- 312
- 10
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2008
It's funny how people are saying "if you don't like how the government is running things, then just leave." You guys were the same people crying when BUSH was in office.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Originally Posted by chozin87
I don't have an argument, keep worrying about all the problems holding you down.
Originally Posted by UTVOL23
Topherr,
If you want to become a physician dont let this discourage you. For theforeseeable future doctors will still do decent they may not do as wellas they have but will still be decently compensated. Also if your soulreason for going into medicine is money you are in a world of hurt. Acareer in medicine has some definite advantages to it including goodpay, job security but you truly have to love the field to make thosethings worth it. The journey is too long and demanding if you donttruly love what you are doing.
Probably the most arrogant thing in this thread.
SdotCAR619 wrote:
It's funny how people are saying "if you don't like how the government is running things, then just leave." You guys were the same people crying when BUSH was in office.
true..
I think the one difference may be one side hates the way a particular administration was running things, and one side hates the government running anything...
That one post about the guy going through his detailed day is priceless. Because the Conservative rant is government shouldn't be at all part of our life except for major things.. Health care is MAJOR. Also they ignore that government is the biggest part of our everyday life. Without government regulations, entitlements, funding, etc. is the reason we can live a free life without a heap of worry (for the most part) and the reason we even have a chance of making it through the day to day without dying (for the most part)...
My life under an involved government > My life under an uninvolved government... Need proof look at Somalia.. They are exactly what Conservative Utopians always cry about. (Everything Conservatives want they pretty much have)
Of course there is an extent to which government involvement should be stopped or not allowed.. Every liberal agrees with that.. but we are nowhere near that point, and even further away from "Destroying America"
"One Nation, Under god with LIBERTY and JUSTICE for ALL"
jus·tice[sup][/sup]â
ânoun
1. the quality of being just; righteousness, equitableness, or moral rightness: to uphold the justice of a cause.
2. rightfulness or lawfulness, as of a claim or title; justness of ground or reason: to complain with justice.
3. the moral principle determining just conduct.
Rest my case... That is as liberal and progressive as you can get...
[h2]lib·er·al[/h2]ââadjective
1.favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2.(often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3.of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4.favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5.favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6.of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7.free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
8.open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
So Burns you ask me what "Liberal, Socialist, or Progressive" thing has ever worked..
My answer AMERICA
So Burns you ask me what "Liberal, Socialist, or Progressive" thing has ever worked..
My answer AMERICA
[h1]14 states sue to block health care law[/h1]
By the CNN Wire Staff
March 23, 2010 7:46 p.m. EDT
(CNN) -- Officials from 14 states have gone to court to block the historic overhaul of the U.S. health care system that President Obama signed into law Tuesday, arguing the law's requirement that individuals buy health insurance violates the Constitution.
Thirteen of those officials filed suit in a federal court in Pensacola, Florida, minutes after Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The complaint calls the act an "unprecedented encroachment on the sovereignty of the states" and asks a judge to block its enforcement.
"The Constitution nowhere authorizes the United States to mandate, either directly or under threat of penalty, that all citizens and legal residents have qualifying health care coverage," the lawsuit states.
The case was filed by Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum and joined by 11 other Republican attorneys general, along with one Democrat. McCollum said the new law also forces states "to do things that are practically impossible to do as a practical matter, and forcing us to do it without giving any resources or money to do it."
McCollum's lawsuit was joined by his counterparts in Alabama, Colorado, Idaho, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota Texas, Utah and Washington. Virginia's attorney general, Ken Cuccinelli, filed a separate case in his state Tuesday afternoon.
All but one of those state officials, Louisiana's Buddy Caldwell, are Republicans. But McCollum said the case is not a partisan issue and predicted other Democrats would join the suit.
"It's a question for most of us in the states of the costs to our people and to the rights and the freedoms of the individual citizens in upholding our constitutional duties as attorneys general," he said.
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Monday that lawyers have advised the administration it would win the lawsuits. And Democratic Party spokesman Hari Sevugan called the lawsuit "a waste of state funds during the worst economic crisis in a generation."
"The American people don't want any more delay, obstruction or hypocrisy on this. They want thoughtfully implemented reform so that it works for all Americans," Sevugan said.
Renee Landers, a law professor at Suffolk University in Massachusetts, said the Constitution gives Congress broad power to regulate commerce and promote the general welfare of Americans.
"If the federal courts follow existing precedents of the United States Supreme Court, I don't think that the claims will be successful," Landers told CNN.
Ryan Wiggins, a spokesman for McCollum, said the case was filed in Pensacola because "we were told that out of all of the places to file in Florida, Pensacola would move the quickest on it."
At least one of the officials who signed onto the lawsuit has run into criticism back home. Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire, a Democrat, criticized Republican Attorney General Rob McKenna for joining the case and said she would actively oppose the suit.
Separately, legislatures in three dozen states are considering proposed legislation aimed at blocking elements of the health care bill. But Cal Jillson, a political science professor at Southern Methodist University in Texas, said the Constitution says laws passed by Congress trump state laws.
"We've got a very conservative Supreme Court, but they're not about to overturn 200 years of Constitutional history and interpretation and declare that the supremacy clause is no longer in effect," Jillson said.
via CNN
Originally Posted by superflyinchopstickninja
im not a fan of this bill. just makes things even more expensive when our economy is already suffering. sure id love to help people out, but only those who are already workin their butts off and still cant make it. its those lazy people who do nothing but reap the benefits of welfare programs that i cant stand. its a shame, but we cant just pick and choose they type of people we wanna help.
Originally Posted by Burns1923
Well, I'll put it this way: I think viewpoints from both sides have been stated and re-stated. It's clear that you're not interested in respecting anyone's beliefs or positions, and only interested in being combative for the sake of it.
Ok so I'll tell you a lil secret: I have no idea who this Saul Alinsky character is. Sorry to break it to you.Don't condescend to me. Typical Saul Alinsky-iteb.s. from you over and over: ridicule, attack, repeat. And as long asyou continue to view yourself as a victim, your life will go nowhere. Have fun being perpetually angry at someone. You know nothingof my background. Grow up - everyone that doesn't agree with speciallittle you isn't "wrong" or "bad" or "misinformed" or "uniformed" or"racist" or any other whiny adjective you want to puke out. Go crysomewhere else.
There you go, assuming you know things. Hey, bud, news flash: LIFEis unfair. All of us are on our own. God gave us a life and it's upto us to try to do something with it. I love playing basketball andwanted to play in the NBA when I was a kid. Guess what? I'm not goodenough to play professionally. I wasn't born with the talent to makeit. Am I whining about how the NBA and NCAA is riggest and bias andunfair? Nope. It is what it is. The guys who are there deserve to bethere because they maximized their talent by working their %*##* off. Like I said, if you're going to continue to be a whiny baby, you'llalways be playing catch up. No one owes me #$!+, and no one owes you#$!+.
I'm sorry you weren't good enough to play in the NBA. I'm sorry you weren't TALL enough, FAST enough, STRONG enough, and SKILLED enough with a basketball. Your inability to play a sport at the professional level boils down to your deficiency as a physical specimen. The requirements needed to play professionally are straight forward, and easily tested. You either have it or you don't. It's black and white--no grey area. The bias here is very justified. Now tell me, what are the black and white requirements needed to become "rich". What's this formula so I can try it myself?
Also, you not "whining" about the NBA and NCAA being rigged and being unfair is not because "it is what it is"--it's because there's really nothing YOU can "whine" about. You simply failed to measure up as a physical specimen, literally and figuratively speaking. Point blank. Had you been the tallest, and the fastest, and the strongest, and the most skilled candidate ever to set foot on an NBA/NCAA court during tryouts and you still got turned away, then you'd have something to whine about because clearly, there is some bias going on. But as previously stated, that is simply not the case. You're neither in the NBA nor the NCAA because, simply stated, you're a poor physical specimen relative to those that actually play at those levels.
people tend to have "extremely different personalities, gifts,talents, choices, surroundings" and all of that does "factor into whypeople's lives take the paths they do". But you'd be a fool to ignore the very real fact that certain populations have been historically victimized and said victimization has had a profound effect on the personalities, choices, surroundings, and "paths" of present day individuals that would belong to the historically victimized population. That's what you don't get and that's why I pity you.ANSWER: The "playing field" is uneven because lifeis uneven. People have extremely different personalities, gifts,talents, choices, surroundings. All of that and more factors into whypeople's lives take the paths they do. You can't ignore all of thisand say "Well, nobody's helping me, nobody's doing x or y for me,people are keeping me down." Contrary to your viewpoint, the majorityof Americans aren't a disenfranchised, oppressed victimhood. No one'slife is a cakewalk, no matter their race, age, gender, or location.
That's rich...
I specifically ask you why AMERICA as a nation, as the playing field, is uneven, and you give the most vague and illusive answer that can be given to such a question: "because life is unfair"...you're such a joke...
Yes,
Sure, no ones life is a "cake-walk"; but as previously mentioned, if you're an able-bodied, white, heterosexual, christian, male--then you can be rest assured that at the end of your walk, if you've done all that you were supposed to do, then you'll have the biggest cake waiting for you. The same cannot be said, however, if you fall outside of any one of those categories.
America is NOT a meritocracy. America is a democracy. The two are NOT the same thing.I'll go one further: NOTHING"guarantees" success, financial or otherwise. Your premise is wrong. By definition, America IS a meritocracy in structure but there is nocertain formula for achievement or success. True story: I busted my@%# in college. Did the work, made the grades, did what I could toprepare myself. Got out and boom - nothing. No job opportunities forme. Everyone wanted me to have some kind of extra "experience", alwaysvague and always elusive. It is only recently - many years after allthat - that I'm getting my sea legs in my career. Believe me - I wascompletely thrown off by the career delay. I blamed the university, Iblamed employers, I blamed others, I blamed myself. Bottom line isthat is just didn't work out. It sucked, but everyone's life sucksfrom time to time. The question is what do you do when those timescome? Point the finger or keep trying because there's nothing else youcan do. I opted for the latter. The former only destroys your life.
Though, I will say that in certain instances, like within a company, there are few instances of meritocracy. But that all disappears as you move higher within the company hierarchy.
Your "true story" brought tears to my eyes...really...it was a cool story...you should tell it again bro...
This country was constructed for the benefit and privilege of people that look like you (word to you being Irish); your inability to take advantage of that privilege is no concern and/or care of mine. I mean, are you like for real here?...
And of course you blamed the University, the employers, and others (first) before blaming yourself (second). After all, you've been raised to believe that good things would be waiting for you after "doing what you were supposed to do".
Perhaps, had been clued in on the fact that graduating college as best as you could was only a quarter of the battle, you may have been better prepared for the reality. BTW, an example of said reality is the fact that, in this economy, a black man with a college degree and no criminal record has about as much chance--if not less/lower--of landing a job as a white man who was recently released from jail.
So yeah, like I said, cool story bro. You almost sound like one of those people who complain about affirmative action...
No, you don't agree with my view on healthcare andcan't accept the fact that there are people who don't think like youwant them to, so you can't let it go and focus on living your ownlife. And, um... I do care about the financial well-being of myselfand my family. You hate the "rich" because they have what you and Idon't: financial freedom and power. I think I can get there and maybeI won't but I'll try. If I fail to reach a goal, I'll take fullresponsibility.
You're right, it does bother me that there are in fact people out there who find it bothersome and vexing that health care is now being made available to millions of Americans who were previously without.
One--I don't hate the rich.
Two-- don't be credulous enough to think and/or believe that we both desire the same things, i.e- financial freedom and power. I don't care much for "riches" and I have all the freedom and power I would ever need in my life, right now at this very moment.
If I could take a trip into American history to converse with ONE individual--it'd be Henry David Thoreau. That revelation should give you an idea of the type of individual I am, and quite possible, the intangible things that I value.
Enjoy your rat race.The thing is, nobody on earth is in aposition or is in authority to decide who is "privileged" and whoisn't. It's none of my business what people do in their lives. Ihandle mine. What it seems you're saying is that really there are 2entitled classes: an over-entitled class (who have wealth and success,which they inherently don't "deserve") and the under-entitled class(who have a severe lack of wealth and "deserve" more).
Andyou're misusing words there. "Sociological" pertains to sociology, thestudy of society. It can't be used to describe logic in society. And"logically sound on the grammatical level." Huh? Your idea
is logically sound on a system-of-inflection-and-syntax level?
Get your eraser and try that again.
I'm not personally deciding who has been privileged and who has not. History has already done that for me. I've merely recapitulated historical fact--that which concerns those dynamics that have existed between the various races, classes, and populations coinciding on/in this land known as the United States.
The truth, which is bitter medicine for you, is that the privileged and over-privileged have endured in this country, and continue to do so, only through the suffering, subjugation, and exploitation of an under-privileged class, race, and population. It's the gospel truth which you are willingly clueless of because you've purposely made it "none of [your] business...." Me, I am too much of a humanitarian to let ishhh like that slide by. Hopefully, you can find it in your heart to pardon me for caring so much...
Don't even attempt to school me on the English language bro'. I know more about this language than you do even though I am not a native speaker.... I didn't misuse any words, rather I played with them. There's a reason why there's a dash between "socio" and "logical" in the original context, and guess what--you apprehended that reason quite well, word to you understanding that I meant to describe logic in a society.
Also, grammar essentially refers to the rules governing language. If it's stated that something is over-privileged, then it's also implied/suggested that, correspondingly, something is under-privileged. But you know what though, I aint even mad that something like that would slip by you. After all, calling a carry on a ******ed kid while you're playing basketball with them is just not the right thing to do......so don't even worry about it.
what I would hope for is that, the greatlyand unfairly privileged realize and recognize those that are strugglingand at the other end of the spectrum. What I would hope for is that,people will realize that in order for the "UNDER-privileged" class toexist, there hasssssss to be a class that is correspondingly"OVER-privileged" to some kind of punishment and/or penalization.No. We live in a nation where bias exists,prejudice exists, and corruption exists., just as they do around theworld. These happen everywhere. If I may ask, are you black? I askbecause the answer may possibly clear your perspective up for me a bitmore. Regardless, life is tough all around. Plenty of people thinkthey have it the worst. It doesn't mean they aren't facing realchallenges but the answer to those problems isn't penalizing others whohave nothing to do with us.
Actually, I'm Scotch-Korean. I've stated that I am black in the past threads only because I wanted a free pass at voicing my opinion without having to hear something along the line of: "you're not even black so you wouldn't even know what it's like."
And this is why I think you're sad--the fact that you equate "
Making others aware does not = penalization.
Seeing life through a different set of eyes, an under-privileged one, is not a sentence or penalty. Please understand this. How can we hope for world peace, an end to starvation and poverty when y'all cant even bring y'all-selves to view life through the eyes of those that are afflicted. Likewise, how can we hope for equality on the religious, racial, gender, sexual-orientation sort if you cant even view life through the eyes of those who live that life without assuming it's some kind of penalty......but I guess I forgot that you could not care less about another, word to "It's none of my business what people do in their lives."
There is absolutely no way you canclaim with certainty that you love America more than myself or anyoneelse. Don't embarrass yourself. Like I said, the country will neverbe to your liking. The country will never guarantee you anythingbecause it's never guaranteed anyone anything. Again, life doesn'tguarantee anything. Not everybody is going to succeed. Some don'thave the talent, some don't have the will, some don't have theeducation. The stark reality is that life truly is every man forhimself.
You're right--I fibbed a little. I don't so much love America as I care, rather, about the people (and their social well-being) inside America. I'm with you that "not everyone is going to succeed". That said, I think it's totally wrong that a large percentage of those who will attain success, would've done so only because they had a head start in a race that effectively determines so much of your social and financial place/standing in life.
In other words, if you're going to have us all in a rat race, make it so that we all start at the same time, and at the same place. Make it so that I can go through this race without having to deal with obstacles that pertain directly to my race, gender, sexual-orientation, religion, and physical normality. This, especially when others are being allowed to progress in the race without having to deal with any of these obstacles.
...
Nope.Ok so I'll tell you a lil secret: I have no idea who this Saul Alinsky character is. Sorry to break it to you.
No? Look him up. Our president taught Alinsky's marxist philosophy in Chicago as a community organizer.
"Seventeen years later, another young honor student was offered a job as an organizer in Chicago. By then, Alinsky had died, but a group of his disciples hired Barack Obama, a 23-year-old Columbia University graduate, to organize black residents on the South Side, while learning and applying Alinsky's philosophy of street-level democracy."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/24/AR2007032401152.html
But none of that background or philosophy is informing anything he's doing in the White House. Surely not.
Actually, I know a lil something about your background...
Maybe the answer was too simple for you to grasp. Either that or else you simply don't live in mainstream reality. I'd place my bets on the latter.I specifically ask you why AMERICA as a nation, as the playing field, is uneven, and you give the most vague and illusive answer that can be given to such a question: "because life is unfair"...you're such a joke...
The "historical victimization.. of certain populations" you speak of is NOT the American experience at large. You're right, that has taken place. But to attempt to apply that to the masses is simply to create a population of victims who, rather than employ self-reliance first, would find it easier to sponge off of others, who have "too much" and must have it snatched out of their hands. I "get" it alright - you just refuse to let someone else's viewpoints simply be. That's what you don't get and that's why I pity you.Yes, people tend to have "extremely different personalities, gifts, talents, choices, surroundings" and all of that does "factor into why people's lives take the paths they do". But you'd be a fool to ignore the very real fact that certain populations have been historically victimized and said victimization has had a profound effect on the personalities, choices, surroundings, and "paths" of present day individuals. That's what you don't get and that's why I pity you.
I didn't attempt. You were schooled. Journalist here with eight years of experience.Don't even attempt to school me on the English language bro'. I know more about this language than you do. I didn't misuse any words, rather I played with them. There's a reason why there's a dash between socio and logical in the original context, and guess what--you apprehended that reason quite well, word to you understanding that I meant to describe logic in a society.
Originally Posted by davidisgodly
Could someone please explain to me, how we are going to spend 980 Billion on health care and somehow save money in the long run. Please explain this.... It really doesn't make sense.
Btw, I don't see why doctors would be bickering over this, they make more money now IMO
Always enjoy your viewpoints Rex. I agree with the growing gov't problem. It's a testament to the elite's grasp on gov't/corporate America and the vulnerability of the common people.Originally Posted by Rexanglorum
That is such a strawman, in the rhetoric of most "progressives" you would think any one who is opposed to the size, scope and nature government expansion is an anarchist. Virtually no one is calling for NO Government at all. The question is about to what degree and in what ways should government play a role and where and when should it not play a role.
Government does provide some real public goods, considering how much it gets in tax revenue, it had better. However, even when it does deliver its product is costly and/or of low quality and we see that in DMV's, the Post Office, the insolvency of entitlement programs and the dismal state of public education for far too many poor children.
There is also the fear that government is moving from an entity that redistributes some wealth, here and there, into a an entity that looking to create a majority voter bloc, that is united by dependence on gov't. Through welfare, through controlling student loans, through health care rationing, through its decision to keep adding more and more people to its tax payer funded payrolls, our government is becoming an entioty which will eventually cannibalize itself. The bigger it gets, the more it will smoother the private sector and eventually the private sector will be bled white and our fate will be insolvency, hyperinflation, loss of sovereignty, punishing taxation and a sudden end to entitlement benefits.
Health care in America needed fixing but this new legislation is primarily about control, the control that comes from, within a decade or so, allowing the Federal government access to all of our private medical information and control over who gets medical care and who does not. It is well known that people who criticize sitting presidents have been known to be repeated subject to "random audits" year after year. The ability to murder a political opponent while he is in the hospital is a powerful tool which will have a chilling effect on future criticisms of our so called "public servants."
Originally Posted by Burns1923
So Burns you ask me what "Liberal, Socialist, or Progressive" thing has ever worked..
My answer AMERICA
People are going to abuse it like everything else they abuse the govt helps with.
Post Office has a problem with their moneyOriginally Posted by Rexanglorum
the Post Office
basically, but insurance screws people regardless. hard to pick sides but I think reform would be the better of 2 evils.Originally Posted by ThunderChunk69
People are going to abuse it like everything else they abuse the govt helps with.
According to a Gallup/USA Today poll conducted the day after health care legislation passed the House of Representatives, 49 percent of the respondents think the passage of reform is a "good thing," compared to the 40 percent who think it is bad.
Originally Posted by Essential1
Conservative is is a political and social philosophy that holds that traditional institutions work best and that society should avoid radical change. Some conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability and continuity, while others oppose modernism and seek a return to the way things were..
America was a copy of early Roman governments but their tradition was British Government...
Soooooooooooo if American was a conservative idea it would have been under the form of British government....
Where as it wasn't even close.... It was of progressive ideas unheard of at the time, and seen as ridiculous by outsiders......
So maybe learn your history, and your meaning of words because you don't know what the hell you are talking about