over laws they cannot change through the legislative process, yes or no?

I support the Constitution of the United States..................

It purposely gave the House the Power of the Purse.............

Obamacare is against the will of the people, which is why you guys lost the house.........

Madison stated it could be used as a Weapon with an out of control Gov't. We have an out of control Gov't with a shitty economy to boot.

YES shut it down and FORCE THE DAMN ISSUE.

So if a Democratic House does this to a GOP President, you're gonna be just peachy with it. Not that I believe the Democrats would ever do a ludicrous thing like this, but it's good to know you'll support it if they do. I won't, but they'll have yours.

That is a non sequitur. Care to address my point? I hate when anyone abuses power. If you think that view is tainted by party affiliation, you're sorely mistaken.

 

[eagle1462010]

Did you bother watching? Did you see the "we're gonna shut er down" letter that 80 GOP members signed.

Do you support the party not in power shutting down the government over laws they cannot change through the legislative process, yes or no?

I support the Constitution of the United States..................

It purposely gave the House the Power of the Purse.............

Obamacare is against the will of the people, which is why you guys lost the house.........

Madison stated it could be used as a Weapon with an out of control Gov't. We have an out of control Gov't with a shitty economy to boot.

YES shut it down and FORCE THE DAMN ISSUE.

So if a Democratic House does this to a GOP President, you're gonna be just peachy with it. Not that I believe the Democrats would ever do a ludicrous thing like this, but it's good to know you'll support it if they do. I won't, but they'll have yours.

LOL

Your side doesn't obstruct the GOP............

LMAO

 

[TemplarKormac]

Did you bother watching? Did you see the "we're gonna shut er down" letter that 80 GOP members signed.

Do you support the party not in power shutting down the government over laws they cannot change through the legislative process, yes or no?

Do you support people in power refusing to sit down and negotiate? Yes or no? I will never take anything from Comedy Central seriously. Post from a more serious source and I may answer your question.

Yes, I support legislators sitting down and compromising on laws...not shutting down the government when there's one they don't like. They are only doing it because they don't have the votes legislatively.

Whether you "take it seriously" or not, the letter exists and there is even a lovely shot of it in the clip. Does a Buffalo New York paper scare you as much as Jon Stewart?

From a letter ... to a train wreck: How the GOP derailed the government

Negotiations don't start with "do this or the country gets it"...

Funny I don't live in New York, so I have no opinion of this "Buffalo New York" paper. Regardless of what it says (the title says all I need to know) it still pushes the flawed mantra that the GOP are the ones holding the government hostage.

Negotiations don't start with "it's my way or the highway."

 

[Seawytch]

LOL.

This is how Democrats negotiate:

You really think that supports your position? He said, he could have tried to shut down the government over Iraq war funding, but he didn't...proving he's not in the hostage taking business like the GOP appears to be.

 

[Seawytch]

Do you support people in power refusing to sit down and negotiate? Yes or no? I will never take anything from Comedy Central seriously. Post from a more serious source and I may answer your question.

Yes, I support legislators sitting down and compromising on laws...not shutting down the government when there's one they don't like. They are only doing it because they don't have the votes legislatively.

Whether you "take it seriously" or not, the letter exists and there is even a lovely shot of it in the clip. Does a Buffalo New York paper scare you as much as Jon Stewart?

From a letter ... to a train wreck: How the GOP derailed the government

Negotiations don't start with "do this or the country gets it"...

Funny I don't live in New York, so I have no opinion of this "Buffalo New York" paper. Regardless of what it says (the title says all I need to know) it still pushes the flawed mantra that the GOP are the ones holding the government hostage.

Negotiations don't start with "it's my way or the highway."

So, again you want to ignore the truth and facts because it doesn't fit with your narrative.

You're right, negotiations shouldn't start that way, but that's exactly what they GOP did. THEY said "repeal or we shut down". They wanted it, they telegraphed it, they did it, they own it.

GOP: Cut off your leg
DEM: No
GOP: Cut off your arm
DEM: No
GOP: Cut off your finger
DEM: No
GOP: Why won't you negotiate?