Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: 2012 Elections - Page 311







Post#7751 at 03-08-2012 10:37 PM by annla899 [at joined Sep 2008 #posts 2,860]
---
03-08-2012, 10:37 PM #7751
Join Date
Sep 2008
Posts
2,860

Quote Originally Posted by Weave View Post
Spare us the faux outrage. Where was your outrage when Bill Maher called Sarah Palin the "C" word? Where was the outrage over his previous constant innapropriate attacks on Palin and her daughters? Where was the outrage when Keith Olbermann called Michelle Malkin a "mashed up bag of meat with lipstick"? Where was your outrage when Special Ed Schultz called Laura Ingraham a "Right wing slut"....Nary a peep of outrage even from women's group, and when they do, its a tepid almost lackluster outrage when its a conservative woman being attacked.

Im guessing you, like many left wingers, had NO problem with Bill Clinton's sexual harrasment of Paula Jones, his rape of Jaunita Broadrick...nope they were just "sluts' making up the charges....You probably had no problem with his (and John Kennedy's) predatory and obsessive womanizing....But of course Bob Packwood (senator from Oregon)was forced to resign for much less...but he was a Republican.....

Of course you are going to demand that the PAC that got 1 million dollars from the misogynist Bill Maher must return the money....I wont hold my breath.....
Actually, Maher called Palin a tw*t and he got nailed for it by the NOW and other women's groups. I am no fan of any of those PACs. Maher has significantly less impact on politics (and politicans) than Limbaugh.







Post#7752 at 03-08-2012 11:29 PM by JDFP [at Knoxville, TN. joined Jul 2010 #posts 1,200]
---
03-08-2012, 11:29 PM #7752
Join Date
Jul 2010
Location
Knoxville, TN.
Posts
1,200

Quote Originally Posted by Odin View Post

There is no point try to argue with you RWers, it's like arguing to a wall, you guys live in your own fake reality built up by Fox and RW Hate Radio.
There is no point trying to argue with you liberals, it's like arguing to a wall, you guys live in your own fake reality built up by the liberal media and elitists.

*** *** *** *** ***

And here we have it folks - the country is absolutely deadlocked. And it's going to get worse before it gets better. The more time goes on the more divisive and vitriolic the nature of this is going to become. The pendulum is going to swing further to the left and further to the right until that pendulum comes off its hinges in a major conflict. It's only a matter of time - and God help us all when it happens.

As far as me, I'm sick and tired of coming to this thread just to hear the incessant bitching and nonsense around it so I generally try to refrain from reading it. When the proverbial sheisse finally does hit the fan I'll try my best to keep to myself in hopes the extremists on both sides either figuratively (or perhaps literally if it comes to that) kill one another off - the more I see of this crap the more I'm certain it's eventually going to happen. I know where I stand. And peoples minds/hearts and opinions aren't changing on the issues - we're only seeing greater vehemence and outrage from both increasingly breaking factions.

It's enough to have me re-consider Germany circa the late 1920's - early 1930's all over again.

j.p.

"And did you get what you wanted from this life, even so? I did. And what did you want? To call myself beloved, to feel myself beloved on the earth.‎" -- Raymond Carver


"A
page of good prose remains invincible." -- John Cheever










Post#7753 at 03-08-2012 11:41 PM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
03-08-2012, 11:41 PM #7753
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
Limbaugh ought to be taken off the air wherever possible. There are petitions going around; lately some of these have had a big effect. Let's do it. If you live near a station that has him on, send a comment. There has never been a worse talk show host than Rush. Never.
Maybe Father Charles Coughlin back in the 1930s for his anti-Jewish screeds that got him in trouble with 'his' Catholic Church.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."


― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters







Post#7754 at 03-09-2012 12:19 AM by Odin [at Moorhead, MN, USA joined Sep 2006 #posts 14,442]
---
03-09-2012, 12:19 AM #7754
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Moorhead, MN, USA
Posts
14,442

Quote Originally Posted by JDFP View Post
There is no point trying to argue with you liberals, it's like arguing to a wall, you guys live in your own fake reality built up by the liberal media and elitists.

*** *** *** *** ***

And here we have it folks - the country is absolutely deadlocked. And it's going to get worse before it gets better. The more time goes on the more divisive and vitriolic the nature of this is going to become. The pendulum is going to swing further to the left and further to the right until that pendulum comes off its hinges in a major conflict. It's only a matter of time - and God help us all when it happens.

As far as me, I'm sick and tired of coming to this thread just to hear the incessant bitching and nonsense around it so I generally try to refrain from reading it. When the proverbial sheisse finally does hit the fan I'll try my best to keep to myself in hopes the extremists on both sides either figuratively (or perhaps literally if it comes to that) kill one another off - the more I see of this crap the more I'm certain it's eventually going to happen. I know where I stand. And peoples minds/hearts and opinions aren't changing on the issues - we're only seeing greater vehemence and outrage from both increasingly breaking factions.

It's enough to have me re-consider Germany circa the late 1920's - early 1930's all over again.

j.p.
In your own state over half of Republicans are BIRTHERS, name some equivalent lunacy on the Left.

It seems to me that most of the crap is coming from the Right, and until OWS must of the Left was a bunch of spineless, self-absorbed wimps who "compromised" away our jobs and our rights. The illusion of "both sides are equally bad" is a creation of the Corporate Media and the Centrist Corporatists who took over the Democratic Party in the 90s.

I have never seen such lunacy and bigotry coming from the Right in my whole life. They seem to be increasingly obsessed with taking away the rights of women in recent months in a way that borders in the pathological. When I was a kid they were just hypocritical selfish jerks who were obsessed over a presidential blowjob. Now they are increasingly fanatical and theocratic, in a sane country Santorum would be irrelavent, if not in a psych ward, not a serious Presidential contender.
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.

-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism







Post#7755 at 03-09-2012 01:44 AM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
03-09-2012, 01:44 AM #7755
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Quote Originally Posted by Weave View Post
Spare us the faux outrage. Where was your outrage when Bill Maher called Sarah Palin the "C" word? Where was the outrage over his previous constant innapropriate attacks on Palin and her daughters? Where was the outrage when Keith Olbermann called Michelle Malkin a "mashed up bag of meat with lipstick"? Where was your outrage when Special Ed Schultz called Laura Ingraham a "Right wing slut"....Nary a peep of outrage even from women's group, and when they do, its a tepid almost lackluster outrage when its a conservative woman being attacked.

Im guessing you, like many left wingers, had NO problem with Bill Clinton's sexual harrasment of Paula Jones, his rape of Jaunita Broadrick...nope they were just "sluts' making up the charges....You probably had no problem with his (and John Kennedy's) predatory and obsessive womanizing....But of course Bob Packwood (senator from Oregon)was forced to resign for much less...but he was a Republican.....

Of course you are going to demand that the PAC that got 1 million dollars from the misogynist Bill Maher must return the money....I wont hold my breath.....
No, don't. We can take advantage of Limbaugh's latest of his many insults against women as a good opportunity to get rid of him (and he's lost 40 sponsors over this), because he is always wrong and outrageous and never says anything of any sense or value. As for Bill Maher, I loved his remark about Rick Santorum that he thinks life begins at erection. So who cares if he insults twits?

The Republican hypocrites who persecuted Clinton were all guilty of much worse themselves. I say these sexual matters are private concerns, regardless of party-- though if Broderick could have proven her charges, then she should have brought them when it happened. Laws exist for a purpose.

We are a divided people, as JP laments; the only solution is for the right wing "red" side to be defeated well enough so it no longer frustrates the blue side, and they become marginalized as the old-fashioned fools that they are as their demographic moment fades. Otherwise we may indeed need to split up; and the hope there is that eventually both sides will want to do it, so that no killing is needed. War is not good for anyone. But we'll know by the end of this 4T around 2025-28.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#7756 at 03-09-2012 02:13 AM by JDFP [at Knoxville, TN. joined Jul 2010 #posts 1,200]
---
03-09-2012, 02:13 AM #7756
Join Date
Jul 2010
Location
Knoxville, TN.
Posts
1,200

Quote Originally Posted by Odin View Post
In your own state over half of Republicans are BIRTHERS, name some equivalent lunacy on the Left.
Massive hyperbole to the 9th degree. I know a great deal of the Republicans in the state in addition to the Haslams through personal connections. And Bill Haslam is going to be a very big name here in the next decade (more so than now). There are plenty of ignorant people in both the red and the blue states. I don't know any leadership people who give any hype to this ignorance.

Quote Originally Posted by Odin View Post
It seems to me that most of the crap is coming from the Right, and until OWS must of the Left was a bunch of spineless, self-absorbed wimps who "compromised" away our jobs and our rights. The illusion of "both sides are equally bad" is a creation of the Corporate Media and the Centrist Corporatists who took over the Democratic Party in the 90s.

I have never seen such lunacy and bigotry coming from the Right in my whole life. They seem to be increasingly obsessed with taking away the rights of women in recent months in a way that borders in the pathological. When I was a kid they were just hypocritical selfish jerks who were obsessed over a presidential blowjob. Now they are increasingly fanatical and theocratic, in a sane country Santorum would be irrelavent, if not in a psych ward, not a serious Presidential contender.
For what it's worth, I think Santorum is an idiot and I wouldn't vote for him. As far as the rest: It proves two things - 1.) I need to stay away from this thread as all it does is increase my blood pressure (and the way I smoke and drink beer it's probably not a good idea). 2.) There's a fundamental polarity in how people think and see the world - no standing on a pulpit as if on High is going to change this. And the country is going to continue to grow increasingly apart until an ultimate split does eventually take place - here's hoping the split doesn't come by bloodshed, personally.

With that, I'm going to be bowing out of this thread again - it's too much "You people are all repugnant!" back and forth for me to handle. It only shows the fundamental worm in the apple that is rotting more every year and through every election. I do agree with you that it's grown worse through time - I just don't see it the way you do. This doesn't mean I'm wearing red goggles to your evident blue goggles.

I enjoy the rest of this forum - the political smegma is just too much to wade through without stinking up my apartment. But I do see a major rift forming and as Eric pointed out it's going to lead to greater derisiveness until a split eventually takes place - as much as I'd hate to consider it happening, I feel it's only a matter of time.

j.p.

"And did you get what you wanted from this life, even so? I did. And what did you want? To call myself beloved, to feel myself beloved on the earth.‎" -- Raymond Carver


"A
page of good prose remains invincible." -- John Cheever










Post#7757 at 03-09-2012 02:53 AM by summer in the fall [at joined Jul 2011 #posts 1,540]
---
03-09-2012, 02:53 AM #7757
Join Date
Jul 2011
Posts
1,540

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
No, don't. We can take advantage of Limbaugh's latest of his many insults against women as a good opportunity to get rid of him (and he's lost 40 sponsors over this), because he is always wrong and outrageous and never says anything of any sense or value. As for Bill Maher, I loved his remark about Rick Santorum that he thinks life begins at erection. So who cares if he insults twits?
He's lost 50.

Best...







Post#7758 at 03-09-2012 10:20 AM by Odin [at Moorhead, MN, USA joined Sep 2006 #posts 14,442]
---
03-09-2012, 10:20 AM #7758
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Moorhead, MN, USA
Posts
14,442

Quote Originally Posted by JDFP View Post
Massive hyperbole to the 9th degree. I know a great deal of the Republicans in the state in addition to the Haslams through personal connections. And Bill Haslam is going to be a very big name here in the next decade (more so than now). There are plenty of ignorant people in both the red and the blue states. I don't know any leadership people who give any hype to this ignorance.



For what it's worth, I think Santorum is an idiot and I wouldn't vote for him. As far as the rest: It proves two things - 1.) I need to stay away from this thread as all it does is increase my blood pressure (and the way I smoke and drink beer it's probably not a good idea). 2.) There's a fundamental polarity in how people think and see the world - no standing on a pulpit as if on High is going to change this. And the country is going to continue to grow increasingly apart until an ultimate split does eventually take place - here's hoping the split doesn't come by bloodshed, personally.

With that, I'm going to be bowing out of this thread again - it's too much "You people are all repugnant!" back and forth for me to handle. It only shows the fundamental worm in the apple that is rotting more every year and through every election. I do agree with you that it's grown worse through time - I just don't see it the way you do. This doesn't mean I'm wearing red goggles to your evident blue goggles.

I enjoy the rest of this forum - the political smegma is just too much to wade through without stinking up my apartment. But I do see a major rift forming and as Eric pointed out it's going to lead to greater derisiveness until a split eventually takes place - as much as I'd hate to consider it happening, I feel it's only a matter of time.

j.p.
Just to make it clear, I wasn't attacking you, JP, so don't take it personally.
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.

-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism







Post#7759 at 03-09-2012 10:31 AM by JDFP [at Knoxville, TN. joined Jul 2010 #posts 1,200]
---
03-09-2012, 10:31 AM #7759
Join Date
Jul 2010
Location
Knoxville, TN.
Posts
1,200

Quote Originally Posted by Odin View Post
Just to make it clear, I wasn't attacking you, JP, so don't take it personally.
I know you weren't, and I'm not.

j.p.

"And did you get what you wanted from this life, even so? I did. And what did you want? To call myself beloved, to feel myself beloved on the earth.‎" -- Raymond Carver


"A
page of good prose remains invincible." -- John Cheever










Post#7760 at 03-09-2012 11:50 AM by The Grey Badger [at Albuquerque, NM joined Sep 2001 #posts 8,876]
---
03-09-2012, 11:50 AM #7760
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Posts
8,876

Quote Originally Posted by Odin View Post
In your own state over half of Republicans are BIRTHERS, name some equivalent lunacy on the Left.

It seems to me that most of the crap is coming from the Right, and until OWS must of the Left was a bunch of spineless, self-absorbed wimps who "compromised" away our jobs and our rights. The illusion of "both sides are equally bad" is a creation of the Corporate Media and the Centrist Corporatists who took over the Democratic Party in the 90s.

I have never seen such lunacy and bigotry coming from the Right in my whole life. They seem to be increasingly obsessed with taking away the rights of women in recent months in a way that borders in the pathological. When I was a kid they were just hypocritical selfish jerks who were obsessed over a presidential blowjob. Now they are increasingly fanatical and theocratic, in a sane country Santorum would be irrelavent, if not in a psych ward, not a serious Presidential contender.
No, he wouldn't be in a psych ward unless we started going in for Soviet-style psychiatry. Where he would be is down at the donut shop sounding off to all the other old farts at the table over a cups of coffee and his breakfast.
How to spot a shill, by John Michael Greer: "What you watch for is (a) a brand new commenter who (b) has nothing to say about the topic under discussion but (c) trots out a smoothly written opinion piece that (d) hits all the standard talking points currently being used by a specific political or corporate interest, while (e) avoiding any other points anyone else has made on that subject."

"If the shoe fits..." The Grey Badger.







Post#7761 at 03-09-2012 12:55 PM by The Wonkette [at Arlington, VA 1956 joined Jul 2002 #posts 9,209]
---
03-09-2012, 12:55 PM #7761
Join Date
Jul 2002
Location
Arlington, VA 1956
Posts
9,209

Quote Originally Posted by The Grey Badger View Post
No, he wouldn't be in a psych ward unless we started going in for Soviet-style psychiatry. Where he would be is down at the donut shop sounding off to all the other old farts at the table over a cups of coffee and his breakfast.
Not quite. Jonesers (even those on the Boomer side), such as Santorum, aren't there yet. My brain isn't sharp to think of a suitable riposte, but as a Disco-wave Boomer myself, I'm not ready to sound off at the donut shop.
I want people to know that peace is possible even in this stupid day and age. Prem Rawat, June 8, 2008







Post#7762 at 03-09-2012 12:56 PM by JDG 66 [at joined Aug 2010 #posts 2,106]
---
03-09-2012, 12:56 PM #7762
Join Date
Aug 2010
Posts
2,106

Oh my. Cutting out the crap for clarity, we see how it is:

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
...We can take advantage of Limbaugh's latest of his many insults against women as a good opportunity to get rid of him... As for Bill Maher, I loved his remark about Rick Santorum that he thinks life begins at erection...

...The Republican hypocrites....
-Eric. You really don't see your situational ethics at work, do you?


Oops. Missed one. Or two...

Quote Originally Posted by Kurt Horner View Post
This would be fine if health insurance wasn't nearly always provided by employers, and if health insurance was reasonable to obtain as an individual (or if some other payment system were in place)....
-More like "nearly always provided by employers" nowadays. But there's no particular reason that health insurance should be part of the package instead of something else, nor does it mean that any particular things need to be covered in the package.

BTW, Few employees had helath coverage until the 1960s. The cost of medical treatment has since sky rocketed. Hmmm...

Quote Originally Posted by Kurt Horner View Post
However, right now, employees generally don't have the option of negotiating for wages instead of a restrictive benefit, so they are stuck with taking some of their compensation in the form of employer-provided health insurance. In a truly competitive market, the employer would not have the capacity to make a take-it-or-leave-it offer like this in the first place...
-Take it or leave is compensation. When no one takes the job, employers get the hint.

Quote Originally Posted by Kurt Horner View Post
You obviously don't understand the way this situation works...
-No, I do. I'm saying that health insurance might not be that great a deal. We'd be better off paying.

Quote Originally Posted by playwrite View Post
...Employment in the US is much more beyond, and purposefully so, the Social Darwinism that you imply. There are considerable laws and requirements imposed by our society, through govt, on those wanting to employ people...
-What PW is saying is that it would be easier to employ people if not for all that government induced crap. I agree...


Quote Originally Posted by playwrite View Post
...Even within your false paradigm of "pay-as-you-go," "transfer payments" or the ludicrous "Ponzi Scheme"...
-Huh. Now, "pay as you go" is a "false paradigm. Just three months ago, it was the combined genius of trust fund baby FDR and the 4TF's favorite trust fund baby Playwrite:

Quote Originally Posted by playwrite View Post
...However, even before MMT, I recognized (like FDR) the poltical risk of lossing the pay-as-you-go and turning it into something that can be attacked as 'welfare.'
...or did PW just discover another fad that he thinks will keep progressives from running out of other people's money?
Last edited by JDG 66; 03-09-2012 at 01:25 PM.







Post#7763 at 03-09-2012 01:46 PM by JDG 66 [at joined Aug 2010 #posts 2,106]
---
03-09-2012, 01:46 PM #7763
Join Date
Aug 2010
Posts
2,106

SGT Stein is wrong:

http://news.yahoo.com/marines-facebo...234113159.html

...if you're in the military, the boss has to trust you.


Oops, missed something:

Quote Originally Posted by Odin View Post
-Uh, he's right:

http://news.yahoo.com/ron-paul-no-fe...102533838.html

"There is no such thing as federal money," Paul said, on CNN’s State of the Union. "Federal money is just what they steal from the states and steal from you and me."
"The people who live in tornado alley, just as I live in hurricane alley, they should have insurance," Paul said.
Paul said there was a role for the National Guard to restore order and provide care and shelter in major emergencies, but that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) led to nothing but "frustration and anger."


...no where did RP say that you can't donate money to tornado victims, oh Self Proclaimed One-Eyed God of Wisdom.
Quote Originally Posted by Odin View Post
45% of Tennessee Republicans are Birthers

But it's not about his race, yep, RIIIIIGHT...
1) What percentage of those Republican birthers are themselves black?

2) They probably suspect he's a liar because he's a liar, as even lefties will accept. They're even more inclined to buy it because they disagree with his politics. If evrything about Obama were the same, except he were white, I suspect the percentage would be the same;

3) What percentage of Washington DC Democrats think that George W. Bush was behind 9/11? I guess that would be because they hate white people, right?







Post#7764 at 03-09-2012 03:51 PM by Kurt Horner [at joined Oct 2001 #posts 1,656]
---
03-09-2012, 03:51 PM #7764
Join Date
Oct 2001
Posts
1,656

Quote Originally Posted by JDG 66 View Post
-More like "nearly always provided by employers" nowadays. But there's no particular reason that health insurance should be part of the package instead of something else, nor does it mean that any particular things need to be covered in the package.
In case you hadn't noticed, I agree with you that health care coverage should be purchased by individuals rather than using the employer as an intermediary. However, that is the world we presently live in. The Affordable Care Act continues that employer-provided paradigm -- and it does so primarily because the Obama administration chose an extremely un-radical path of reform. Why did they do this? Because the political reality is that right-wing and centrist politicians like to describe the current health care market as the awesome product of the "free market" which only a "socialist" would want to tamper with.

So here's where our debate stands:

I say: The ACA mandates certain coverage be available because individuals don't have the ability to choose what coverage they get.

You say: People should be able to choose what health care they get. Employers are being forced to pay for health care they disapprove of.

I say: You're damn right they should be able to choose, but in actuality they don't. Employers are only being "forced" to not abuse a position of power they shouldn't have in the first place.

You say: We should let individuals buy their health care.

I say: OK, awesome -- so what have conservatives been doing every time health care reform has been discussed for the last 20 years? Oh, that's right, they quake in terror at the prospect of the coming "socialist" apocalypse and try to block reform of any kind. In the meantime, most of America is still at the mercy of their employer's choices regarding health care.

You say: I don't understand why people accept health insurance from their employers. They should just take wages.

I say: The tax system makes it so that the equivalent amount of wages for your health care plan costs an employer more money than giving you insurance. Thus, they have zero incentive to even give you that option, and if they give you cash equivalent in gross income, you have zero incentive to make that trade (unless you don't want health care coverage at all). Thus, everyone who wants health care is at the mercy of their employer.

You say: Well, they should suck it up and buy insurance on their own. You know, for freedom.

I say: That's ridiculous. Why should the pain from a stupid policy we both don't like be borne solely by those least capable of bearing that burden? Why are the constrained choices of employers an example of "tyranny" but the constrained choices of employees are "freedom"?

***

And that's where we stand. The conservative position on this and so many other economic issues elevates ideal outcomes (that no conservatives are actually working to achieve) over better outcomes that conservatives hysterically denounce as tyranny.







Post#7765 at 03-09-2012 04:13 PM by playwrite [at NYC joined Jul 2005 #posts 10,443]
---
03-09-2012, 04:13 PM #7765
Join Date
Jul 2005
Location
NYC
Posts
10,443

Quote Originally Posted by Kurt Horner View Post
In case you hadn't noticed, I agree with you that health care coverage should be purchased by individuals rather than using the employer as an intermediary. However, that is the world we presently live in. The Affordable Care Act continues that employer-provided paradigm -- and it does so primarily because the Obama administration chose an extremely un-radical path of reform. Why did they do this? Because the political reality is that right-wing and centrist politicians like to describe the current health care market as the awesome product of the "free market" which only a "socialist" would want to tamper with.

So here's where our debate stands:

I say: The ACA mandates certain coverage be available because individuals don't have the ability to choose what coverage they get.

You say: People should be able to choose what health care they get. Employers are being forced to pay for health care they disapprove of.

I say: You're damn right they should be able to choose, but in actuality they don't. Employers are only being "forced" to not abuse a position of power they shouldn't have in the first place.

You say: We should let individuals buy their health care.

I say: OK, awesome -- so what have conservatives been doing every time health care reform has been discussed for the last 20 years? Oh, that's right, they quake in terror at the prospect of the coming "socialist" apocalypse and try to block reform of any kind. In the meantime, most of America is still at the mercy of their employer's choices regarding health care.

You say: I don't understand why people accept health insurance from their employers. They should just take wages.

I say: The tax system makes it so that the equivalent amount of wages for your health care plan costs an employer more money than giving you insurance. Thus, they have zero incentive to even give you that option, and if they give you cash equivalent in gross income, you have zero incentive to make that trade (unless you don't want health care coverage at all). Thus, everyone who wants health care is at the mercy of their employer.

You say: Well, they should suck it up and buy insurance on their own. You know, for freedom.

I say: That's ridiculous. Why should the pain from a stupid policy we both don't like be borne solely by those least capable of bearing that burden? Why are the constrained choices of employers an example of "tyranny" but the constrained choices of employees are "freedom"?

***

And that's where we stand. The conservative position on this and so many other economic issues elevates ideal outcomes (that no conservatives are actually working to achieve) over better outcomes that conservatives hysterically denounce as tyranny.
Very well done.

Logical, not too complicated an explanation. Should be readily taken-up and understood.

But, that’s the reason it doesn't have a chance to do so with its intended target. Believe me, I know.

Not to give up though; others, more open-minded, are watching.

We all have roles to play. Yours may not be as fun as that of your intended target, but at least you will be much less confused that he when operating in the real world.
Last edited by playwrite; 03-09-2012 at 04:18 PM.
"The Devil enters the prompter's box and the play is ready to start" - R. Service

“It’s not tax money. The banks have accounts with the Fed … so, to lend to a bank, we simply use the computer to mark up the size of the account that they have with the Fed. It’s much more akin to printing money.” - B.Bernanke


"Keep your filthy hands off my guns while I decide what you can & can't do with your uterus" - Sarah Silverman

If you meet a magic pony on the road, kill it. - Playwrite







Post#7766 at 03-09-2012 04:25 PM by playwrite [at NYC joined Jul 2005 #posts 10,443]
---
03-09-2012, 04:25 PM #7766
Join Date
Jul 2005
Location
NYC
Posts
10,443

Quote Originally Posted by JDG 66 View Post
.."There is no such thing as federal money," Paul said, on CNN’s State of the Union. "Federal money is just what they steal from the states and steal from you and me."

That has to be about the dumbest damn thing I've ever heard come out of Paul's mouth.


Where exactly does he think the states, you or me get our money to begin with? I sure wish someone would catch this clown trying to make some; it would be great to put this guy in jail for twenty years or so to make an example for all of the other idiots out there. Central govts don't mess with people counterfeiting something they have a monopoly on to issue; they mess them up good instead with long federal prison sentences sharing beds with big ugly dudes - Ron would last about a hour.

Yeesh, talk about magic pony land. I guess he has one that poops out dollar bills in the basement to go with that one that poops out gold nuggets.

People actually vote for this guy?
"The Devil enters the prompter's box and the play is ready to start" - R. Service

“It’s not tax money. The banks have accounts with the Fed … so, to lend to a bank, we simply use the computer to mark up the size of the account that they have with the Fed. It’s much more akin to printing money.” - B.Bernanke


"Keep your filthy hands off my guns while I decide what you can & can't do with your uterus" - Sarah Silverman

If you meet a magic pony on the road, kill it. - Playwrite







Post#7767 at 03-10-2012 03:14 PM by Alioth68 [at Minnesota joined Apr 2010 #posts 693]
---
03-10-2012, 03:14 PM #7767
Join Date
Apr 2010
Location
Minnesota
Posts
693

Quote Originally Posted by Weave View Post
Spare us the faux outrage. Where was your outrage when Bill Maher called Sarah Palin the "C" word? Where was the outrage over his previous constant innapropriate attacks on Palin and her daughters? Where was the outrage when Keith Olbermann called Michelle Malkin a "mashed up bag of meat with lipstick"? Where was your outrage when Special Ed Schultz called Laura Ingraham a "Right wing slut"....Nary a peep of outrage even from women's group, and when they do, its a tepid almost lackluster outrage when its a conservative woman being attacked.
There is of course another distinction: whether or not the person is a "public figure". The line on this does seem kind of fuzzy--because it doesn't just mean "public officials" but people with a degree of celebrity or fame. Like Jerry Falwell (vs. Larry Flynt). But there is an actual legal distinction there (in terms of libel or slander laws), as well as (to me) a matter of class. While it's not classy (imho) to call even public figures vulgar or dirty names (and when I do it, it's not classy either), it's even less classy, and more below the belt, to call a private citizen one with a megaphone that reaches millions--simply because she testified once before Congress as a private citizen (I mean, did anyone even know who she was before Rush made the remarks? I didn't. She did a small civic duty, same as you or I might, in appearing before a congressional hearing. Should we all be cowed from doing something like that because we might get falsely smeared before millions?). And I do include Palin's kids (not Sarah Palin herself) in this--and said so to people at the time. Palin as a politician put herself out there, and that's one of the prices we as a society agree that you might pay for being a politician or having a degree of celebrity--goes with the territory. But her kids? They certainly didn't. Not to mention that as a child of teen pregnancy myself, I was personally offended by the attacks made against the oldest daughter. Obama also was (both the child of a teen pregnancy, and offended), and said so when those attacks were being made on her.

Basically, a person of celebrity or fame has the resources or platform to defend themselves publicly in the mass media from such smears, while someone like Fluke does not. The sense of a "fair fight" doesn't exist with the latter--which, wherever the legal lines might actually be drawn, will draw out more of an opinion of disgust in many. No one likes to see a bully suckerpunch someone far weaker--and that's exactly what Rush did, that's exactly what Maher did attacking Palin's kids, that's exactly what Don Imus did with those college basketball players ("nappy-headed hos"), etc. I was disgusted with all of those.

And Rush has done such before, starting with poor 13-year-old Chelsea Clinton ("the White House dog"). Just... sleaziness, or creepiness, toward a pubescent girl. Yes she had some fame as daughter of a President, but there's also the idea of attacking a poor awkward kid like that who didn't choose that fame herself (I would say publicly smearing even a willing celebrity child in such a way is below the belt and cowardly, for different but similar reasons--how does a mere (typical) child have the capacity to defend herself from that?). His latest may just be the last straw--and guess what, the market is speaking. You know, that force that can do no wrong in the eyes of many on the right. The irony is indeed delicious.
Last edited by Alioth68; 03-10-2012 at 03:28 PM.
"Understanding is a three-edged sword." --Kosh Naranek
"...Your side, my side, and the truth." --John Sheridan

"No more half-measures." --Mike Ehrmantraut

"rationalizing...is never clear thinking." --SM Kovalinsky







Post#7768 at 03-10-2012 10:44 PM by Odin [at Moorhead, MN, USA joined Sep 2006 #posts 14,442]
---
03-10-2012, 10:44 PM #7768
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Moorhead, MN, USA
Posts
14,442

Study: Hate of Obama fuels 755% growth in extremist groups

Fears that the nation’s first black president will be re-elected has fueled the dramatic growth extremists groups in the U.S. over the past year, according to a report from a civil rights organization that tracks these groups.

The number of groups in the anti-government “Patriot” movement have sky rocketed 755 percent since President Barack Obama has been elected, the Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) yearly report found.

“These groups are becoming more and more aware as they watch the primary season unfold that Obama is fairly likely to win and some of them are having meltdowns over this,” Southern Poverty Law Center senior fellow Mark Potok told Raw Story. “They’re looking at four more years under a very hated black president — hated by them. So, we’re seeing signs of real anger over that. People saying we’re at war already, saying go out and buy AK-47s and hollow-point bullets, get tools to derail trains.”

Unlike traditional hate groups, “Patriot” groups subscribe to a set of conspiracy theories and see the government as their primary enemy.

“Basically what ‘Patriot’ groups think is that the federal government is an evil cabal in the hands of bad people,” Potok explained. “The government is about to impose martial law on the country, very probably with the help of foreign troops, perhaps U.N. troops. They intend to confiscate all guns from Americans. Those liberty-loving Americans who resisted will be thrown into concentration camps that have secretly constructed by FEMA. And ultimately the government will force us all into a socialistic kind of one-world government, the so-called New World Order.”

In addition to the staggering growth of groups in the “Patriot” movement, hate groups in general have grown from 926 in 2008 to 1018 last year. Anti-LGBT groups have grown by 27 percent and anti-Muslim groups have triple from 10 to 30 in just one year.

Ku Klux Klan groups actually fell from 221 to 152 last year, largely because the second largest Klan group — the Brotherhood of Klans in Ohio — folded after its leader, Jeremy Parker, joined a faction of the Aryan Nations.

Overall, Potok said that it was the disturbing growth by ‘Patriot’ groups that shocked the Southern Poverty Law Center.

“We were all astounded by the numbers this year,” Potok told Raw Story. “We’ve seen a very, very rapid growth in the ‘Patriot’ movement in the prior two years. We all expected that just had to tail off, that this kind of growth couldn’t continue for another year. But the reality is that we saw something close to 450 new groups appear on the scene last year.”

If the president is successful in his re-election bid, Potok sees no reason that the dramatic growth will not continue.

“I think if Obama is re-elected, this is very likely to get worse before it gets better,” he said. “We’re already seeing signs of anger in groups that are coming to believe that Obama will probably win the election so they’re going a bit crazy out there.”
But it's not about racism!!! *SARCASM*
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.

-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism







Post#7769 at 03-10-2012 11:14 PM by Odin [at Moorhead, MN, USA joined Sep 2006 #posts 14,442]
---
03-10-2012, 11:14 PM #7769
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Moorhead, MN, USA
Posts
14,442

To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.

-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism







Post#7770 at 03-10-2012 11:43 PM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
03-10-2012, 11:43 PM #7770
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

Quote Originally Posted by Odin View Post
In the article to which you refer, the most conservative Democratic Senator (Ben Nelson) and the most liberal Republican Senator (Olympia Snowe) have chosen to not run for re-election. It's hard to believe that a Senator from a decidedly-conservative state (Pryor, D-AR) can be more liberal than a Senator from a liberal state (Kirk, R-IL). But such is so when one Party is nearly so full of ideologues that one can't tell the difference between James Imhofe and Pat Toomey in a voting record.

It is as if regional differences matter little except that one Party has effectively no chance in some regions except in wave years. Thus Begich, D-AK and Johnson, R-WI.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."


― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters







Post#7771 at 03-11-2012 05:27 PM by Brian Beecher [at Downers Grove, IL joined Sep 2001 #posts 2,937]
---
03-11-2012, 05:27 PM #7771
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Downers Grove, IL
Posts
2,937

Quote Originally Posted by pbrower2a View Post
In the article to which you refer, the most conservative Democratic Senator (Ben Nelson) and the most liberal Republican Senator (Olympia Snowe) have chosen to not run for re-election. It's hard to believe that a Senator from a decidedly-conservative state (Pryor, D-AR) can be more liberal than a Senator from a liberal state (Kirk, R-IL). But such is so when one Party is nearly so full of ideologues that one can't tell the difference between James Imhofe and Pat Toomey in a voting record.

It is as if regional differences matter little except that one Party has effectively no chance in some regions except in wave years. Thus Begich, D-AK and Johnson, R-WI.
Doesn't this mirror the shape of the country as a whole. We are so polarized but in many ways the corporatist ideolgy has be winning out. OWS is out to change this, but how favorable to the cause their efforts will be remains to be seen.







Post#7772 at 03-11-2012 07:42 PM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
03-11-2012, 07:42 PM #7772
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

Quote Originally Posted by Brian Beecher View Post
Doesn't this mirror the shape of the country as a whole. We are so polarized but in many ways the corporatist ideology has be winning out. OWS is out to change this, but how favorable to the cause their efforts will be remains to be seen.
It may also be that the corporatist ideology has become an absurd parody of conservatism that has little to offer to the common man but demands too much.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."


― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters







Post#7773 at 03-12-2012 08:25 AM by KaiserD2 [at David Kaiser '47 joined Jul 2001 #posts 5,220]
---
03-12-2012, 08:25 AM #7773
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
David Kaiser '47
Posts
5,220

Speaking of the corporatist ideology, here is a remarkably frank interview with a Chicago hedge fund manager who feels, among other things, that the superwealthy don't have enough influence in our political system.







Post#7774 at 03-12-2012 09:54 AM by Weave [at joined Feb 2010 #posts 909]
---
03-12-2012, 09:54 AM #7774
Join Date
Feb 2010
Posts
909

ABCNews/Wa (Com)Post poll

Another notoriously leftward slanted Poll shows Obama's approval at 46%. His approval on the economy is 59% Disapproval and with gas prices 65% disapproval. Also found in the story. Romney leads Obama 49%-47% and Obama and SANTORUM are neck and neck...yes Santorum......

Looks like the "bruising" primary is only holding the Repubs back from completely blowing out the President at this point. Whats going to happen this summer when Romney locks it up and gas prices remain high? If Obama's approval is at 46% in this poll his real approval is probably 5% lower....


http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...O6R_story.html







Post#7775 at 03-12-2012 11:09 AM by playwrite [at NYC joined Jul 2005 #posts 10,443]
---
03-12-2012, 11:09 AM #7775
Join Date
Jul 2005
Location
NYC
Posts
10,443

Quote Originally Posted by Weave View Post
Another notoriously leftward slanted Poll shows Obama's approval at 46%. His approval on the economy is 59% Disapproval and with gas prices 65% disapproval. Also found in the story. Romney leads Obama 49%-47% and Obama and SANTORUM are neck and neck...yes Santorum......

Looks like the "bruising" primary is only holding the Repubs back from completely blowing out the President at this point. Whats going to happen this summer when Romney locks it up and gas prices remain high? If Obama's approval is at 46% in this poll his real approval is probably 5% lower....


http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...O6R_story.html
At what price does gas become a non-issue? Many believe it to now be under $3.50.

At what price does Obama look like a miracle worker? Many suggest under $3.00 as long as the economy is still doing well.

You really have no idea how likely those situations are by summer, let alone by November, do you?

While the primary characteristic of today’s Right is troubling, it sure can have an upside.

Bargain of the week! Iranian oil

The Iranians have reportedly started offering a discount on their crude oil as big as $20 per barrel. Fadel Gheit, a senior energy analyst at Oppenheimer in New York, told New Europe that oil sanctions on Iran are working. He added that Tehran is losing $40-46m a day.

“That is not a small amount of money to lose every day and the discount is gonna get bigger,” Gheit said, adding that traders and buyers are going to take advantage of that, knowing that Tehran is under pressure and low-balling the price of Iranian oil even more. “It is like buying Iran in a bazaar. They offer it for that amount and you bargain them down.” On 9 March Brent crude was at $124.77 a barrel. “I bet you anything there will be some bidders for under $100,” Gheit said, regarding the Iranian crude. “Iranian oil is on sale basically and the question is will the discount further increase and I would say the probability is high that will be the case.”

This could weaken the global oil price but Gheit reminded that oil prices are 30% inflated by speculation on fear of potential supply disruption. “If the economic sanctions are working, very unlikely we will see any supply disruption and oil prices will ease because there is no justification for the 30% premium that traders and speculators are putting on the price of oil. High oil prices are not good for the global economy, not good for the US economy, not good for Europe, not good for Japan, or any other country. The only country that benefits outside of OPEC [Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries] is basically Russia and they’ll love to see the tension go on forever,” Gheit said.
Not only are the Iranian elections over, but so are the Russian ones; and like any Czar, Putin can now go back to not giving a shirt about serfs – he’s now okay with oil prices dropping. Europe is going into economic contraction. China and India are not only slowing, but have been given the signal by Obama that it's okay to buy deeply discounted Iranian oil for now and the Israelis have been told to accept that until at least after the elections.

The only ones rooting for higher oil prices right now are hapless (and now obvious America-hating) GOP that get their marching orders from Faux News –
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tu...it-got-better-

The clueless GOP bozos can be really funny, and are just making this too easy for two-steps-ahead Obama.
Last edited by playwrite; 03-12-2012 at 11:11 AM.
"The Devil enters the prompter's box and the play is ready to start" - R. Service

“It’s not tax money. The banks have accounts with the Fed … so, to lend to a bank, we simply use the computer to mark up the size of the account that they have with the Fed. It’s much more akin to printing money.” - B.Bernanke


"Keep your filthy hands off my guns while I decide what you can & can't do with your uterus" - Sarah Silverman

If you meet a magic pony on the road, kill it. - Playwrite
-----------------------------------------