Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#43036 May 5, 2014
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
"scary & sad" - the perfect description for the complete adherence to the party line of 98% of the Lefties on here. Those of us on the Right DO question the actions of the Republicans in power - we praise some actions and criticize others. We do not pretend they are the "be all and end all." What the Lefties do not realize is that they would enjoy so much more credibility if they would at least admit that many of Obama's actions do not pass the smell test.
The question of intent versus accident would be legitimate fodder for discussion, but when they blindly spout the party line and refuse to acknowledge reality - discussion is pointless. The only thing we can do is show time and again where they are factually inaccurate - and even when we do, they bury their heads in the sand and repeat what has been shown to be false.
I have tried to make this point numerous times to no avail. They simply WILL NOT admit that Obama has weaknesses. It's really sickening that a group of people can be that indoctrinated when CLEARLY there are problems with this administration.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#43037 May 5, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
The odds of you being correct about at least my position in either my High School, College, or post-graduate matriculation are not in your favor at all.
<quoted text>
You know, when I first started posting here years ago, I made it a point to never insult anyone at all and always be polite no matter what. After years of trying to talk to brain-washed poorly-mannered, low-lifes with no regard for facts or logic (certainly I don't mean all of the posters here..just the ones that fit the description).. and especially Bill in Dville, I may have loosened those standards a tiny bit.
Troll man isn't the least bit dumb. He's one of the few here that actually posts factual information along with his posts. He's just a little more direct than I am on occasion.
Your last three sentences are the funniest sentences of the YEAR. lol You are simply being diplomatic because he is a libroid. Nothing more. But good job anyway, CB.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#43038 May 5, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
So you would argue that the direct text from the legislation ISN"T the direct text from the legislation? How can you possibly say that makes any sense at all?
<quoted text>
I didn't back them up by posting a direct quote from the legislation, and showing that the report was written by the Cato Institute? I didn't show that Charles Kock founded the Cato Institute?
I did in fact do all of those things. That's a lot more than just "attacking the source". However, sources DO matter, don't they Aggie? Yes or no?
<quoted text>
Again, I did argue the points, as well as pointing out the source. The point was that you and your fellow whacko's indicated that IPAB was death panel and that it would limit care to individuals. I've proven beyond any reasonable doubt whatsover that IPAB is explicitly forbidden to do what you ( and the lying right-wing-press) accuse them of doing.
<quoted text>
Of course you are. There is nowhere left for you to go. It's checkmate. The matter has definitely been settled, hasn't it?
"A rose by any other name…"

The IPAB DOES have the power to cut reimbursement rates for procedures and services. Cut it low enough and no physician or hospital will offer those procedures or services - rationing without the stigma of rationing.
==========
And since you're still hung up on sources, here's a few for you.

Howard Dean: In a WSJ op-ed called the IPAB "essentially a health-care rationing body".
=======
And how about looking at one of (if not the primary) ACA architects himself - Ezekial Emanuel. He wrote in 2009 in The Lancet about a framework he termed The Complete Lives System - it basically looked at 5 factors in the "allocation" of medical services: youngest-first, prognosis, save the most lives, lottery, and instrumental value.

(But that "youngest first" isn't set in stone: "Consideration of the importance of complete lives also supports modifying the youngest-first principle by prioritising adolescents and young adults over infants. Adolescents have received substantial education and parental care, investments that will be wasted without a complete life. Infants, by contrast, have not yet received these investments."

"When implemented, the complete lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated."

Whatever else you want to call it - it comes down to rationing.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#43039 May 5, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
"The proposal shall not include any recommendation to ration health care, raise revenues or Medicare beneficiary premiums under section 1818, 1818A, or 1839, increase Medicare beneficiary cost sharing (including deductibles, coinsurance, and co-payments), or otherwise restrict benefits or modify eligibility criteria.
What you guys SAY is going to happen (which isn't), is specifically forbidden in the text of ObamaCare legislation itself.
But - Never miss a chance to believe a good Republican lie. I swear you Right-Wing-Whacko's are easy marks. You'll believe anything.
What you are saying remains to be seen. I heard Obama with my own ears say that perhaps you shouldn't have the surgery. Perhaps you should go home, make yourself comfortable and take a pill. YOU are continuing to stick your empty head in the sand. Ostrichbutt.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#43040 May 5, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
Your reply, quoted RIGHT ABOVE THESE WORDS quoted my post which had a link in it. A very informative one, I might add.
You've been proven wrong so much that you don't even CARE if you lie anymore.
Care to count NOW MANY TIMES I have asked you for a link and you've ignored the question? You aren't fooling anyone, CB. They all know you've not posted many links.
BTW, I posted RARELY, IF EVER. I KNOW whether you normally post links or not and you most certainly don't.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#43041 May 5, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
Obama's approval rating, with ObamaCare in place - 44%
Bush's approval rating, when people had no ObamaCare - 25%
There ya go Synergy.
And, here's a link, just for you. http://bit.ly/Q7T7vs
Stop making yourself look so foolish. Bush never claimed that HE was going to save the country. Bush never claimed that HE knew how to fix everything. Oh, wait! Bush ISN'T president. It's not lost on all of us that your ONLY DEFENSE is by living in the past.
Tell us how much the country LOVES Obamacare. How about THAT percentage? Remember, we were FORCED to sign up. Those who didn't are going to pay a fine. Nothing like being FORCED to sign up for something one doesn't want.
cp

Lilburn, GA

#43042 May 5, 2014
Here is some free advice. Take care of your health. Encourage your family and friends to do the same. The quality of health care is going to go down in a hurry. Doctors / Facilities will not stay in business without making a profit. I just hope they don't cut back on cleanliness and implement sterilization.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#43043 May 5, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
I DID post the approval rating that you have gone ON AND ON about for days..
Now, tell me more about how the big bad nasty DEATH PANEL is going to huff and puff and kill grandma.
Please?
Aggie described perfectly what was meant by that term.
BTW, you did NOT post Obamacare's approval rating. I didn't ask for Obama's JOB approval rating. I already know he is a loser on that issue. Perhaps you need some rest.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#43044 May 5, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you care if the number is 5.3 million or 8 million. Either way, it's helping people.
http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-stories.p...
Did YOU Synergy, have to sign up for ObamaCare, or did you have a private policy? Why all the hate for the program. You haven't ONCE given a valid, substantiated reason for you to viscerally hate it so much. I know why you do, but you probably have never even questioned it. It's because Fox and the right-wing media TOLD YOU WHAT TO THINK about it, and you've heard it SO much that you're brain-washed.
But you've never calmly sat down and said to yourself " let me learn the true facts and think this through."
I can turn that right back on you. YOU don't know if it's helping THAT many people. I know it has certainly HURT some people. I have the gold plan if you even know what that means. All YOU know is what MSNBC, Huffington Post, Mother Jones and Daily Kos tells you to think. You kill me thinking that YOU and YOUR left wing propaganda is beyond reproach. Until you admit that this administration has dropped the ball, your cred will suffer. THAT is a no brainer.
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#43045 May 5, 2014
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
"A rose by any other name…"
The IPAB DOES have the power to cut reimbursement rates for procedures and services. Cut it low enough and no physician or hospital will offer those procedures or services - rationing without the stigma of rationing.
==========
And since you're still hung up on sources, here's a few for you.
Howard Dean: In a WSJ op-ed called the IPAB "essentially a health-care rationing body".
=======
And how about looking at one of (if not the primary) ACA architects himself - Ezekial Emanuel. He wrote in 2009 in The Lancet about a framework he termed The Complete Lives System - it basically looked at 5 factors in the "allocation" of medical services: youngest-first, prognosis, save the most lives, lottery, and instrumental value.
(But that "youngest first" isn't set in stone: "Consideration of the importance of complete lives also supports modifying the youngest-first principle by prioritising adolescents and young adults over infants. Adolescents have received substantial education and parental care, investments that will be wasted without a complete life. Infants, by contrast, have not yet received these investments."
"When implemented, the complete lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated."
Whatever else you want to call it - it comes down to rationing.
Aggie, you're in "change the subject and deflect the conversation" OVERDRIVE right now.

When the text of the legislation says "IPAB SHALL NOT RATION CARE" , expressly making it illegal and forbidden to do so, you're not going to convince an impartial jury of reasonable citizens that the law gives IPAB the authority to ration care.

There's no defending the right-wing lie of "death panels". It is a blatant lie, and has been proven a blatant lie.

Why can't you accept reality? Do you just need a little time for the unflappable truth to sink in, or will you ignore and deny it yet again?

----------

And I really, at this moment, would like an explanation of the hypocrisy you put forth.

You're perfectly ok with a poorly informed neo-con whacko saying on a public forum that I'm anti-semetic, anti-women, and anit-christian, which is an unfounded blatant lie? Just because he parrots the opinions you also hear on the right-wing-propaganda outlets? But you're perfectly willing to throw the moral card down on somebody who disagrees with you?

Please provide justification for that bit of outright hypocrisy.
silverfox

Moultrie, GA

#43046 May 5, 2014
No meltdowns, that's hilarious. He's going all Ghandi on us. That's even more hilarious. Just avoiding evil, disgusting posters, plain & simple. He's sick & twisted, I don't allow that into my life. Now, carry on.:)

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#43047 May 5, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you care if the number is 5.3 million or 8 million. Either way, it's helping people.
http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-stories.p...
Did YOU Synergy, have to sign up for ObamaCare, or did you have a private policy? Why all the hate for the program. You haven't ONCE given a valid, substantiated reason for you to viscerally hate it so much. I know why you do, but you probably have never even questioned it. It's because Fox and the right-wing media TOLD YOU WHAT TO THINK about it, and you've heard it SO much that you're brain-washed.
But you've never calmly sat down and said to yourself " let me learn the true facts and think this through."
Your arrogance is disgusting to put it mildly. YOU have NO IDEA what I have and haven't done. You actually are delusional and narcissistic enough to think those who don't agree with you are simply ignorant. I PITY you and the TRULY ignorant people who are being led down the primrose path. They are being taken advantage of by a government that has no other motive but to make them MORE dependent on it. Hopefully, come November, some changes are going to take place and something will be done to stop the liberal destruction.
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#43048 May 5, 2014
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
Stop making yourself look so foolish. Bush never claimed that HE was going to save the country. Bush never claimed that HE knew how to fix everything. Oh, wait! Bush ISN'T president.
FOUR HUNDRED AND NINETY-TWO.

Yes, that's what I said. 492. Is that a good number or a bad number? Is it a big number or a small number?

You really don't know, do you?

And how can you? You have nothing to compare it to. I've provided a reference. Now we know that anything ABOVE 25% approval rating is in fact BETTER than the last Republican president the American public was foolish enough to allow into the oval office. TWICE.

AND - you in fact wanted to know if people were happy with Obama care. People who now have ObamaCare are in fact happier with their president, than the people who DIDN'T have Obamacare were with theirs.

I've answered your questions.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#43049 May 5, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
SilverFox. I'm just shaking my head at your absolute stupidity. It's beyond incredible.
To begin with, I did read your link. It is an OPINION piece written by Michael F. Cannon, and as you so gleefully noted, published in Forbes, which I previously pointed out was a very Right-Wing publication.
The first paragraph of the opinion piece says this:
<quoted text>
The actual legislation says this:
<quoted text>
So we're off to a bad start already. But we haven't EVEN YET BEGUN!!!!! But I'm going to keep this as short as possible.
Please look at the 24 page report the author links to to substantiate his claim that the IPAB will "ration care". Here is a direct link to the report, included for your convenience.
http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/p...
If I may direct you to page 24 of this report, and then ask you to scroll to the bottom of the page. You will notice the following text:
"PUBLISHED BY THE CATO INSTITUTE".
The Cato Institute, if I may refresh your memory, is an American libertarian think tank headquartered in Washington, D.C. It was founded as the Charles Koch Foundation in 1974 by Ed Crane, Murray Rothbard, and Charles Koch,[6] chairman of the board and chief executive officer of the conglomerate Koch Industries.
Now Charles and David Koch are amongst the biggest polluters in the world. They do NOT want any restrictions and greenhouse gasses, as that would hurt their business by billions of dollars. They also want the Keystone Pipeline not to go through, as they stand to make as much as 100 BILLION DOLLARS from it.
So we have motive for them to want to get rid of a political party and specifically a president that would like to do the smart thing and kill the Keystone Pipeline and work towards green-energy technology. A LOT of motive.
So they are feeding the right wing propaganda machine, trying to make the Democrats and specifically Obama look bad by any means possible, including publishing fake reports through the Cato Institute and other institutes they control, which then feeds the right-wing press, and finally gets posted as a link by a poor gullible stupid sap like you, Mr. SilverFox.
<quoted text>
Perhaps your smug attitude wasn't justified, Mr. SilverFox, now that I've proven you wrong AGAIN?
However, I'm a gracious man. All will be forgiven if you apologize and quit being a dumbass.
Just curious. WHOM do you think will enforce that law? Let's say you have the best Obamacare plan offered and you are turned down for a procedure. My guess is you won't be given a REASON. You'll just be denied. Okay. So, YOU determine that you have been denied care due to your age, illness or whatever. WHO is going to enforce the law that says you haven't been treated correctly? Are you going to have to HIRE a lawyer to point that out because more than likely YOU won't be able to accomplish that yourself. Let's say even the doctor goes to bat for you and you are STILL denied. What then? See! YOU can't answer that. You can spin that, but you really can't answer it. This is something NONE of us REALLY know at this point. You won't admit it, but it's true.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#43050 May 5, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
Correction to my previous post -
Now Charles and David Koch are amongst the biggest polluters in the world. They do NOT want any restrictions ON greenhouse gasses, as that would hurt their business by billions of dollars. They also want the Keystone Pipeline TO go through, as they stand to make as much as 100 BILLION DOLLARS from it, according to many estimates.
OMG! The Koch brothers AGAIN. I'm living with Obama. You'll just have to live with the Koch brothers.
silverfox

Moultrie, GA

#43051 May 5, 2014
cp wrote:
Here is some free advice. Take care of your health. Encourage your family and friends to do the same. The quality of health care is going to go down in a hurry. Doctors / Facilities will not stay in business without making a profit. I just hope they don't cut back on cleanliness and implement sterilization.
Just look at the MRSA rates, noscomial infection rates have skyrocketed. Hospitals are germy, nasty places. That'll make you want to stay healthy, out of hospitals & clinics. I'm all about cleanliness & good health, exactly why I can't handle germs & toxins coming from certain posters. I dont want the exposure. LOL

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#43052 May 5, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
Aggie, you're in "change the subject and deflect the conversation" OVERDRIVE right now.
When the text of the legislation says "IPAB SHALL NOT RATION CARE" , expressly making it illegal and forbidden to do so, you're not going to convince an impartial jury of reasonable citizens that the law gives IPAB the authority to ration care.
There's no defending the right-wing lie of "death panels". It is a blatant lie, and has been proven a blatant lie.
Why can't you accept reality? Do you just need a little time for the unflappable truth to sink in, or will you ignore and deny it yet again?
----------
And I really, at this moment, would like an explanation of the hypocrisy you put forth.
You're perfectly ok with a poorly informed neo-con whacko saying on a public forum that I'm anti-semetic, anti-women, and anit-christian, which is an unfounded blatant lie? Just because he parrots the opinions you also hear on the right-wing-propaganda outlets? But you're perfectly willing to throw the moral card down on somebody who disagrees with you?
Please provide justification for that bit of outright hypocrisy.
1. There is no changing the subject going on, you are simply ignoring what you do not what to acknowledge. Sorry, but truth is truth whether YOU like it or not. You are pinning all your arguments on the literal terms "death panels" and "rationing" - I have shown you that rationing can be achieved without EVER using the word. Are you suddenly going to try to say that Howard Dean is "a right wing whacko?"

2. You questioned my being a "good Christian" (which I never called myself) and claimed I "hate all humanity" - I'll leave you to fight your own battles.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#43053 May 5, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you care if the number is 5.3 million or 8 million. Either way, it's helping people.
http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-stories.p...
Did YOU Synergy, have to sign up for ObamaCare, or did you have a private policy? Why all the hate for the program. You haven't ONCE given a valid, substantiated reason for you to viscerally hate it so much. I know why you do, but you probably have never even questioned it. It's because Fox and the right-wing media TOLD YOU WHAT TO THINK about it, and you've heard it SO much that you're brain-washed.
But you've never calmly sat down and said to yourself " let me learn the true facts and think this through."
Would you like for me to post a link(s) to Obamacare HORROR stories? See how stupid this is? Why didn't Mr. Wonderful just fix what was actually BROKEN instead of wrecking everything and lying out of his tail? He ended up with PLENTY of egg on his face. GOOD!

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#43054 May 5, 2014
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
FOUR HUNDRED AND NINETY-TWO.
Yes, that's what I said. 492. Is that a good number or a bad number? Is it a big number or a small number?
You really don't know, do you?
And how can you? You have nothing to compare it to. I've provided a reference. Now we know that anything ABOVE 25% approval rating is in fact BETTER than the last Republican president the American public was foolish enough to allow into the oval office. TWICE.
AND - you in fact wanted to know if people were happy with Obama care. People who now have ObamaCare are in fact happier with their president, than the people who DIDN'T have Obamacare were with theirs.
I've answered your questions.
Do you think the people who HAD insurance are happier now that their polices were canceled - thanks to Obamacare?

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#43055 May 5, 2014
General Robert E Lee wrote:
<quoted text>
You do realize that so many of these sign ups were people who once had a plan and a doctor that they liked, but had that coverage yanked out from underneath them and were forced to sign up for the ACA. You do realize that the ACA will not increase or decrease the number of insured. You do realize that for most, costs have gone up for less coverage.
Yes, he realizes that. His left wing programming won't let him admit it. Left wingers NEVER admit they are wrong. They had rather the country implode than admit a mistake and try to correct it. They really are a mentally ill bunch.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Brunswick Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Anti-Gay Pastor Found Guilty Of Molesting Teena... Apr 17 Here is what I 7
What McIntosh/Darien does not want you to know (May '13) Apr 14 Showtime 35
Speed Trap along the I-95 corridor in Mcintosh ... (Nov '15) Apr 14 Showtime 32
News Melvin Shares Life Story in Young Stranger Apr 12 Greg B 1
Creative Landscaping Mar 31 Stole from me 1
Part 12 Guy Heinze Jr. (May '10) Mar 28 Meme 1,227
ex sheriff bennett Mar 28 in the know 1

Brunswick Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Brunswick Mortgages