I swear I've seen that line before...!n00less cluebie wrote:It won't cost you an arm and a leg....unless you want it to.
The start of the 2012 election debacle
- NWA
- Luxer
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 4:30 pm
- Location: Norte, Weed, Arod. Now With Attitude!
Re: WE1GHT L0$$ FA$T!
I was going to post about the Rep. Party Candidates, but it sounds like a porn film:
1) Newt Gingrich - adultery, adultery, open marriage, divorce, open marriage, divorce while wife is dying, adultery, open marriage, divorce while wife is diagnosed with MS, etc, etc. But, I have heard he has changed his ways.
2) Rick Santorum - thank Heaven that the #1 result from a Google search on Santorum has changed....
3) Mitt Romney - missionary / mormon / enough said
4) Herman Cain - deja vu from Clarence Thomas / Anita Hill thingy. Can I get a pubic hair on my pizza and my coke?!!
Based on the above sexual overtones, and frothy disturbances, I have to vote for Ron Paul in Republican Primary. He is the only one not trying to subliminally sex me up. Ya know?!
I CAN'T WAIT UNTIL NOVEMBER!!!!!!
1) Newt Gingrich - adultery, adultery, open marriage, divorce, open marriage, divorce while wife is dying, adultery, open marriage, divorce while wife is diagnosed with MS, etc, etc. But, I have heard he has changed his ways.
2) Rick Santorum - thank Heaven that the #1 result from a Google search on Santorum has changed....
3) Mitt Romney - missionary / mormon / enough said
4) Herman Cain - deja vu from Clarence Thomas / Anita Hill thingy. Can I get a pubic hair on my pizza and my coke?!!
Based on the above sexual overtones, and frothy disturbances, I have to vote for Ron Paul in Republican Primary. He is the only one not trying to subliminally sex me up. Ya know?!
I CAN'T WAIT UNTIL NOVEMBER!!!!!!
- Drifter
- Semiholy Rambler
- Posts: 6770
- Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 5:06 pm
- Location: An undisclosed location... for reasons of security, and therefore... insecurity...
- Contact:
Keep telling yourself that, and I'm sure all will be fine. But the last time I had a salesman pressure me into something I didn't want, I seriously wanted to kick his ass from there to where he left his momma the day he was born... I'll leave it there without gettin more graphic.NWA wrote:That's not what Obamacare doesDrifter wrote:If you mean I don't want someone taking care of me against my will... yes I am.
Indeed. I want someone to vote for, not just someone to vote against.NWA wrote:Here, hear...Drifter wrote:If you mean I feel a thrill going up my leg about the potential candidates in the upcoming election... no I'm not.
- n00less cluebie
- Lux Cantor
- Posts: 8377
- Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 8:55 am
- Location: At the Official Clown Reference Librarian Desk--'All the answers you weren't looking for.'
- Contact:
What's funny is that Mitt Romney was the first one to sign an individual mandate as Governor of Tax-a-2-shits....Drifter wrote:Keep telling yourself that, and I'm sure all will be fine. But the last time I had a salesman pressure me into something I didn't want, I seriously wanted to kick his ass from there to where he left his momma the day he was born... I'll leave it there without gettin more graphic.NWA wrote:That's not what Obamacare doesDrifter wrote:If you mean I don't want someone taking care of me against my will... yes I am.
Indeed. I want someone to vote for, not just someone to vote against.NWA wrote:Here, hear...Drifter wrote:If you mean I feel a thrill going up my leg about the potential candidates in the upcoming election... no I'm not.
On some level the mandate does make sense IF it's coupled with insurance companies being forced to offer plans to all, and not cut those who are too sick....
The idea is this:
A) Insurance companies want to insure HEALTHY people only, so they can make money
B) Govt. wants to force insurance companies to cover ANYONE, and not cancel policies of those who need it most
C) Insurance companies are afraid if they can't deny coverage, Healthy people will stay OFF insurance UNTIL they get sick, and then they'll sign up, and the Insurance companies will only have SICK people on their rolls, and they'll go out of business.
So if you want (B), it seems to make sense that (C) needs to coupled to that.... Of course there are still OTHER problems that then pop up like:
If everyone is forced to get coverage, how do you keep Insurance Companies from gouging the public by over-charging everybody. And the REAL culprit to the rising cost of Health Care is the Pharmaceutical Companies who make billions from new drugs, and then invest all that money into investigating drugs that will make them money, not necessarily those which address the most pressing Health needs. . . .
>sigh< How did we go off-topic from a Clown-subject to something serious like Health Care?!?
- Shockandawe
- Lux Vigilante
- Posts: 2182
- Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 1:33 am
- Location: In orbit around Kerbin.
- Drifter
- Semiholy Rambler
- Posts: 6770
- Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 5:06 pm
- Location: An undisclosed location... for reasons of security, and therefore... insecurity...
- Contact:
Let's just go back to a time when none of this was even feasible... Jerry Clower and The Pet Squirrel. Don't sell it short... the moral of the story has depth.n00less cluebie wrote:On some level the mandate does make sense IF it's coupled with insurance companies being forced to offer plans to all, and not cut those who are too sick....
If you didn't take the time to listen to the above cause you are too bullheaded, I'll just say this... if you think Obamacare has anything to do with health care, I'm sorry you have your head stuck so far somewhere dreaming of the utopian life, that I offended you. The heath care part of that law is just the pretty pretty wrapping paper on the outside of Pandora's Box. There ain't no free lunch, stop fooling yourself, do the damnass math. Look into Darwin's theory if nothing else.
When potential candidates are taking $10,000 bets like it's pocket change... something is really wrong on all our level. And it ain't a single party affliction.
- AquaRegia
- Lux Ambassador
- Posts: 3721
- Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2005 6:20 am
- Location: Lounging once more at the mods' retirement villa
- Contact:
The question NOBODY seems willing to even ask: can this country AFFORD quality health care for all? I'm not sure, but I'm afraid the answer is "NO".
If each and every individual does not make enough money to pay the high costs of modern technological medical care (and we clearly DON'T), then I don't see how we can COLLECTIVELY pay it, either. I'm a liberal democrat on most issues, but I fear single-payer health care in the the U.S. today is essentially wishing for 1 + 1 + 1 = 750. It doesn't add up, because we simply can't afford it no matter how we pool our pennies. Medical degrees and MRI machines are figgin' EXPENSIVE.
If each and every individual does not make enough money to pay the high costs of modern technological medical care (and we clearly DON'T), then I don't see how we can COLLECTIVELY pay it, either. I'm a liberal democrat on most issues, but I fear single-payer health care in the the U.S. today is essentially wishing for 1 + 1 + 1 = 750. It doesn't add up, because we simply can't afford it no matter how we pool our pennies. Medical degrees and MRI machines are figgin' EXPENSIVE.
-
- Luxer
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 1:43 am
That's absurd ...... then again I believe that most health care costs are artificially inflated.... that's what should be addressed IMHO.Lantern wrote:I don't know the cost of medical degrees but good MRI scanners run anywhere from 1million to 2 million.AquaRegia wrote:Medical degrees and MRI machines are figgin' EXPENSIVE.
- paranoiarodeo
- Semiholy Exile
- Posts: 10421
- Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 5:30 pm
- paranoiarodeo
- Semiholy Exile
- Posts: 10421
- Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 5:30 pm
Shame you edited your original post, 'cause I woulda respectfully fisked you. I will say this, though: Anyone who proclaims themselves a "Republican", then declares they're gonna vote for Obama in 2012, isn't a Republican, or conservative, or whatever. Sorry, dude, but I gotta question your understanding of history and politics after posting something like that. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever, and I think you're just trying to be a contrarian and stir up trouble. As for being trolled, you aren't, so maybe you should stop being so fucking defensive.
(New Weed, same as the old Weed?)
(New Weed, same as the old Weed?)
- NWA
- Luxer
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 4:30 pm
- Location: Norte, Weed, Arod. Now With Attitude!
Could you not have offered your response before griefing?paranoiarodeo wrote:Shame you edited your original post, 'cause I woulda respectfully fisked you. I will say this, though: Anyone who proclaims themselves a "Republican", then declares they're gonna vote for Obama in 2012, isn't a Republican, or conservative, or whatever. Sorry, dude, but I gotta question your understanding of history and politics after posting something like that. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever, and I think you're just trying to be a contrarian and stir up trouble. As for being trolled, you aren't, so maybe you should stop being so fucking defensive.
God forbid I enter a conversation I don't have much empirical knowledge on to get my thoughts some real criticism. If you were to have offered me some counterpoints before throwing up a snug one-liner--I even acknowledged that what I said was rudimentary--I wouldn't be at all pissed off.
Slightly more on-topic: I said I'd like to consider myself a Republican. I'm just going by the dictionary definition here, not what the party has become over recent history.
I certainly do plan to vote Democrat. I was just pointing out, with childlike innocence, that I think some ideas from both sides are right, and should be shared without either side declaring that it can't be so unless you're a flip-flopper. Leftists and rightists alike won't find any common ground, and it pisses me off as a voter who would like to see that actually happen.
I'd like to think not, but I'm obviously no fair judge. But you have a habit of bringing out the worst in me, which is sort of what trolling intends to do. Congratulations, you've succeeded.(New Weed, same as the old Weed?)
-
- Luxer
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 1:43 am
- Big Will E Style
- RAW Dogger
- Posts: 2943
- Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 1:28 am
- Location: Los Angeles, California
Ron Paul's lack of "charisma" isn't the problem... His views on foreign policy and certain social issues are in direct conflict with the views of the GOP base, unfortunately. And this person wouldn't be able to run independent, because as you know that would screw the pooch for everyone but Obama.
P.S.- But I support genetically engineering a super-human "Mitt Paul" hybrid. We would be unstoppable!!!
P.S.- But I support genetically engineering a super-human "Mitt Paul" hybrid. We would be unstoppable!!!
-
- Luxer
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 1:43 am
Ron Paul is one of the few candidate's in recent years that hasn't been bought, sold, packaged, and repackaged by major corporate backers, PAC's, etc.
That makes his message worth listening to IMHO. Ralph Nader is another that comes to mind..... whether or not they're electable (given US standards) is another issue entirely....
That makes his message worth listening to IMHO. Ralph Nader is another that comes to mind..... whether or not they're electable (given US standards) is another issue entirely....
- Big Will E Style
- RAW Dogger
- Posts: 2943
- Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 1:28 am
- Location: Los Angeles, California
-
- Luxer
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 1:43 am
Both Republicans and Democrats are for big government.... Democrats generally for increased domestic spending while Republicans love to fund great boondoggles such the "war on terror", "war on drugs", etc.
Both parties couldn't care less about civil liberties and generally look the other way while multi-nationals, banks, and other vampires bleed the US dry....
The lens through which we traditionally view politics need to be taken off.... don't vote for labels.... look at the money first and then try to see who profits from what policies......
Both parties couldn't care less about civil liberties and generally look the other way while multi-nationals, banks, and other vampires bleed the US dry....
The lens through which we traditionally view politics need to be taken off.... don't vote for labels.... look at the money first and then try to see who profits from what policies......
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 74 guests