Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Brand New Totally-On-Topic-Or-I-Will-Cut-You Health Care Thread

1568101164

Posts

  • gigEsmallsgigEsmalls __BANNED USERS
    edited August 2009
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Kastanj wrote: »
    So apparently a black conservative says he was punched by someone pretty much out of the blue, maybe by some SEIU member. The usual suspects are ejaculating righteousness all over the place, but let's not forget "B for Barack" and the fact that physical scuffles caught on a cellphone are usually very complicated affairs when it comes to who did what.

    Honestly, if he was punched in the face totally at random while he was trying to walk an elderly kitten across the street by an outstated Obama supporter, does it really matter?


    This matters as this guy was roughed up by SEIU union goons who had no reason to be there other than to intimidate the yelling elderly. Purple is the new brown.

    edit: Here is the actual clip that clearly shows what happened.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTXBOgPCh9w&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.prisonplanet.com%2Funion-thugs-beat-patriot-at-obamacare-town-hall-in-st-louis.html&feature=player_embedded

    big l wrote: »
    $5 says gigEsmalls never responds to this excellent post.
  • KastanjKastanj __BANNED USERS
    edited August 2009
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Kastanj wrote: »
    So apparently a black conservative says he was punched by someone pretty much out of the blue, maybe by some SEIU member. The usual suspects are ejaculating righteousness all over the place, but let's not forget "B for Barack" and the fact that physical scuffles caught on a cellphone are usually very complicated affairs when it comes to who did what.

    Honestly, if he was punched in the face totally at random while he was trying to walk an elderly kitten across the street by an outstated Obama supporter, does it really matter?


    This matters as this guy was roughed up by SEIU union goons who had no reason to be there other than to intimidate the yelling elderly. Purple is the new brown.

    edit: Here is the actual clip that clearly shows what happened.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTXBOgPCh9w&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.prisonplanet.com%2Funion-thugs-beat-patriot-at-obamacare-town-hall-in-st-louis.html&feature=player_embedded

    Jumping the Godwin gun on blame allocation based on blatant political bias is the new black. Go to memeorandum and get some new friends, would you?

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • werehippywerehippy Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    I blame this town hall anger squarely on the President. His lack of leadership allowed Nancy Pelosi, probably the most unpopular politician in the USA, to be the face of health care reform. President Obama has also failed in properly explaining his health care reform goals. Instead of bringing both parties together he has been aggressively divisive in the last few days. The Democrats have a super-majority however they cannot take responsibility and feel compelled to blame others for their failure. Again, this is because of poor leadership from the top down.

    You want to know what the problem is with healthcare reform? This right here. Literally every sentence here is wrong. I'm not saying that as a rhetorical flourish or the standard "no you are" tit for tat argument, as a simple statement of fact every single idea here is wrong but swathes of people believe this (or lie to that effect) and are allowed to keep repeating this crap by a media that fetishizes balance over actual describing reality.

    In order of their appearance, sentence:
    Spoiler:
    And to loop back to what's relevant to the healthcare discussion, the take away here needs to be to slap every democrat in the face with: Until the next political sesmic shift this is what will be facing you across the aisle. There won't be constructive debate, there will never be proportional reaction to you moderating your plan, and if you want to do anything make it right first then sell that, don't waste your time trying to build a bipartisan bill because you think people support it more for that.

    The discussion hasn't been enhanced by grinding things to a halt looking for bipartisan support, the bill will pass by the barest margins or not at all no matter what is done, and we can look forward to months to years of this kind of tone because we've shown the republicans that if you want to stop a bill just pretend to negotiate while your base says the most insane things possibly imaginable and tries to terrorize anyone who doesn't fold at the drop of a hat.

  • lazegamerlazegamer Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    I thought I'd point out that the video starts when people are already fighting, and doesn't show who started anything. It's mostly lots of people yelling "that guy attacked me", "where my peeps", "you asshole", and "why'd you hit my hand."

    As far as I can tell, everyone audible in that video is an idiot.

    Surprise.
    - Spy
  • NartwakNartwak Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    This matters as this guy was roughed up by SEIU union goons who had no reason to be there other than to intimidate the yelling elderly.
    Ahahahaha, what possible reason people from a union made up with a large chunk of nurses and medical techs have to be at healthcare town halls?!?!

    INTIMIDATION.

    Spoiler:
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    lazegamer wrote: »
    I thought I'd point out that the video starts when people are already fighting, and doesn't show who started anything. It's mostly lots of people yelling "that guy attacked me", "where my peeps", "you asshole", and "why'd you hit my hand."

    As far as I can tell, everyone audible in that video is an idiot.

    The purpose of all the videos on both sides is the same: to make everyone angrier, so more of this bullshit happens, which makes it less likely for anything to get done. Then the politicians will conclude "well, there is no consensus so it's time to punt again," because no one in Washington knows how to read two numbers and determine which one is larger, as we saw during the campaign last year.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    David_T wrote: »
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    I blame this town hall anger squarely on the President. His lack of leadership allowed Nancy Pelosi, probably the most unpopular politician in the USA, to be the face of health care reform.

    Am I going to get infracted if I point out that Nancy Pelosi has favorables that Mitch McConnell and John Boehner can only drool over? And that she's not even the most unpopular Democrat (hey Harry!)?

    Though shouldn't Kathleen Sebelius be a lot more visible over this? I don't get your American television, so all I go on are blogs and this place, but I've barely heard her mentioned. In fact, I had to look up who was HHS sec., which seems odd in the middle of such vast healthcare discussions.

    1) HHS is an administrative role, mostly.
    2) I love her politics for the most part (she was my VP choice about this time last year and remains one of my two favorites for the nomination in 2016 if Obama wins his second term), but she is not the most gifted saleswoman.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • werehippywerehippy Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Nartwak wrote: »
    This matters as this guy was roughed up by SEIU union goons who had no reason to be there other than to intimidate the yelling elderly.
    Ahahahaha, what possible reason people from a union made up with a large chunk of nurses and medical techs have to be at healthcare town halls?!?!

    INTIMIDATION.
    You don't even need to go into "that's a stupid reason for them to be there" territory, they were the ones hosting the event and providing the staff to run things. They were there because it was their event.

  • NartwakNartwak Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Well that's just extra doubleplus reason not to be there.

    Spoiler:
  • DeebaserDeebaser Alpha Teemo Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Kastanj wrote: »
    So apparently a black conservative says he was punched by someone pretty much out of the blue, maybe by some SEIU member. The usual suspects are ejaculating righteousness all over the place, but let's not forget "B for Barack" and the fact that physical scuffles caught on a cellphone are usually very complicated affairs when it comes to who did what.

    Honestly, if he was punched in the face totally at random while he was trying to walk an elderly kitten across the street by an outstated Obama supporter, does it really matter?


    This matters as this guy was roughed up by SEIU union goons who had no reason to be there other than to intimidate the yelling elderly. Purple is the new brown.

    edit: Here is the actual clip that clearly shows what happened.




    LOL. Talk about missing the point and the story.

    Fact: This "conservative" was paid to either hand out or sell flags.

    If this unemployed dude was handing them out, who paid for the flags as well as paid for him to be there. Isn't this the fucking definition of a 'plant'?

    Also, what is he suing for? Could it be medical expenses because he's unemployed and doesnt have health insurance?

    The meta lulz here are amazing.

  • DeebaserDeebaser Alpha Teemo Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Harrisonburg, VARegistered User regular
    edited August 2009
    David_T wrote: »
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    I blame this town hall anger squarely on the President. His lack of leadership allowed Nancy Pelosi, probably the most unpopular politician in the USA, to be the face of health care reform.

    Am I going to get infracted if I point out that Nancy Pelosi has favorables that Mitch McConnell and John Boehner can only drool over? And that she's not even the most unpopular Democrat (hey Harry!)?

    Though shouldn't Kathleen Sebelius be a lot more visible over this? I don't get your American television, so all I go on are blogs and this place, but I've barely heard her mentioned. In fact, I had to look up who was HHS sec., which seems odd in the middle of such vast healthcare discussions.

    1) HHS is an administrative role, mostly.
    2) I love her politics for the most part (she was my VP choice about this time last year and remains one of my two favorites for the nomination in 2016 if Obama wins his second term), but she is not the most gifted saleswoman.
    Who's the other? (Please say Schweitzer. I have a big man-crush on him.)

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    David_T wrote: »
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    I blame this town hall anger squarely on the President. His lack of leadership allowed Nancy Pelosi, probably the most unpopular politician in the USA, to be the face of health care reform.

    Am I going to get infracted if I point out that Nancy Pelosi has favorables that Mitch McConnell and John Boehner can only drool over? And that she's not even the most unpopular Democrat (hey Harry!)?

    Though shouldn't Kathleen Sebelius be a lot more visible over this? I don't get your American television, so all I go on are blogs and this place, but I've barely heard her mentioned. In fact, I had to look up who was HHS sec., which seems odd in the middle of such vast healthcare discussions.

    1) HHS is an administrative role, mostly.
    2) I love her politics for the most part (she was my VP choice about this time last year and remains one of my two favorites for the nomination in 2016 if Obama wins his second term), but she is not the most gifted saleswoman.
    Who's the other? (Please say Schweitzer. I have a big man-crush on him.)

    Yup.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • KastanjKastanj __BANNED USERS
    edited August 2009
    Much to his credit, David Frum blasphemes by asking the right if it is even capable of anything resembling a victory beyond purely political and non-ideological gains.

    "What would it mean to “win” the healthcare fight? For some, the answer is obvious: beat back the president’s proposals, defeat the House bill, stand back and wait for 1994 to repeat itself.

    The problem is that if we do that… we’ll still have the present healthcare system. Meaning that we’ll have (1) flat-lining wages, (2) exploding Medicaid and Medicare costs and thus immense pressure for future tax increases, (3) small businesses and self-employed individuals priced out of the insurance market, and (4) a lot of uninsured or underinsured people imposing costs on hospitals and local governments. We’ll have entrenched and perpetuated some of the most irrational features of a hugely costly and under-performing system, at the expense of entrepreneurs and risk-takers, exactly the people the Republican party exists to champion.

    Even worse will be the way this fight is won: basically by convincing older Americans already covered by a government health program, Medicare, that Obama’s reform plans will reduce their coverage. In other words, we’ll have sent a powerful message to the entire political system to avoid at all hazards any tinkering with Medicare except to make it more generous for the already covered."


    Wow. In the current crowd of right-wingers and wannabe Wolverines, that takes some fortitude and honesty.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • gigEsmallsgigEsmalls __BANNED USERS
    edited August 2009
    Kastanj wrote: »
    Much to his credit, David Frum blasphemes by asking the right if it is even capable of anything resembling a victory beyond purely political and non-ideological gains.

    Wow. In the current crowd of right-wingers and wannabe Wolverines, that takes some fortitude and honesty.

    My partisan right-wing friends would consider a total health care bill death a victory though I disagree. I agree with Mr. Frum's article.

    I expect, or hope, in the coming weeks the President reaching out a hand to the Republicans for their support. Nancy Pelosi and her liberal friends will disagree but if he signs on enough Republicans it shouldn't matter. If the President can get an endorsement from Sen. John McCain for a health care bill, that will be a major victory for the President.

    big l wrote: »
    $5 says gigEsmalls never responds to this excellent post.
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    Kastanj wrote: »
    Much to his credit, David Frum blasphemes by asking the right if it is even capable of anything resembling a victory beyond purely political and non-ideological gains.

    Wow. In the current crowd of right-wingers and wannabe Wolverines, that takes some fortitude and honesty.

    My partisan right-wing friends would consider a total health care bill death a victory though I disagree. I agree with Mr. Frum's article.

    I expect, or hope, in the coming weeks the President reaching out a hand to the Republicans for their support. Nancy Pelosi and her liberal friends will disagree but if he signs on enough Republicans it shouldn't matter. If the President can get an endorsement from Sen. John McCain for a health care bill, that will be a major victory for the President.

    It would, however, be a major loss for the country. As the Republicans have no ideas, much less good ones, on this issue. McCain will never support health reform, to use your example. We have seen this previously with things like the stimulus bill. You might be able to get the two Maine women and maybe pick of one of the retiring Senators from states Obama won (Voinovich/Martinez though he won't be a Senator much longer, not sure when that's effective).

    Republicans are not negotiating in good faith, thus the idiocy of Baucus' Gang of Six.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • JudgementJudgement Registered User
    edited August 2009
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    Kastanj wrote: »
    Much to his credit, David Frum blasphemes by asking the right if it is even capable of anything resembling a victory beyond purely political and non-ideological gains.

    Wow. In the current crowd of right-wingers and wannabe Wolverines, that takes some fortitude and honesty.

    My partisan right-wing friends would consider a total health care bill death a victory though I disagree. I agree with Mr. Frum's article.

    I expect, or hope, in the coming weeks the President reaching out a hand to the Republicans for their support. Nancy Pelosi and her liberal friends will disagree but if he signs on enough Republicans it shouldn't matter. If the President can get an endorsement from Sen. John McCain for a health care bill, that will be a major victory for the President.

    It would, however, be a major loss for the country. As the Republicans have no ideas, much less good ones, on this issue. McCain will never support health reform, to use your example. We have seen this previously with things like the stimulus bill. You might be able to get the two Maine women and maybe pick of one of the retiring Senators from states Obama won (Voinovich/Martinez though he won't be a Senator much longer, not sure when that's effective).

    Republicans are not negotiating in good faith, thus the idiocy of Baucus' Gang of Six.

    Hasn't this been the Republican Party's only goal, though? Having nothing to offer? I'm all about people who want to voice an opinion(even if you're angry, old, or both), but not even being able to form a reasonable arguement against UHC only makes you look stupid. Worse, I've yet to see a single idea/solution come from them, or even a solid defense of the current system.

    A government-funded public option, while enforcing new rules on insurance companies(no turning away those with pre-existing conditions, for example) and still allowing insurance companies to compete(I saw someone mention the Swiss system allows companies to only lower costs) would be extremely benefical to America. Don't run insurance companies into the ground, make insurance more affordable, remove unnessacary procidures, cheapen the cost of pills, etc. How can this suck?

    309151-1.png
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Judgement wrote: »
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    Kastanj wrote: »
    Much to his credit, David Frum blasphemes by asking the right if it is even capable of anything resembling a victory beyond purely political and non-ideological gains.

    Wow. In the current crowd of right-wingers and wannabe Wolverines, that takes some fortitude and honesty.

    My partisan right-wing friends would consider a total health care bill death a victory though I disagree. I agree with Mr. Frum's article.

    I expect, or hope, in the coming weeks the President reaching out a hand to the Republicans for their support. Nancy Pelosi and her liberal friends will disagree but if he signs on enough Republicans it shouldn't matter. If the President can get an endorsement from Sen. John McCain for a health care bill, that will be a major victory for the President.

    It would, however, be a major loss for the country. As the Republicans have no ideas, much less good ones, on this issue. McCain will never support health reform, to use your example. We have seen this previously with things like the stimulus bill. You might be able to get the two Maine women and maybe pick of one of the retiring Senators from states Obama won (Voinovich/Martinez though he won't be a Senator much longer, not sure when that's effective).

    Republicans are not negotiating in good faith, thus the idiocy of Baucus' Gang of Six.

    Hasn't this been the Republican Party's only goal, though? Having nothing to offer? I'm all about people who want to voice an opinion(even if you're angry, old, or both), but not even being able to form a reasonable arguement against UHC only makes you look stupid. Worse, I've yet to see a single idea/solution come from them, or even a solid defense of the current system.

    A government-funded public option, while enforcing new rules on insurance companies(no turning away those with pre-existing conditions, for example) and still allowing insurance companies to compete(I saw someone mention the Swiss system allows companies to only lower costs) would be extremely benefical to America. Don't run insurance companies into the ground, make insurance more affordable, remove unnessacary procidures, cheapen the cost of pills, etc. How can this suck?

    Because it will murder Grandpa and Grandma!

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • GeodGeod swim, swim, hungryRegistered User regular
    edited August 2009
    There were some people at an intersection near me with signs over their chest that said "Stop Obama's Nazi Healthcare Plan" or something to that affect. They were trying to hand out some flyers or literature or something. I really wanted to get out of my car and just punch them.

    Honestly, where did all the wingnuts come from? This is northern Virginia, not exactly a stronghold for them. Oh well, as an independent voter, makes me dislike Repubs even more, their loss.

    XBL/PSN: Qamel NNI: Quamel 3DS Code: 0774 4249 8305
    PAX East 2014 Omeganaut
    http://www.pinnypals.com/?tab=pals&username=geod
  • KastanjKastanj __BANNED USERS
    edited August 2009
    They want something to do. Just like incredibly bored and stunted teenagers resort to crime, lost and bored citizens affix themselves to something larger, something that they can "be" about. People need something definitive that their "Story" can be about.

    Make a search on Altemeyer, if you are interested in learning about which people are prone to be authoritarian, and why.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • JudgementJudgement Registered User
    edited August 2009
    Geod wrote: »
    There were some people at an intersection near me with signs over their chest that said "Stop Obama's Nazi Healthcare Plan" or something to that affect. They were trying to hand out some flyers or literature or something. I really wanted to get out of my car and just punch them.

    Honestly, where did all the wingnuts come from? This is northern Virginia, not exactly a stronghold for them. Oh well, as an independent voter, makes me dislike Repubs even more, their loss.

    I know philisophical, rethorical questions are a no-no, but I cannot resist asking:

    If there are people standing on the corner of a street, screaming ill-thought bullshit, and no one around them gives a fuck about their insanity, do they really matter?

    309151-1.png
  • JudgementJudgement Registered User
    edited August 2009
    Judgement wrote: »

    Hasn't this been the Republican Party's only goal, though? Having nothing to offer? I'm all about people who want to voice an opinion(even if you're angry, old, or both), but not even being able to form a reasonable arguement against UHC only makes you look stupid. Worse, I've yet to see a single idea/solution come from them, or even a solid defense of the current system.

    A government-funded public option, while enforcing new rules on insurance companies(no turning away those with pre-existing conditions, for example) and still allowing insurance companies to compete(I saw someone mention the Swiss system allows companies to only lower costs) would be extremely benefical to America. Don't run insurance companies into the ground, make insurance more affordable, remove unnessacary procidures, cheapen the cost of pills, etc. How can this suck?

    Because it will murder Grandpa and Grandma!

    Which doesn't even make sense, because under a (hopefully) cheaper public plan they can recieve the same, if not better, healthcare without (again, hopefully) bankrupting the economy. I know a few elderly people who are on a fixed income, and I don't want them to suffer from this. But from what I've seen its gong to be more "Hey, we have money and better care. Grandma can get the care she needs!" rather than "Hey, young people are getting all the care. Old people can just find a hole and die in it."

    309151-1.png
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Judgement wrote: »
    Geod wrote: »
    There were some people at an intersection near me with signs over their chest that said "Stop Obama's Nazi Healthcare Plan" or something to that affect. They were trying to hand out some flyers or literature or something. I really wanted to get out of my car and just punch them.

    Honestly, where did all the wingnuts come from? This is northern Virginia, not exactly a stronghold for them. Oh well, as an independent voter, makes me dislike Repubs even more, their loss.

    I know philisophical, rethorical questions are a no-no, but I cannot resist asking:

    If there are people standing on the corner of a street, screaming ill-thought bullshit, and no one around them gives a fuck about their insanity, do they really matter?

    They're stealing real estate from the 'end is nigh' guys.

    tea-1.jpg
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Judgement wrote: »
    Judgement wrote: »

    Hasn't this been the Republican Party's only goal, though? Having nothing to offer? I'm all about people who want to voice an opinion(even if you're angry, old, or both), but not even being able to form a reasonable arguement against UHC only makes you look stupid. Worse, I've yet to see a single idea/solution come from them, or even a solid defense of the current system.

    A government-funded public option, while enforcing new rules on insurance companies(no turning away those with pre-existing conditions, for example) and still allowing insurance companies to compete(I saw someone mention the Swiss system allows companies to only lower costs) would be extremely benefical to America. Don't run insurance companies into the ground, make insurance more affordable, remove unnessacary procidures, cheapen the cost of pills, etc. How can this suck?

    Because it will murder Grandpa and Grandma!

    Which doesn't even make sense, because under a (hopefully) cheaper public plan they can recieve the same, if not better, healthcare without (again, hopefully) bankrupting the economy. I know a few elderly people who are on a fixed income, and I don't want them to suffer from this. But from what I've seen its gong to be more "Hey, we have money and better care. Grandma can get the care she needs!" rather than "Hey, young people are getting all the care. Old people can just find a hole and die in it."

    Grandma and Grandpa are already on a government run commie-nazi social insurance plan. Which is the most ironic thing about all this.

    tea-1.jpg
  • big lbig l Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    werehippy wrote: »
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    I blame this town hall anger squarely on the President. His lack of leadership allowed Nancy Pelosi, probably the most unpopular politician in the USA, to be the face of health care reform. President Obama has also failed in properly explaining his health care reform goals. Instead of bringing both parties together he has been aggressively divisive in the last few days. The Democrats have a super-majority however they cannot take responsibility and feel compelled to blame others for their failure. Again, this is because of poor leadership from the top down.

    You want to know what the problem is with healthcare reform? This right here. Literally every sentence here is wrong. I'm not saying that as a rhetorical flourish or the standard "no you are" tit for tat argument, as a simple statement of fact every single idea here is wrong but swathes of people believe this (or lie to that effect) and are allowed to keep repeating this crap by a media that fetishizes balance over actual describing reality.

    In order of their appearance, sentence:
    Spoiler:
    And to loop back to what's relevant to the healthcare discussion, the take away here needs to be to slap every democrat in the face with: Until the next political sesmic shift this is what will be facing you across the aisle. There won't be constructive debate, there will never be proportional reaction to you moderating your plan, and if you want to do anything make it right first then sell that, don't waste your time trying to build a bipartisan bill because you think people support it more for that.

    The discussion hasn't been enhanced by grinding things to a halt looking for bipartisan support, the bill will pass by the barest margins or not at all no matter what is done, and we can look forward to months to years of this kind of tone because we've shown the republicans that if you want to stop a bill just pretend to negotiate while your base says the most insane things possibly imaginable and tries to terrorize anyone who doesn't fold at the drop of a hat.

    $5 says gigEsmalls never responds to this excellent post.

  • KastanjKastanj __BANNED USERS
    edited August 2009
    Steve Benen describes the different types of anti-reform rationales.

    "The Greedy (PhRMA): Reform puts their profits at risk, so they're fighting back to protect their livelihood."
    "The Partisans (DeMint etc.) care more about Republican gains than the national well being, so they're fighting to prevent a major Democratic victory."
    "The Tin-Foil Hats (Mrs. Death Panel) have active imaginations, and believe their own ridiculous conspiracy theories. They'll benefit from reform, but the voices in their head discourage them from believing it."
    "Probably the largest group ... The Dupes ("Keep gubbyment away from my Medicare!") tend to believe what The Greedy, The Partisans, and The Tin-Foil Hats have told them. When confronted with accurate information, The Dupes suspect the media, Democrats, and their lying eyes aren't to be trusted."
    "The Wonks (Example: Mikkel Fishman) are conservatives who actually care about substantive policy details, have read the proposals, and believe there are better ways to improve the system. The Greedy, The Partisans, The Tin-Foil Hats, and The Dupes tend to ignore The Wonks."

    I'd like to add The Ideologues: people who can't stand the idea of any reform that doesn't presuppose that taxation is slavery and the government is for parasites.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • JudgementJudgement Registered User
    edited August 2009
    moniker wrote: »
    Judgement wrote: »
    Geod wrote: »
    There were some people at an intersection near me with signs over their chest that said "Stop Obama's Nazi Healthcare Plan" or something to that affect. They were trying to hand out some flyers or literature or something. I really wanted to get out of my car and just punch them.

    Honestly, where did all the wingnuts come from? This is northern Virginia, not exactly a stronghold for them. Oh well, as an independent voter, makes me dislike Repubs even more, their loss.

    I know philisophical, rethorical questions are a no-no, but I cannot resist asking:

    If there are people standing on the corner of a street, screaming ill-thought bullshit, and no one around them gives a fuck about their insanity, do they really matter?

    They're stealing real estate from the 'end is nigh' guys.
    Spoiler:

    309151-1.png
  • JudgementJudgement Registered User
    edited August 2009
    Kastanj wrote: »
    Steve Benen describes the different types of anti-reform rationales.

    "The Greedy: Reform puts their profits at risk, so they're fighting back to protect their livelihood."
    "The Partisans care more about Republican gains than the national well being, so they're fighting to prevent a major Democratic victory."
    "The Tin-Foil Hats have active imaginations, and believe their own ridiculous conspiracy theories. They'll benefit from reform, but the voices in their head discourage them from believing it."
    "Probably the largest group in opposition to reform, The Dupes tend to believe what The Greedy, The Partisans, and The Tin-Foil Hats have told them. When confronted with accurate information, The Dupes suspect the media, Democrats, and their lying eyes aren't to be trusted."
    "The Wonks are conservatives who actually care about substantive policy details, have read the proposals, and believe there are better ways to improve the system. The Greedy, The Partisans, The Tin-Foil Hats, and The Dupes tend to ignore The Wonks"

    Can I rename Wonks the "Super Awesome Badasses"?

    309151-1.png
  • RingoRingo Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    If they were Super Awesome Badasses, they'd be out there punching their conservative reps in the balls for not listening to them.

    ceres wrote: »
    I'm just going to go ahead and lock this thread before I feel any worse about humanity.
    AUGMENTOS - Edcrab's Exigency RPG
  • JudgementJudgement Registered User
    edited August 2009
    Ringo wrote: »
    If they were Super Awesome Badasses, they'd be out there punching their conservative reps in the balls for not listening to them.

    OR they could take the high road and point out that they haven't contributed anything beyond Harble-garble that has done absolutely nothing other than make anyone who considers themself conservative alienated as an ignorant bigit.

    Of course, if they did this, they would qualify as "Badasses" but it would be nice.

    309151-1.png
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Kastanj wrote: »
    Steve Benen describes the different types of anti-reform rationales.

    "The Greedy (PhRMA): Reform puts their profits at risk, so they're fighting back to protect their livelihood."
    "The Partisans (DeMint etc.) care more about Republican gains than the national well being, so they're fighting to prevent a major Democratic victory."
    "The Tin-Foil Hats (Mrs. Death Panel) have active imaginations, and believe their own ridiculous conspiracy theories. They'll benefit from reform, but the voices in their head discourage them from believing it."
    "Probably the largest group ... The Dupes ("Keep gubbyment away from my Medicare!") tend to believe what The Greedy, The Partisans, and The Tin-Foil Hats have told them. When confronted with accurate information, The Dupes suspect the media, Democrats, and their lying eyes aren't to be trusted."
    "The Wonks (Example: Mikkel Fishman) are conservatives who actually care about substantive policy details, have read the proposals, and believe there are better ways to improve the system. The Greedy, The Partisans, The Tin-Foil Hats, and The Dupes tend to ignore The Wonks."

    I'd like to add The Ideologues: people who can't stand the idea of any reform that doesn't presuppose that taxation is slavery and the government is for parasites.

    This looks like a Phalla summary post. Quick someone make one. :P

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • gigEsmallsgigEsmalls __BANNED USERS
    edited August 2009
    big l wrote: »
    werehippy wrote: »
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    I blame this town hall anger squarely on the President. His lack of leadership allowed Nancy Pelosi, probably the most unpopular politician in the USA, to be the face of health care reform. President Obama has also failed in properly explaining his health care reform goals. Instead of bringing both parties together he has been aggressively divisive in the last few days. The Democrats have a super-majority however they cannot take responsibility and feel compelled to blame others for their failure. Again, this is because of poor leadership from the top down.

    You want to know what the problem is with healthcare reform? This right here. Literally every sentence here is wrong. I'm not saying that as a rhetorical flourish or the standard "no you are" tit for tat argument, as a simple statement of fact every single idea here is wrong but swathes of people believe this (or lie to that effect) and are allowed to keep repeating this crap by a media that fetishizes balance over actual describing reality.

    In order of their appearance, sentence:
    Spoiler:
    And to loop back to what's relevant to the healthcare discussion, the take away here needs to be to slap every democrat in the face with: Until the next political sesmic shift this is what will be facing you across the aisle. There won't be constructive debate, there will never be proportional reaction to you moderating your plan, and if you want to do anything make it right first then sell that, don't waste your time trying to build a bipartisan bill because you think people support it more for that.

    The discussion hasn't been enhanced by grinding things to a halt looking for bipartisan support, the bill will pass by the barest margins or not at all no matter what is done, and we can look forward to months to years of this kind of tone because we've shown the republicans that if you want to stop a bill just pretend to negotiate while your base says the most insane things possibly imaginable and tries to terrorize anyone who doesn't fold at the drop of a hat.

    $5 says gigEsmalls never responds to this excellent post.


    werehippy in his partisan view thinks I'm wrong. How can I convince him otherwise? However he has made some debatable statements so...

    First, Pelosi is the Speaker of the House and has a Dick Cheney level approval rating, its a fact. Second, if you go to RCP you'll find Republicans are beating Dems in the latest approval polls there.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/generic_congressional_vote-901.html

    Third, like you said Obama has been pushing for this since 2007 and that's his problem. He has never left campaign mode. If he is to fix healthcare he must stop campaigning and start leading. There is a difference between the two.

    Last, this is responded. big l owes me $5, biiiiaaaatch. $1 says say he'll never pay me 8-)

    big l wrote: »
    $5 says gigEsmalls never responds to this excellent post.
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    big l wrote: »
    werehippy wrote: »
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    I blame this town hall anger squarely on the President. His lack of leadership allowed Nancy Pelosi, probably the most unpopular politician in the USA, to be the face of health care reform. President Obama has also failed in properly explaining his health care reform goals. Instead of bringing both parties together he has been aggressively divisive in the last few days. The Democrats have a super-majority however they cannot take responsibility and feel compelled to blame others for their failure. Again, this is because of poor leadership from the top down.

    You want to know what the problem is with healthcare reform? This right here. Literally every sentence here is wrong. I'm not saying that as a rhetorical flourish or the standard "no you are" tit for tat argument, as a simple statement of fact every single idea here is wrong but swathes of people believe this (or lie to that effect) and are allowed to keep repeating this crap by a media that fetishizes balance over actual describing reality.

    In order of their appearance, sentence:
    Spoiler:
    And to loop back to what's relevant to the healthcare discussion, the take away here needs to be to slap every democrat in the face with: Until the next political sesmic shift this is what will be facing you across the aisle. There won't be constructive debate, there will never be proportional reaction to you moderating your plan, and if you want to do anything make it right first then sell that, don't waste your time trying to build a bipartisan bill because you think people support it more for that.

    The discussion hasn't been enhanced by grinding things to a halt looking for bipartisan support, the bill will pass by the barest margins or not at all no matter what is done, and we can look forward to months to years of this kind of tone because we've shown the republicans that if you want to stop a bill just pretend to negotiate while your base says the most insane things possibly imaginable and tries to terrorize anyone who doesn't fold at the drop of a hat.

    $5 says gigEsmalls never responds to this excellent post.


    werehippy in his partisan view thinks I'm wrong. How can I convince him otherwise? However he has made some debatable statements so...

    First, Pelosi is the Speaker of the House and has a Dick Cheney level approval rating, its a fact. Second, if you go to RCP you'll find Republicans are beating Dems in the latest approval polls there.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/generic_congressional_vote-901.html

    Third, like you said Obama has been pushing for this since 2007 and that's his problem. He has never left campaign mode. If he is to fix healthcare he must stop campaigning and start leading. There is a difference between the two.

    Last, this is responded. big l owes me $5, biiiiaaaatch. $1 says say he'll never pay me 8-)

    1) That's not approval, that's the bullshit "national ballot" which will always swing against the incumbent party relative to the real votes. Everyone hates Congress, but loves their congresscritter.

    2) If you don't arbitrarily exclude polls to favor Republicans (which RCP does), the Dems have a very narrow lead still.

    Anyway, most of the fall in Democratic popularity during the health care thing is from Republicans getting mad at them. Shockingly, the people who didn't vote for Obama after hearing for two years what he was going to do, don't approve of him when he tries to do those things.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • FencingsaxFencingsax Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Geod wrote: »
    There were some people at an intersection near me with signs over their chest that said "Stop Obama's Nazi Healthcare Plan" or something to that affect. They were trying to hand out some flyers or literature or something. I really wanted to get out of my car and just punch them.

    Honestly, where did all the wingnuts come from? This is northern Virginia, not exactly a stronghold for them. Oh well, as an independent voter, makes me dislike Repubs even more, their loss.
    There was an Obama rally on Thursday.

    It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it
  • werehippywerehippy Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    big l wrote: »
    werehippy wrote: »
    gigEsmalls wrote: »
    I blame this town hall anger squarely on the President. His lack of leadership allowed Nancy Pelosi, probably the most unpopular politician in the USA, to be the face of health care reform. President Obama has also failed in properly explaining his health care reform goals. Instead of bringing both parties together he has been aggressively divisive in the last few days. The Democrats have a super-majority however they cannot take responsibility and feel compelled to blame others for their failure. Again, this is because of poor leadership from the top down.

    You want to know what the problem is with healthcare reform? This right here. Literally every sentence here is wrong. I'm not saying that as a rhetorical flourish or the standard "no you are" tit for tat argument, as a simple statement of fact every single idea here is wrong but swathes of people believe this (or lie to that effect) and are allowed to keep repeating this crap by a media that fetishizes balance over actual describing reality.

    In order of their appearance, sentence:
    Spoiler:
    And to loop back to what's relevant to the healthcare discussion, the take away here needs to be to slap every democrat in the face with: Until the next political sesmic shift this is what will be facing you across the aisle. There won't be constructive debate, there will never be proportional reaction to you moderating your plan, and if you want to do anything make it right first then sell that, don't waste your time trying to build a bipartisan bill because you think people support it more for that.

    The discussion hasn't been enhanced by grinding things to a halt looking for bipartisan support, the bill will pass by the barest margins or not at all no matter what is done, and we can look forward to months to years of this kind of tone because we've shown the republicans that if you want to stop a bill just pretend to negotiate while your base says the most insane things possibly imaginable and tries to terrorize anyone who doesn't fold at the drop of a hat.

    $5 says gigEsmalls never responds to this excellent post.


    werehippy in his partisan view thinks I'm wrong. How can I convince him otherwise? However he has made some debatable statements so...

    First, Pelosi is the Speaker of the House and has a Dick Cheney level approval rating, its a fact. Second, if you go to RCP you'll find Republicans are beating Dems in the latest approval polls there.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/generic_congressional_vote-901.html

    Third, like you said Obama has been pushing for this since 2007 and that's his problem. He has never left campaign mode. If he is to fix healthcare he must stop campaigning and start leading. There is a difference between the two.

    Last, this is responded. big l owes me $5, biiiiaaaatch. $1 says say he'll never pay me 8-)

    I'll give you that you did respond to a critique, it's decidedly more than we get on occasion. That being said, you'e still wrong on everything you said and you ignored the substantive arguments :)

    Your first two rebuttal points are tangential to the discussion and Fencingsax already addressed, so I won't go into it. The third point is something worth talking about, though again I think there's no real substance to your argument. What exactly does "he's campaigning as opposed to leading" mean other than being a slightly less ridiculous way to say it's all Obama's fault? He talked about principles and got people together to talk details, he made every effort humanly possible to engage the public, and he spent months getting every single stakeholder and congressional player in the same room and talking to each other. What, in exact terms, more could Obama have done to lead and what exactly has he done that was unhelpful or campaigning?

    And this is all leaving aside you have yet to acknowledge the republicans have presented absolutely no substantial ideas (honest to god I'd love to hear what exactly you think the republicans have to offer in the way of real ideas and not "don't do anything democrats suggest" or come up with a single instance of Obama and democrats refusing to hear the republicans or rejecting ideas that were presented), have not acted in good faith during this entire discussion (would you like a detailed list of every time every single one of the few republicans that have bothered to even go into the room for the discussion have said "I think we are making progress on this bipartisan bill except for my grave concerns about [literally everything in the bill]"), and are the driving force behind these explicitly organized, guided from above, and rightwing funded attempts to use intimidation and disruption to stop the discussion.

    And let's not forget the absolutely batshit insane and non-stop lies about the bill or the idea in general. I'm pretty sure the whole Obama needs to be nicer to the republicans, since they're only upset he's being so mean thing can go out the fucking window once a national republican figure literally says Obama wants to murder my baby and is not corrected or stands to lose any standing in the party. Or when Democrats want to kill your grandparents is a talking point said with a straight face. And that's just the egregious stuff, we aren't even getting into the dime a dozen lies about cost, specifics, or what have you.

  • Loren MichaelLoren Michael Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Found via Matt Yglesias:

    http://www.newmajority.com/what-if-we-win-the-healthcare-fight

    (David Frum contemplates a conservative victory on the health care fight)

    The problem is that if we do that… we’ll still have the present healthcare system. Meaning that we’ll have (1) flat-lining wages, (2) exploding Medicaid and Medicare costs and thus immense pressure for future tax increases, (3) small businesses and self-employed individuals priced out of the insurance market, and (4) a lot of uninsured or underinsured people imposing costs on hospitals and local governments. [...]

    Even worse will be the way this fight is won: basically by convincing older Americans already covered by a government health program, Medicare, that Obama’s reform plans will reduce their coverage. In other words, we’ll have sent a powerful message to the entire political system to avoid at all hazards any tinkering with Medicare except to make it more generous for the already covered.

    If we win, we’ll trumpet the success as a great triumph for liberty and individualism. Really though it will be a triumph for inertia. To the extent that anybody in the conservative world still aspires to any kind of future reform and improvement of America’s ossified government, that should be a very ashy victory indeed.

    2ezikn6.jpg
  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Whatever you do don't look at the last page.

    PSN: allenquid
  • werehippywerehippy Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Quid wrote: »
    Whatever you do don't look at the last page.

    It's one of the few non-bloodsport focused pieces of thinking to come out of the right on healthcare recently, and it bears re-emphasizing. Though of course Frum speaks for no one other than his own idle musings and is loathed among real conservatives for exactly this tendency to ask this kind of "are you sure you want to do that" question about conservative political strategy consensus.

  • Loren MichaelLoren Michael Registered User regular
    edited August 2009
    Dammit I looked at the last page yesterday.

    I can't help it that I'm on the other side of the goddamn world for less than...

    $1700, according to Expedia.

    2ezikn6.jpg
  • KastanjKastanj __BANNED USERS
    edited August 2009
    The right-wing reactions to Frum are predictably acerbic and dismissive. Not much in the way of reasoning as to why he is erring - they just decided he was a bad man, basically.

    One link at memeorandum said "David Frum is a RINO and has no credibility". I thought that was an ironic heading at a left-wing site, but lo and behold it was a completely non-ironic header underneath a confederate saber Ifuckingkidyounotsonnyjim. At times I feel a significant segment of humanity only exists to provide entertainment and cautionary examples for the others.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
1568101164
This discussion has been closed.