T1B

The left has finally done it. Now if they don't like what you say - you're a racist.
Nothing new. I'm not concerned. I got my "Absolution From White Guilt" certificate years ago from the Black Avenger. Remember him? I should dig mine up, scan it, and post it here.

Relax Spray. We're white. It's pretty good work if you can get it. So good we have to actually search for things to offend us.

Steve Young is beyond a racist, he's a devout Mormon. He routinely retraces the Great Trek of the early Mormons across Utah, celebrating the sites where the natives were slaughtered with pride and Divine agency. As for Barry, he's not a dictator at all, but the duly elected president exercising his rightful powers of office. Boehner and his ilk are in fact quite criminal in their shameless beholding to their completely anti-American plutocratic agenda.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:Boehner and his ilk...

His ilk? You mean like Barry and Shillary?

Hey, I've never defended Barry, and in fact have called him out as a fraud from the beginning. But not at all what your wind-up GOP hatchet job is all about. I regard Barry as having betrayed the progressive agenda upon which he was duly elected. You're just some total whore for corporate "libertarianism" like the Kochs and the similar trans-national .01% Plus you're a total racist moron who can't sort out the issues at all.

Is that your Frenchie in your av spray?

At least it wasn't a negro... :wink:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... /21062089/

LTS TRN 2 wrote: As for Barry, he's not a dictator at all, but the duly elected president exercising his rightful powers of office.

The NY Times and plenty of liberals would disagree with you. They say he has over reached using executive actions and orders to avoid Congress. Look no further than the waivers he has granted on Obamacare.

In fact many would agree with Young on his Dictator line.

Left Seater wrote:

LTS TRN 2 wrote: As for Barry, he's not a dictator at all, but the duly elected president exercising his rightful powers of office.

The NY Times and plenty of liberals would disagree with you. They say he has over reached using executive actions and orders to avoid Congress. Look no further than the waivers he has granted on Obamacare.

In fact many would agree with Young on his Dictator line.

Oh yes, he has gone wwwwaaaaayyyyy overboard with the executive orders. In fact, he's issued more per year, on average, than any President since Grover Cleveland.

Oh wait. That's fewer.

Never mind.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php

Mikey wrote:
Oh yes, he has gone wwwwaaaaayyyyy overboard with the executive orders. In fact, he's issued more per year, on average, than any President since Grover Cleveland.

Oh wait. That's fewer.

Never mind.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php

Notice I said order and action. Obama is using other directives besides "executive orders" so he can fool simpletons like yourself and the media. It turns out he is no different than any other occupant of the White House. Sadly his use of executive power has been very far reaching. He has even used it to change his own signature law, which libs on this board have said was illegal.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/poli ... /20590037/

AS usual, you're confused, Fakeseater, as to just where Barry has betrayed his original progressive agenda. The use of executive orders is basically a response to the most obstructionist congress in history. But...why don't you take issue with his calling for a "fast-tracking" of the TPP agreement? This shameless corporate scheme makes NAFTA look like the Peace Corps. But..not a peep from you and the anti-Barry legions...Not a word.

Left Seater wrote:
Notice I said order and action. Obama is using other directives besides "executive orders" so he can fool simpletons like yourself and the media.

Yes, you are undoubtedly one sly, brilliant motherfucker. Most definitely head and shoulders above the rest of us, and especially all those brown people who don't live in your neighborhood.

Left Seater wrote:

It turns out he is no different than any other occupant of the White House.

Glad you can be so objective and non-partisan and stuff. Only I'll bet Dubya's 750 or so "signing statements" didn't bother you nearly so much.

Does that make you a racist?

Found this as a stop gap exoneration for all us White European folks. And it's not the numbers that are upsetting, it's the content of those actions/executive orders/pen strokes.
And yes even some of GWB's were out of line.

Mikey wrote:
Does that make you a racist?

I don't know and I don't care. The term is worthless today. It is so improperly overused that few outside the media take notice of it.

Is Jessie Jackson or Al Sharpton racist?

So the number of executive actions is now the measure of a president's executive overreach, Mikey? Not what those executive actions consist of? So by way of comparison, a person who murders one person is less guilty than someone who, say, jaywalks 50 times? The argument that Obama has not committed offenses against the Constitution because of the number of incidences of him using a semantically disingenuous term like "executive action" or "executive memorandum" versus executive orders is beyond silly, it's an affront to the very nature and purpose of the explicit separation of powers set out in our founding documents.

Being a Democratic Party homer is one thing, but being a member of a fawning party base actively and willfully supporting a supposedly intelligent constitutional scholar who is purposefully subverting that very Constitution is not just beyond the pale, it is positively Orwellian.

LTS TRN 2 wrote: The use of executive orders is basically a response to the most obstructionist congress in history.

He doesn't get that option, fuckpuddle. Congress has no duty or obligation to act on his agenda. If they "obstruct" his program, that is simply too fucking bad for him.

Okay, it's an obstructionist showdown which has resulted in the least productive congress in history. But...if you're really anti-Obama...and it would seem you are, then you should be vehemently opposing anything he proposes--especially something he really wants, right? And that should certainly be the case with his calling for a fast-tracking of the pending TPP agreement. But....since the same "free market" corporatists whom you dutifully support at every turn are also supporting this, then suddenly you're confused....and ...rather than actually think about anything remotely complex, you'll just shut your pie hole and continue to offer your Savage Nation bullet points. How pathetic.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:Okay, it's an obstructionist showdown which has resulted in the least productive congress in history.

You say that like its a bad thing.

But...if you're really anti-Obama...and it would seem you are, then you should be vehemently opposing anything he proposes--especially something he really wants, right?

Correct.

And that should certainly be the case with his calling for a fast-tracking of the pending TPP agreement.

And it is. I do not support free trade agreements in any way shape or form. His fast track authority and ratification appear to be a dead letter in Congress, so I'm not that worried about it at this point.

mvscal wrote:

LTS TRN 2 wrote:Okay, it's an obstructionist showdown which has resulted in the least productive congress in history.

You say that like its a bad thing.

yes, god forbid the legislature do anything like govern.....apparently the voters elected them to go and do nothing, and they're doing a bang up job of that.....

Felix wrote: yes, god forbid the legislature do anything like govern.....apparently the voters elected them to go and do nothing, and they're doing a bang up job of that.....

"That government is best which governs least."

--Henry David Thoreau

You, on the other hand, remain a pitiful, thumbsucking bed-wetter.

Typical simplistic "libertarian" marching orders. Consider that FDR and his massive governing--and expansion of government and its actual policies of investing in the nation--created the middle class. His approach resulted in the greatest increase in income, home ownership, and everything elsewe take for granted in America being a desirable place to live. In contrast, the smaller government--i.e., "privatized"--social model as launched by Reagan, and continued by the Bush (and Clinton) contagion have resulted in a dramatic decrease in income, and a decimated middle class. The similar movement to roll back corporate tax has quickly resulted in the biggest debt in known history. Your entire so-called philosophy is demented and utterly fraudulent.

I see "F" and you see "K". No wonder the world is screwed up.

mvscal wrote:"That government is best which governs least."

--Henry David Thoreau

Great quote and spot on. What is happening now is the antithesis of it.

mvscal wrote: "That government is best which governs least."

--Henry David Thoreau

well then you must be ecstatic with this new congress.....

When you demand your government "do something" you get programs Obamacare. The efficacy of Obamacare is best illustrated by the rollout, the falsehoods spoken by our president about keeping your doctors and healthcare plans, and the overbearing costs on that middle class LTS is so desirous of defending. Strange how that works... Thankyouverymuch, but I'll take a do-nothing government every time if this is what an active government produces.

Rooster wrote:When you demand your government "do something" you get programs Obamacare. The efficacy of Obamacare is best illustrated by the rollout, the falsehoods spoken by our president about keeping your doctors and healthcare plans, and the overbearing costs on that middle class LTS is so desirous of defending. Strange how that works... Thankyouverymuch, but I'll take a do-nothing government every time if this is what an active government produces.

if the republicans had opted to work with obama on it, do you think they could have made it a better law? probably, but the republicans were against it....they knew it was going to be enacted so rather than trying to help with it, they chose to sit back and bitch about it......by the way, I know a lot of people that have been helped by this law......

Felix wrote: if the republicans had opted to work with obama on it, do you think they could have made it a better law?

Not a chance. The only thing that can be done to improve it is to defeat it. It remains a catastrophically stupid idea which passed only through a level of deception and fraud that should be criminal. Anyone who voted for it or supported it in any way should be stood against a wall and shot.

And you can stop lying about knowing people who have been "helped" by this law. You don't.

mvscal wrote:

Felix wrote: if the republicans had opted to work with obama on it, do you think they could have made it a better law?

Not a chance. The only thing that can be done to improve it is to defeat it. It remains a catastrophically stupid idea which passed only through a level of deception and fraud that should be criminal. Anyone who voted for it or supported it in any way should be stood against a wall and shot.

And you can stop lying about knowing people who have been "helped" by this law. You don't.

Come on, now. He might have friends who work for Aetna.

mvscal wrote:
And you can stop lying about knowing people who have been "helped" by this law. You don't.

my brother in law who works construction and was paying his own insurance....his monthly cost went from about $800 to $350...the one thing I don't know is how the quality of care matches up.....
ironic thing, he used to forward me tons of shit that was anti-obama....haven't seen anything from him for a while.....

That the Republicans did or did not contribute to Obamacare is irrelevant in that the Democrats-- who are solely responsible for creating and implementing this disaster --chose to pass a law which nobody was allowed to read, much less ask for constructive assistance from the Right. Little things like insurance which carries across state lines, allowing employees who move on to other jobs to continue utilizing their former company's insurance plan, etc., you know, obvious things to improve the quality of health care across the board weren't put into Obamacare. It's not like the Republicans hadn't brought this up in the past, right? But, no, the reality is this was the intentional first step in a complete governmental takeover of the healthcare system with the ultimate goal of making it single payer, Europe-style.

Fortunately for the United States the whole thing has self-destructed just as predicted because the only two things Big Government does well is screw up and tax stuff.

So don't try to kid us that the Dems ever wanted input from the Right.

Rooster wrote:It's not like the Republicans hadn't brought this up in the past, right?

yeah the same ideas they rolled out 20 years ago when Clinton was proposing implementing a national health care plan.....the republicans aren't concerned about a government takeover of healthcare, they're afraid that it might work (like Social Security and Medicare both successful systems implemented by democrats) which would swing the political pendulum in the democrats favor.....the republicans sole political agenda is to defeat every proposal brought up by obama pure and simple.....they've become the party of obstruction because they are afraid that a democratic proposition might work which would in turn hurt them politically.....

Fortunately for the United States the whole thing has self-destructed just as predicted because the only two things Big Government does well is screw up and tax stuff.

so the healthcare plan established by obama no longer exists? wow, talk about breaking news....when did this happen?

So don't try to kid us that the Dems ever wanted input from the Right.

technically you're right I guess, because lock step republicans were told they were to oppose any healthcare plan that obama proposed at any cost.....their alternative? well, they don't have one but they acknowledge that something needs to be done.....so what they've done is asked republican governors what they should do....they've created an iphone app looking for ideas about healthcare reform.....look anything has to work better than what obama created doesn't it? what the republican leaders have essentially said is "we don't have any ideas, but we know whatever we come up with will work better than obama's plan"

look I'm no great fan of obama's but I think he's tried to implement something to help....is it a boondoggle-certainly, but any kind of reform like this would be whether it was implemented by a democrat or a republican......

but the whole obstructionism plan is what the republicans now call leadership.....

Felix wrote:look I'm no great fan of obama's but I think he's tried to implement something to help

Help who?

Felix, as noted by mvscal and Rooster, he's lied blatantly -----> directly to our face, over the course of the past number of years regarding Barrycare, and what he's lied about are things which are most definitely NOT helping us.

People don't lie to you when they are trying to help you.
This is most definitely no exception.

The bill was passed based on FRAUD.
If this FRAUD went on in the private sector, it would be prosecuted.

You saw all of Gruber's bullshit, right?

Do you really think these sociopaths are trying to help people like us??

haha

Felix wrote:the republicans sole political agenda is to defeat every proposal brought up by obama pure and simple

Really?

Did you happen to notice the recent 1+ trillion dollar CRomnibus bill that passed?
Among many other things, it funds Barry's illegal immigration executive order through next fall.
The bill does not cut Barrycare funding.

Wakey?

Felix wrote:my brother in law who works construction and was paying his own insurance....his monthly cost went from about $800 to $350...the one thing I don't know is how the quality of care matches up.....

If this is accurate, his deductible is no doubt obscene, Felix.
Use your own common sense, and in the new year, stop thinking any of the current turds in Washington are trying to help you or I.

Felix wrote:the whole obstructionism plan is what the republicans now call leadership.

That "plan" helped get them majorities (leadership) in both houses of Congress so I guess you could say that it worked.

poptart wrote: Help who?

poor people who can't afford insurance.....
you know, for a christer you sure seem to ignore a lot of what Jesus said.....

ever heard of Acts 20:35?
Matthew 25:35-40?
proverbs,
Luke
Galatians

all books of the bible that contain passages about helping the poorest people.....maybe you should refresh yourself on what god and christ said about helping others....I would think you more than almost anybody would see that obama is trying to help out the poorest of our people....

were there problems? sure there were.....did he blatantly lie? I don't think so, I simply think he didn't know exactly how this was all going to shake out....but at the very least he's trying to help the poorest people to afford health care.....are you so hardened in your heart that simply because some people take advantage of government programs that we should stop them completely?

that is fucking hardcore dude......

Help them with your own money, asshole.

No surprise, you sound like a bratty ten year-old. So...following your childish selfishness, you believe that because folks without jobs need food stamps, and returning damaged veterans need assistance, and the elderly require Social Security and Medicare, that surely you shouldn't pay a cent? Right? And further, because the same government that is charged to maintain these social programs is also charged with protecting the environment, well the EPA should be eliminated as well, right? And of course corporations should have the same rights as a person--and similarly should not pay taxes (not above the absolute minimum ) and...fuck it, let's just "privatize" everything! Highways, prisons, power plants, everything. Just an Ayn Rand wet dream of plutocratic entitlement.

As for the usual entrenched attacks on the National Healthcare Act, how come no one is pointing out or acknowledging that the entire program was hobbled from the start by the (forced) capitulation to the massive insurance lobby to not allow the U.S. government to competitively purchase drugs? Where is the proper vitriol at this shameless industry which has reaped unprecedented profits since the act was passed?

Surely the whole (phony) "libertarian" position is more than a simple racist fear? Or ...not...

LTS TRN 2 wrote:So...following your childish selfishness, you believe that because folks without jobs need food stamps, and returning damaged veterans need assistance, and the elderly require Social Security and Medicare, that surely you shouldn't pay a cent?

The care of disabled veterans is a contractual obligation.

To be perfectly frank, I could not give less of a fuck about the poor. The planet is overpopulated anyway, right? How does it make sense in any "sustainable environment" to enable hordes of unproductive eaters consume resources they could not otherwise procure for themselves? If the poor die in the gutter, I will happily chip in to have waste disposal remove their carcasses. That is an issue of general welfare and permissible by the Constitution. It is also cheap and sustainable.

...the same government that is charged to maintain these social programs is also charged with protecting the environment, well the EPA should be eliminated as well, right?

Charged by what authority? Certainly not the Constitution.

And of course corporations should have the same rights as a person--and similarly should not pay taxes (not above the absolute minimum )

We have the highest corporate income rate in the developed world, idiot.

Okay, so to be clear, your approach is basically Swift's without the sarcasm. Riiiight.. And I'm sure you'd find shoulder to shoulder solidarity with Herbert Backe and his "Hunger Plan." :wink: But as for questioning the government's constitutional authority and duty to protect the environment, it's simply the result of laws and agencies duly enacted by the congress. Are you suggesting the congress is not charged with seeking legislation to benefit the republic? Shouldn't the government do all it can to stay abreast of emerging technological threats to the environment--both potential and current? Surely the Founding Fathers hadn't envisioned giant coal sludge floods, or poisoned ground water from "fracking," or any such threats from all sorts of new industrial toxins. But...you're saying ..what? That there should be no agency with governmental authority to protect America's environment?

Your simplistic dodge on the Reagan ushered Biggest Debt In The Known Universe needs some details..http://www.ctj.org/hid_ent/part-2/part2-3.htm

The question remains...why do you suck the Koch brothers ball sack?

Felix wrote:did he blatantly lie? I don't think so, I simply think he didn't know exactly how this was all going to shake out

I can't imagine that an adult around the same age as I am honestly thinks this.

You watched Gruber, right?

They are not trying to help you and they are not trying to help the poor.
They are seeking to CONTROL.

And you flop down on your tummy and spread wide.

Truly pitiful.


If you want to pursue Biblical issues, please start a thread in the right forum.
I'll be glad to reply there.

Ok, Felix, I'll bite. So for argument's sake let's agree that those Republican ideas were put forward twenty years ago. You don't say whether or not you think those ideas have merit, but if I can infer that you believe that it is better to make into law a "boondoggle" as you say, than to incrementally improve healthcare by small changes like insurance that crosses state lines, then we have a problem. Why must there be wholesale and widespread change rather than tiny improvement to which you can tweak and adjust the result? If healthcare were a car, the Democrats would swap out the motor when the check engine light comes on. Small fixes are key. Now we have this bloated Rube Goldbergesque legislation that nearly every one of those lawmakers voted for ran away from during the midterms. That should tell you something. So, yes, while we can all find somebody who Obamacare helped-- if we look hard enough --there are myriads of people who the law has done nothing but injure their family budget and healthcare prospects because of reduced services.

There is really nothing you can say to refute this, Felix.