Obama Care Could Be Deadly

[quote name='myl0r']am I missing some sort of humor or sarcasm in this, or could you enlighten me?[/QUOTE]

There is a guy named Ken Gladney, he is obviously the one you are making reference to but pretty much nothing you said was true.

There was a scuffle but he wasn't beaten (he is in fact standing over someone else on the ground) or taken away in an ambulance.

What did happen though is that Gladney decided to fool some rubes and make a bit of cash.
 
These three strands of the radical right - the hate groups, the nativist extremist groups, and the Patriot organizations - are the most volatile elements on the American political landscape. Taken together, their numbers increased by more than 40 percent, rising from 1,248 groups in 2008 to 1,753 last year.
Click to expand...

I don't really understand why they lumped the hate groups and the immigration hate groups with the "Patriot" organizations, but whatever.
 
[quote name='perdition(troy']I don't really understand why they lumped the hate groups and the immigration hate groups with the "Patriot" organizations, but whatever.[/QUOTE]

"Patriot" in that context is just a euphemism for anti-Government wingnuts who think Patriotism means the violent overthrow of the Federal government. Not Patriot like you and I might understand it, such as someone who loves their country and performs their civic duties like voting, paying taxes, and not blowing up buildings.
 
There's plenty of overlap if you look at core values/goals/mission statements and whatnot.

The minuteman movement, for example refers to itself as a "Patriot" organization.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']There's plenty of overlap if you look at core values/goals/mission statements and whatnot.

The minuteman movement, for example refers to itself as a "Patriot" organization.[/QUOTE]

One group hates the feds, one hates blacks, the third hates immigrants. Since everyone knows Obama is all three, there's plenty of room for common ground.
 
Reminds me of Sunday's 'This Week' where we saw Plouffe vs. Rove. Plouffe said 'maybe if we get this healthcare bill passed we can throw up the old Mission Accomplished banner'...and Rove responded by asking Plouffe why he hates our troops.

Rovian tactics don't work anymore, we saw that in the 2008 election.
 
Just because he's not running any campaigns doesn't mean his ideas aren't there. Slanderous fear-mongering tactics epitomize Rovian tactics. Unpatriotic! Gay marriage = assless chaps! Unamerican! Palls with terrorists! He's a muslim!

wow, I can't believe I have to explain this...
 
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." -- Thomas Jefferson
 
So anyway a plurality of Americans (probably soon to be a simple majority) think the bill being passed was a good thing.

Should we start holding out breath for the right wing talking points to change?
 
Are we playing the random quote game?

"Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society." - Oliver Wendell Holmes.

Gosh I wish the darned government hadn't been so concerned with taking care of me with all those fire engines, police cars, paved roads, and schools. Darn them! I'll pave my own roads.
 
I really wish i could see an alternate universe where this passed with a public option. Just to see if the anger would be any greater or not. Because from the way some of my more conservative friends describe what did pass, you'd think we were all living in soviet Russia.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']I really wish i could see an alternate universe where this passed with a public option. Just to see if the anger would be any greater or not. Because from the way some of my more conservative friends describe what did pass, you'd think we were all living in soviet Russia.[/QUOTE]

I think it would look just about the same. People are convinced what is ultimately a fairly moderate bill is rampant socialism already (these are people who wouldn't know socialism if they tripped over it, mind you). Given that, anything more progressive probably would have sparked just as much vitriol.

I think that's where Republicans fouled up the most in this whole process. If they'd been willing to compromise they probably could have both achieved something even more conservative and also painted themselves as the heroes of the whole thing. Instead they just decided that any reform = socialism and figured that the Democrats wouldn't have the stones to pass it without them. They were wrong obviously.
 
Well, since Monday morning, I've noticed the sky is red. There are men marching down the streets, uttering low dirges in monotone pitches. The mailman delivered my bloody gruel, and told me to not expect more for another three days. Policemen showed up at my door and hauled away all my clothes, except for one pair of jeans, a white shirt, and three pairs of boxer briefs. My shoes were also confiscated, and it was suggested to me that socks were now considered contraband.

There is also talk that the moon is about to crash any moment, killing all life upon the planet, but only if I don't agree to wearing a camera inside my colon. Normally it's the urethra, but mine's narrow, and they felt I might not be able to relieve myself in times of duress. Which they then added, chuckling, "Is totally all the time now."
 
Obama = 2nd bill of rights

He already gave us freedom to have affordable health care, now we just need freedom to smoke weed and Freedom to have a well paying job.
 
right. the people who are angry are angry at the idea of the bill, not its contents.

they have screamed for months about how they would vote out incumbents who voted for the bill - which is a red herring, since they aren't the people who voted for the democrats to begin with. it's an insincere gesture.
 
any activist/group that throws around the N-word in a rally or protest has lost there chance to change any opinions, Especially if you say it to John Lewis WTF I read his book...walk the line? I don't remember what it was called but seriously its 2010 and last time I checked Sarah palin affiliated her self with those same tea party activists. *wink-wink*
 
[quote name='Strell']
There is also talk that the moon is about to crash any moment, killing all life upon the planet...[/QUOTE]
... except for The Guy.

upper5_jump.png


Look at that smug son of a bitch moon.
upper5_unit.png
 
[quote name='bvharris']Gosh I wish the darned government hadn't been so concerned with taking care of me with all those fire engines, police cars, paved roads, and schools. Darn them! I'll pave my own roads.[/QUOTE]

The funny thing is that I might have to fill in a few potholes on the way to my kids' daycare.

Does anybody have any good suggestions other than asking the fine wageslaves at the Home Depot?
 
I have asthma. My Advair is gonna cost me $50 on my next refill.
I don't want to pay for that.
So, I'm going to take $1 from $50. If they don't have $1, I'll take 50 cents from them and another 50 cents from some else.

Now, I can buy a nice pair of jeans next month!
 
[quote name='lilboo']I have asthma. My Advair is gonna cost me $50 on my next refill.
I don't want to pay for that.
So, I'm going to take $1 from $50. If they don't have $1, I'll take 50 cents from them and another 50 cents from some else.

Now, I can buy a nice pair of jeans next month![/QUOTE]

That post was a hot mess.
 
I did bring up the fact that we pay for a public education system, all i got in return was a rant about the dept. of education. IT was also explained to me that education in the US is completely slanted to the left and that those fine Texans did a service to everyone. Tried to bring up Thomas Jefferson being left out, was basically told he should be.

This is why i try not to discuss politics with anyone i see on a regular basis.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']
This is why i try not to discuss politics with anyone i see on a regular basis.[/QUOTE]

Me too. I'll talk politics with colleagues occasionally. Perk of being an academic is most of my circle of acquaintances are of like mind, and even those with opposing views are at least highly educated and can have reasonable and informed discussions on politics.

But otherwise I avoid it like the plague with family, old friends back in WV etc.

I mostly avoid it online as well. I don't post here nearly as much as I used to, try to avoid long debates, make heavy use of ignore etc. And I don't talk about anything related to politics anywhere else on the net.

Just not worth the frustration. Everyone posting on the net already has their mind made up on everything. So it can be nothing but a fun time waster. :D
 
[quote name='bvharris']I think it would look just about the same. People are convinced what is ultimately a fairly moderate bill is rampant socialism already (these are people who wouldn't know socialism if they tripped over it, mind you). Given that, anything more progressive probably would have sparked just as much vitriol.

I think that's where Republicans fouled up the most in this whole process. If they'd been willing to compromise they probably could have both achieved something even more conservative and also painted themselves as the heroes of the whole thing. Instead they just decided that any reform = socialism and figured that the Democrats wouldn't have the stones to pass it without them. They were wrong obviously.[/QUOTE]

The thing that kills me is that most working class people, given a true implementation, should love socialism. The whole point is that it's the worker's party. Labor unions were a taste of it, but that's as far as it got.Everyone has knee jerk reactions to systems like socialism and communism because of past associations with our enemies. People think nazis when they hear socialism, and russians, chinese, koreans etc. when they hear communism. Except that it isn't even all the same, communism in russia is/was not communism in china. If anything at all it gives us a chance to learn from their screw ups. So why is it that the mention of any social programs in the U.S. illicit the reaction that we'll become some sort of nazi like state.

I'm not even advocating the US becoming socialist, just that we integrate some of the better ideas. Hell, no one here would want to live in a purely capitalist society anyway.
 
[quote name='bvharris']I'm talking about the general attitude of the people at these rallies. I live in Washington, they've been here for weeks and I've heard them spouting some of the most awful, hateful things you could imagine. Right or wrong (obviously I think wrong) these people are furious. And let's not forget this is basically the same set of people whose members included those who were toting guns to presidential campaign events in 2008. Proudly.[/QUOTE]

I'd like to see some evidence, rather than vague assertions, that the tea party protests were/are violent. Coming from someone who lives in the D.C. area and thus has seen plenty of protests, they have been tame in that regard compared to, say, anarchists protesting the World Bank/IMF.
 
Seems that the protests over health care reform have brought out more hate and anger than any protest over the wars in iraq/afghanistan.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']I'd like to see some evidence, rather than vague assertions, that the tea party protests were/are violent. Coming from someone who lives in the D.C. area and thus has seen plenty of protests, they have been tame in that regard compared to, say, anarchists protesting the World Bank/IMF.[/QUOTE]

Would throwing dollar bills at a guy with Parkinson's and screaming at him to get over it be considered violent or just crude?

It reminded me of an old SNL skit with Will Ferrell screaming that people with diabetes were just weak and faking it.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']The thing that kills me is that most working class people, given a true implementation, should love socialism. The whole point is that it's the worker's party. Labor unions were a taste of it, but that's as far as it got.Everyone has knee jerk reactions to systems like socialism and communism because of past associations with our enemies. People think nazis when they hear socialism, and russians, chinese, koreans etc. when they hear communism. Except that it isn't even all the same, communism in russia is/was not communism in china. If anything at all it gives us a chance to learn from their screw ups. So why is it that the mention of any social programs in the U.S. illicit the reaction that we'll become some sort of nazi like state.

I'm not even advocating the US becoming socialist, just that we integrate some of the better ideas. Hell, no one here would want to live in a purely capitalist society anyway.[/QUOTE]

Coming from the Eatern Bloc, I'm a bit biased, but I would submit to you that we should learn from history. Specifically, we should learn from others' mistakes.

It is arrogant to think that we are somehow more honorable or better than other groups of people who have tried to implement statism. Trust me, we are not that much different... basic human tendencies and behaviors are highly conserved... and I would posit that our outcomes would be similar to those of our "comrades." ;)
 
And we learn from our own history - it wasn't the invisible hand of the free market that gave us the labor standards we have today. And it won't be the free market that improves them.

The changes to labor in the United States came in the form of labor unions and government intervention. Safety standards, accountability/safety standards, 40-hour work weeks would have never happened in a pure free market.

I'm not advocating for anything but balance and a mutual appreciation of history. We need nuance, not people fully supportive of corporatism or fully supportive of collectivism. That requires moderates, which we have. But it also involves improving our discourse so we don't knee jerk react to "socialism" like (1) it's inherently a bad thing or (2) not at all worthy of consideration. Nor do we need people who buy wholesale into free market strategies as being sufficient because they're free market strategies.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']And we learn from our own history - it wasn't the invisible hand of the free market that gave us the labor standards we have today. And it won't be the free market that improves them.

The changes to labor in the United States came in the form of labor unions and government intervention. Safety standards, accountability/safety standards, 40-hour work weeks would have never happened in a pure free market.

I'm not advocating for anything but balance and a mutual appreciation of history. We need nuance, not people fully supportive of corporatism or fully supportive of collectivism. That requires moderates, which we have. But it also involves improving our discourse so we don't knee jerk react to "socialism" like (1) it's inherently a bad thing or (2) not at all worthy of consideration. Nor do we need people who buy wholesale into free market strategies as being sufficient because they're free market strategies.[/QUOTE]

That's a rather sensible post that I agree with fully.

Unions are not purely evil! You are right that they did lead to improvements in the workplace. However, in some instances, they have become out of control. For example, the public worker unions in California have really gone over the deep end. We are broke... that is a fact. Yet, it is nearly impossible to downsize governmental institutions because it is nearly impossible to fire any worker or cut his or her wages, since the unions scream bloody murder and are very influential in government!

Here is a story from the LA times, which is a left leaning news paper:
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/may/03/local/me-teachers3
(summary: it is very difficult to fire even incompetent or abusive teachers and very few get fired).

Balance is needed. Anyone who has too much power will tend to screw up. If government in general is too powerful, it will tend to abuse the populace. If republicans are too powerful, they just funnel money into big business and wars. If democrats are too powerful, they spend money on large entitlement programs that are bound to become insolvent. The common theme is that everyone spends, spends, spends...

I would offer to you the idea that stalemate and diffusion of power makes government less dangerous and less apt to lead us into bankruptcy.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']Seems that the protests over health care reform have brought out more hate and anger than any protest over the wars in iraq/afghanistan.[/QUOTE]

I think you have a selective memory, or don't know much about the anti-war protests that went on for years (and mysteriously have largely disappeared since Obama took office, even while he has escalated the war in Afghanistan...hmm...).

[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Would throwing dollar bills at a guy with Parkinson's and screaming at him to get over it be considered violent or just crude?

It reminded me of an old SNL skit with Will Ferrell screaming that people with diabetes were just weak and faking it.[/QUOTE]

I'd say just crude, unless they were dollar coins. By violent I picture fighting with police, rioting and destroying property, etc etc.
 
There are still anti-war rallies, but the corporate media has decided that health care rallies are where the ratings are at. There was such a rally recently at the same time as one of the last big pre-passing health rallies - no coverage.

Secondarily, not only have we escalated in Afghanistan, we've also escalated in Iraq. While we have reduced the number of military troops slightly, we've INCREASED the number of private contractors, for an overall net gain.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']I'd like to see some evidence, rather than vague assertions, that the tea party protests were/are violent. Coming from someone who lives in the D.C. area and thus has seen plenty of protests, they have been tame in that regard compared to, say, anarchists protesting the World Bank/IMF.[/QUOTE]

If you've been reading the last few pages of the thread, I've never said that the protests themselves have been violent, just that the general attitude of them is fostering what I believe to be a violent message about how to fight back against "socialism." I'll readily acknowledge that would even be a fringe element within the tea parties themselves.

I live in DC myself, so I'm not sure either of us is more qualified than the other to assess the relative crudeness of protests. (This is just anecdotal, but the only group who consistently gets in my face when trying to walk past them on the mall or elsewhere are the pro-lifers, and it's not like I walk around wearing a shirt which says "kill all the babies.") I guess it depends where you stand politically. One thing in the tea partiers favor over the anti-war protesters of years past: They have heard of a shower. :D
 
[quote name='mykevermin']And we learn from our own history - it wasn't the invisible hand of the free market that gave us the labor standards we have today. And it won't be the free market that improves them.

The changes to labor in the United States came in the form of labor unions and government intervention. Safety standards, accountability/safety standards, 40-hour work weeks would have never happened in a pure free market.

I'm not advocating for anything but balance and a mutual appreciation of history. We need nuance, not people fully supportive of corporatism or fully supportive of collectivism. That requires moderates, which we have. But it also involves improving our discourse so we don't knee jerk react to "socialism" like (1) it's inherently a bad thing or (2) not at all worthy of consideration. Nor do we need people who buy wholesale into free market strategies as being sufficient because they're free market strategies.[/QUOTE]
Exactly, in a purely capitalist country those improvements in labor standards probably wouldn't happen since it isn't conducive to making a profit. Workers liked unions because they benefited them, despite them not being a capitalist ideal.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']I think you have a selective memory, or don't know much about the anti-war protests that went on for years (and mysteriously have largely disappeared since Obama took office, even while he has escalated the war in Afghanistan...hmm...).



I'd say just crude, unless they were dollar coins. By violent I picture fighting with police, rioting and destroying property, etc etc.[/QUOTE]
I don't remember hearing about anyone shouting racial or homophobic epitaphs at anti war protests, if anyone did i must have missed it.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']I don't remember hearing about anyone shouting racial or homophobic epitaphs at anti war protests, if anyone did i must have missed it.[/QUOTE]

Epithets. Though I guess epitaphs might be what they're going for...
 
[quote name='JolietJake']I don't remember hearing about anyone shouting racial or homophobic epitaphs at anti war protests, if anyone did i must have missed it.[/QUOTE]

I'll reluctantly side with elp on this one. Crude and idiotic slogans, chants and signs are not the equivalent of violent actions.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']When has rhetoric EVAR led people to violent actions?[/QUOTE]

By Msut's same logic, the actions of Obama and Congress are leading people to violent actions. They must be stopped!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top