T1B

This is a serious question ...

How the fuck can American citizens be described as "infiltrating," "crashing," etc.???

As well, how the fuck can Democrats be crying that some of these protests are "manufactured" or complaining that they are "organized" when our President was a former "organizer" himself?

And, lastly, while Democrats are characterizing Republican protesters as violent mobs the only violence I am seeing is being perped by pro-Obamacare people and those wearing SEIU jackets.

Meanwhile, to those liberal tards here, how do you feel about the White House setting up a nice little email account so you can report us "fishy" opponents of Obamacare?

Today's left-wing meme: The opposition to Obamacare has nothing to do with health care. Nope, it's simply a reflection of Obamacare opponent's hatred of a black president.

Opposition to the plan has nothing to do with Obama and the Democrats out and out lying about it. Nope. Opponents just hate the black president.

Seems to me that the only people that have a problem with race these days are...~gasp~...liberal and progressive Democrats.

Shut up whitey.

Mikey wrote:Shut up whitey.

That's funny.

Interesting, too. Anyone read about the black conservative activist that was beat up by Obamacare supporters yesterday? One of this attackers was another black guy that hurled racial insults while attacking him.

But only conservatives are extremists, radical, violent mobs, right?

I wonder if Obama will divine from this yet another of his valuable "teaching moments"???

Here's something that's deliciously Orwellian...

Amazon sued over Kindle deletion of Orwell books

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... QD99PH1901

Let's see.

Most every Federal agency is riddled with inefficient processes and ineptitude.

So questioning how effective a Federal Healthcare program will be is "fishy" ?

Mikey wrote:Here's something that's deliciously Orwellian...

Amazon sued over Kindle deletion of Orwell books

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... QD99PH1901

gets a rack

JMak wrote:This is a serious question ...

How the fuck can American citizens be described as "infiltrating," "crashing," etc.???

As well, how the fuck can Democrats be crying that some of these protests are "manufactured" or complaining that they are "organized" when our President was a former "organizer" himself?

And, lastly, while Democrats are characterizing Republican protesters as violent mobs the only violence I am seeing is being perped by pro-Obamacare people and those wearing SEIU jackets.

Meanwhile, to those liberal tards here, how do you feel about the White House setting up a nice little email account so you can report us "fishy" opponents of Obamacare?

...Dennis Prager is right on!

JMak wrote:

Mikey wrote:Shut up whitey.

That's funny.

Interesting, too. Anyone read about the black conservative activist that was beat up by Obamacare supporters yesterday? One of this attackers was another black guy that hurled racial insults while attacking him.

But only conservatives are extremists, radical, violent mobs, right?

I wonder if Obama will divine from this yet another of his valuable "teaching moments"???

Yep. The Democrats just need to learn to shout louder.

I just sent them your name- hope you don't mind

Weasel, if you knew anything about George Orwell, you'd know he was completely opposed to precisely your style of squirming parsing of the language. We note that you offer only pissy attacks, for the most part on behalf of international corporations. Like Avi, you are the lowest of the low, a bitter little punk who is enraged at everything outside your caccoon of a demented Libertarian Survivalist agenda.

As for the organized fake protests against the efforts to actually reform the ludicrous health care system in this country, these are standard ops and have been for a long time. From the fake "insurrection" used to depose the secular Prime Minister of Iran in 1953, to fake hacks like you spouting your uninformed garbage on the net, it's nothing new.

Mikey wrote:Shut up whitey.

He has a point...if you are a white male, you are the devil, the anti Christ,the reason for global warming, the reason for everything wrong, so shut the fuck up and get ready to pay reparations.

If you are not a white male, then carry on.

Everything is going according to plan.

JMak wrote:Today's left-wing meme: The opposition to Obamacare has nothing to do with health care. Nope, it's simply a reflection of Obamacare opponent's hatred of a black president.

The DemocRAT playbook is like the old Miami Dolphin playbook of the early '70s.

Remember that?


- Hand off to Czonka

- Hand off to Kiik

And when they wanted to get freeeeeaky ...

- Pitch out to Morris




- Yeah, but Bush ...

- Yeah, but Cheney ...

- (freaky) You're a racist

poptart wrote:. . .

You believe in fairytales. You're not smart.

Q, West Coast Style wrote:

poptart wrote:. . .

You believe in fairytales. You're not smart.

Because he quotes the Bible ?

l to r: LTS TRN 2, LTS TRN 1

Not pictured: Sanity

poptart gets it

Yep, racktart

yeah why try to have any type of meaningful dialogue about the health care issue....better just to scream people down so that no one can get a word in edgewise

but here's your chance....lay out why you disagree with reformation of the health care plan in america and be specific

Felix wrote:but here's your chance....lay out why you disagree with reformation
of the health care plan in america and be be specific

Dearest Felix,

The U.S. Constitution (that'd be the LAW) does not grant the federal government the AUTHORITY to run national health care.

Read that again if you must.
Or 178 times-or-so ... until it sinks in.

That's all you need to know, but I'll elaborate just a wee bit.


Fed authority to run national health care is not given in the Constitution.

NOT GIVEN.

Then finally, in the 10th Amendment -- the LAST in the Bill of Rights -- it says, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The end.


Health care is something for the states or the people to handle.

Fed gov has ... NO authority ... to run national health care.

It is ... ummm ... ILLEGAL for the feds to run national health care.

Does your Constitutional Lawyer/"President"/Head Dipshit in Charge have a reading comprehension problemo?


Health care is not a right.

In point of fact, the Constitution does not grant any right to a citzen at all.

BEFORE the Constitution (Declaration of Independence) we find Who grants individual rights.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

So, the Constitution does not grant rights.
It assumes people have those rights from the Creator and establishes that government shall not take them away.

There are scant few things the feds DO have authority to do, and sure as you like to use a potato as a fleshlight, running Obumble Care ain't one of 'em.

No way, no how.



Bottom line -- Federal Gov run health care is against the law.

poptart wrote: Health care is not a right.

ding, ding, ding.... we have a winner.

War Wagon wrote:

poptart wrote: Health care is not a right.

ding, ding, ding.... we have a winner.

Of the Internet Dolt Award. Nice selective reading.

Again, poptard also posted where the Constitution says:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life,...."

How can you affirm the right to life while denying access to that which preserves it?

Diego in Seattle wrote: How can you affirm the right to life while denying access to that which preserves it?

Nice circular logical fallacy. By that rationale, everything should be a "right", including food and shelter.

Diego, you have the "right" to blow your brains out, just don't expect me to pay for the bullet.

War Wagon wrote:

Diego in Seattle wrote: How can you affirm the right to life while denying access to that which preserves it?

Nice circular logical fallacy. By that rationale, everything should be a "right", including food and shelter.

Ok then.....using your same rational the 2nd amendment provides the right to a single shot musket. When it comes to assault rifles there is no right.

Funny how you conservatives like to pick & choose which parts of the constitution you think are applicable.

Having the right to something does not mean anyone is obliged to buy it for you.

Everyone has the right to medical attention or most other services. This does not relieve them of the responsibility to pay for it.

Really simple. As for your 2nd amendment comparison, I will agree that the gubmint does not have the obligation to purchase your firearm. They simply have the obligation to see to it that no one else prevents you from purchasing it yourself.

See how fukking simple this is?

RACK smackoholic.


Diego, just go ahead and stay down for the count on this one. You're done.

poptart wrote: The U.S. Constitution (that'd be the LAW) does not grant the federal government the AUTHORITY to run national health care.

Read that again if you must.
Or 178 times-or-so ... until it sinks in.

Care to show me where in the Constitution the power that the DEA and the ATF and the FBI wield comes from?

DEA and ATF should be disbanned yesterday.

The FBI should exist, but, probably ought to butt out of a majority of what they stick their noses in.

Moving Sale wrote:

poptart wrote: The U.S. Constitution (that'd be the LAW) does not grant the federal government the AUTHORITY to run national health care.

Read that again if you must.
Or 178 times-or-so ... until it sinks in.

Care to show me where in the Constitution the power that the DEA and the ATF and the FBI wield comes from?

Lincoln did away with all that nonsense- after all, what's anybody going to do about it?

poptart wrote:

you might think it's s softball, but far from it.

The U.S. Constitution (that'd be the LAW) does not grant the federal government the AUTHORITY to run national health care.

so you'd just as soon leave it as the status quo? Uh by the way, Medicare and Medicaid are both government run health plans...of course there's no constitutional authority that grants them that, but where do you think we'd be without those programs?

Fed authority to run national health care is not given in the Constitution.

NOT GIVEN.

Then finally, in the 10th Amendment -- the LAST in the Bill of Rights -- it says, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The end.

there's a lot of things that aren't specifically written into the constitution-is there a constitutional mandate that the federal government is supposed to take care of our highways, how about our nation power grid--anything specifically in the constitution about that? How about telecommunications? The list goes on and on...but if you're okay with being butt jammed by the insurance companies, good for you....well not specifically you because your now Korean...how's the health care system over there work?

Health care is something for the states or the people to handle.

so what do you think they'll do in Cali-hand out chits for health care

Felix, the Constitution has been violated in many ways for a very long time.

Just get enough people in Washington to agree to do something and ... the LAW of the land be damned.

It's not new, this is true.


The Constitution does not give the feds the authority to run national health care.

So are you proposing a Constitutional Amendment?

Or are you proposing continuing anarchy on the part of politicians?


If you're proposing an amendment, I can hear ya out.

If you're proposing continuing anarchy, which I think you are, sorry, I'm not IN.

mvscal wrote:
We'd be a lot more prosperous.

so you're in favor of getting rid of Medicare and Medicaid?

what should we do with the retirement age people that rely on it for their health care?

Felix wrote:yeah why try to have any type of meaningful dialogue about the health care issue....better just to scream people down so that no one can get a word in edgewise

but here's your chance....lay out why you disagree with reformation of the health care plan in america and be specific

There is no meaningful dialogue, fool. Obama and the Dems were attempting to ram this through before the August recess before any dialogue.

As well, when we have these same legislators coming home now to lie straight up to us about what the proposals do and don't do (see Carnahan claiming this so-called reform will create $6 billion surpluses) when we know for a fact that they have not read them...well, a little outrage is reasonable.

What's not reasonable are SEIU thugs who are pro-Obamacare attacking Obamacare opponents and compounding that with racial slurs. I wonder where Obama is on this and when we'll have our next teaching moment...errr, my bad, it was a conservative black guy that was attacked by pro-Democrat union thugs that we really interested in what you called "dialogue." Fuck you and die, jagoff.

Felix wrote:so you'd just as soon leave it as the status quo? Uh by the way, Medicare and Medicaid are both government run health plans...of course there's no constitutional authority that grants them that, but where do you think we'd be without those programs?

Status quo is cheaper than Obamacare and doesn't require rationing like Obamacare does. But my reforms would include eliminating many of the nearly 1500 state and federal regulations that require insurers to include specific coverages in all plans no matter what the subscriber needs/wants, that prohibits out-state insurers from issuing insurance in a state, etc., That's just a start.

BTW - whatever happened to dissent being the highest form patriotism? That was the case when you were shouting "BusHitler."

Criticize Obama and his health care reform proposals and, according to Democratic leadership, you "un-American."

Additionally, whatever happened to community organizing being such a high calling? Organize now and you're a violent mob.

Felix wrote:but here's your chance....lay out why you disagree with reformation
of the health care plan in america and be be specific

The U.S. Constitution (that'd be the LAW) does not grant the federal government the AUTHORITY to run national health care.

Fed authority to run national health care is not given in the Constitution.

NOT GIVEN.

Then finally, in the 10th Amendment -- the LAST in the Bill of Rights -- it says, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The end.

Or run car companies, or banks, or other private institutions as they see fit.

JMak wrote:BTW - whatever happened to dissent being the highest form patriotism? That was the case when you were shouting "BusHitler."

Criticize Obama and his health care reform proposals and, according to Democratic leadership, you "un-American."

where the fuck are coming up with this shit? Go ahead, hook me up to any democrat that has said if you question Obama's health care plan your un-american....but you know, I can remember being called un-American plenty of times when I questioned the invasion of Iraq.....

and you might want to check out who is behind these "Community organizers"
pretty amazing stuff really

JMak wrote: Status quo doesn't require rationing.

Still lying out your ass, I see.

No surprises here.

mvscal wrote:
Absolutely.

A. It's blatantly unconstitutional.

B. I don't use it.

then by all means, I think you should write your senator a sternly worded letter telling them as much.....

Not my problem.

it will be eventually-maybe not you, but somebody you know.

People are free to solve their own personal problems on their own dime or not.

tell ya what there sport, develop yourself a case of spinal cancer and try and foot the bill on your own....guanfuckingtee you'll (speaking strictly in a general sense because you no doubt have military insurance or some such) be flat broke within a year

It isn't the role of government to solve all of your personal problems for you. If that's what you think, you should be stood against a wall and shot.

and you should learn some compassion for your fellow man, instead of being a fucking asshole all of your life....you've got no problem with us spending billions killing people that never did a fucking thing to us, but when it comes to taking care of the people that can't take care of themselves, that's where you draw the line? Dude, you've got some seriously fucked up priorities.....