OK Health Care Freedom Amendment, Sta...

OK Health Care Freedom Amendment, State Question 756

Created by CitizenTopix on Oct 11, 2010

1,569 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

Packing Heat

United States

#21285 Jun 16, 2012
Justaminute wrote:
<quoted text>
And with control of the High Court they will make the looting and destruction all nice and legal. It will take decades to undo, if it is even possible should Romney get in.

America cannot afford to allow Obama to trash our Constitution with another Liberal on the Supreme Court. When Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg downplayed the Constitution’s Importance, you could hear a Cricket scratch his balls a mile away from any Liberal. It is amazing how fast some liberal pundits like you can become Constitutional Originalists when it is convenient for you to distract from the real issues at hand yet ignore moron's like Ginsburg.

During an interview in Egypt, Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg responded to a question about "if the Egyptian people should look to the U.S. Constitution when attempting to draft their own":

You should certainly be aided by all the constitution-writing that has gone on since the end of World War II. I would not look to the US constitution, if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012. I might look at the constitution of South Africa. That was a deliberate attempt to have a fundamental instrument of government that embraced basic human rights, had an independent judiciary… It really is, I think, a great piece of work that was done. Much more recent than the US constitution – Canada has a Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It dates from 1982. You would almost certainly look at the European Convention on Human Rights. Yes, why not take advantage of what there is elsewhere in the world?

Ginsburg’s stance on the Constitution mirrors that of a recent article in the New York Times about its slipping status as an inspiration for more recent constitutions around the world. Obama demonstrates that everyday, you just deny it.
Packing Heat

United States

#21286 Jun 17, 2012
WMCOL, the last post is meant for you and not Justaminute. My bad.
Justaminute

Oklahoma City, OK

#21287 Jun 17, 2012
Who is Obama

Dusty is a troll.

Don't waste your time.

You can't be reasonable with the unreasonable.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#21288 Jun 17, 2012
Accomplished more good in his 47 years than all of the cops who beat him will in their combined lifetimes.

RIP Rodney.

Cops everywhere are tormented by their evil and by how it could not keep you down. You kept arising, but now they have finally gotten you, but your legacy of exposing corruption and pursuing justice outshines their evil of being judge, jury, and executioner.

Since: May 12

Tulsa, OK

#21289 Jun 17, 2012
Justaminute wrote:
Who is Obama
Dusty is a troll.
Don't waste your time.
You can't be reasonable with the unreasonable.
Well he may be a cranky old fart...but I still like him anyway.

I used to debate every morning with a business owner who is about Dusty's same age and temperment. My way or the highway type of guy, LoL! It wasn't a few times he jumped up and stormed out of his own office and took off down the road! The mayor who sit in on some of our arguements tried to talk us into doing a morning radio show but they would probably wind up bleeping out half the show because of profanity.

I value and consider all of your opinions.
Packing Heat

United States

#21291 Jun 17, 2012
WMCOL wrote:
Accomplished more good in his 47 years than all of the cops who beat him will in their combined lifetimes.
RIP Rodney.
Cops everywhere are tormented by their evil and by how it could not keep you down. You kept arising, but now they have finally gotten you, but your legacy of exposing corruption and pursuing justice outshines their evil of being judge, jury, and executioner.


Rodney King Drinking and Smoking Weed Before Drowning.
He was in the pool hiding from the cops,,, of course he was drunk and stoned, he was screaming because he thought there was 4 off duty LAPD Officers (all friends of Barack Obama) trying to drown him, imagine that.
Packing Heat

United States

#21292 Jun 17, 2012
Who Is Obama wrote:
<quoted text>
Well he may be a cranky old fart...but I still like him anyway.

I used to debate every morning with a business owner who is about Dusty's same age and temperment. My way or the highway type of guy, LoL! It wasn't a few times he jumped up and stormed out of his own office and took off down the road! The mayor who sit in on some of our arguements tried to talk us into doing a morning radio show but they would probably wind up bleeping out half the show because of profanity.

I value and consider all of your opinions.


I have to say I agree with you, he can be a cranky old fart sometimes and I suppose why it gets rather entertaining making sport of him from time to time. Not sure if you recall but when Dusty and WMCOL had drifted back to the thread recently I had made it as clear as I could to Dusty the ordeal between Justaminute and I was for entertainment purposes only. It was nowhere near any kind of debate so much as it was just slinging insults and party line bullshit to each other. I found it funny to watch her pound away at her keyboard with cheerful glee that she is absolutely sure Obama will be re-elected. To tell you the truth it doesn't make one bit of difference to me which one wins. They both are cheeks of the same ass connected to Bush Jr.

Dusty loves to attack me for the same reason he attacked you. When it finally became crystal clear you were not ready to commit to Obama after all the training he gave this thread then all that refused is now officially an extremist. For me, it is Obama's arrogance and not his ignorance that pushes me away from him. It is funny to watch Dusty explain away how Obama is now a changed man and has moved to the center as a moderate and away from his true colors as a leftwing hack and in the next breath trying to explain to you how Romney is just flip flopping. Fact is Obama will move where ever he has to so he can get re-elected then if he does it will be right back to ramming the most draconian bullshit imaginable down the throats of the unwilling if he has to do it by executive order. Well that is my opinion, I welcome yours.

I would like to hear more about the solutions you have discussed as I think if an effort was spent educating the general public that actually pay taxes in this country that most would agree our entitlements should be done as a handup and not a handout.
Packing Heat

United States

#21293 Jun 17, 2012
This is the video Rodney King should have watched from Chris Rock on,
"How not to get your ass kicked by the police."

Since: May 12

Tulsa, OK

#21294 Jun 17, 2012
Packing Heat wrote:
<quoted text>
I have to say I agree with you, he can be a cranky old fart sometimes and I suppose why it gets rather entertaining making sport of him from time to time. Not sure if you recall but when Dusty and WMCOL had drifted back to the thread recently I had made it as clear as I could to Dusty the ordeal between Justaminute and I was for entertainment purposes only. It was nowhere near any kind of debate so much as it was just slinging insults and party line bullshit to each other. I found it funny to watch her pound away at her keyboard with cheerful glee that she is absolutely sure Obama will be re-elected. To tell you the truth it doesn't make one bit of difference to me which one wins. I would like to hear more about the solutions you have discussed as I think if an effort was spent educating the general public that actually pay taxes in this country that most would agree our entitlements should be done as a handup and not a handout.
I know the mud slinging between you and Minute is just fun and games. It's a lot like the Ou Texas rants during football season. It's ok for us to fight among ourselves...but someone else comes along starting a fight we're one big team.

It reminds me of when we were kids playing football in a local vacant lot. It amazes me how well 15 to 20 kids aged 8 to 14 knew how to line up and execute some fairly complicated plays....when they could quit fighting. With no older person there to enforce the rules...it was run a play and argue for 15 minutes. Just like the dems and republicans today. There were never many fistfights though...maybe some pushing and shoving...but the argueing over who did what would reach such a feverish pitch it would be a disturbance to the neighborhood and the laws get called to break it up. Us kids were all buddies then...we were just playing officer... LoL! Or when the football gets stuck in a tree or in a neighbors fenced yard with a dog...we were all one team then...we all shared the same goal...get the football back.

We could learn a lot about politics just by watching a group of kids play backyard football supervised only by the rules they make as they go. Politics today is still in the argueing and fighting stage...approaching the pushing and shoving...and nobody is discussing the strategies for the next play...we're still fighting about the last one.

Most great presidents had a way of refereeing the two sides and getting them to work together and play the game more efficiently so progress is made. The football is our economy. It's in a neighbors yard with a bad dog while we fight over who threw it over there. Sooner or later we are going to have to work together on a stategy to get the football back... especially when that dog starts chewing on it. No game to fight over without a football.

So Heat, that's my football analogy of politics... LoL!
Packing Heat

United States

#21295 Jun 17, 2012
Who Is Obama wrote:
<quoted text>
I know the mud slinging between you and Minute is just fun and games. It's a lot like the Ou Texas rants during football season. It's ok for us to fight among ourselves...but someone else comes along starting a fight we're one big team.

It reminds me of when we were kids playing football in a local vacant lot. It amazes me how well 15 to 20 kids aged 8 to 14 knew how to line up and execute some fairly complicated plays....when they could quit fighting. With no older person there to enforce the rules...it was run a play and argue for 15 minutes. Just like the dems and republicans today. There were never many fistfights though...maybe some pushing and shoving...but the argueing over who did what would reach such a feverish pitch it would be a disturbance to the neighborhood and the laws get called to break it up. Us kids were all buddies then...we were just playing officer... LoL! Or when the football gets stuck in a tree or in a neighbors fenced yard with a dog...we were all one team then...we all shared the same goal...get the football back.

We could learn a lot about politics just by watching a group of kids play backyard football supervised only by the rules they make as they go. Politics today is still in the argueing and fighting stage...approaching the pushing and shoving...and nobody is discussing the strategies for the next play...we're still fighting about the last one.

Most great presidents had a way of refereeing the two sides and getting them to work together and play the game more efficiently so progress is made. The football is our economy. It's in a neighbors yard with a bad dog while we fight over who threw it over there. Sooner or later we are going to have to work together on a stategy to get the football back... especially when that dog starts chewing on it. No game to fight over without a football.

So Heat, that's my football analogy of politics... LoL!

Your "Football Analogy of Politics" explains it rather well and you're correct, sooner or later we have to go get the football because there is no game without it. I must say Obama has not shown me any good coaching skills worthy of note. Any hope of winning the game require the coach to get the whole team to work together to achieve the win.

I spent a good bit of the day reading the liberal sight you had posted for Dusty. Very interesting site as were the comments. I'll get back in there and read some more as time permits. It's unfortunate Topix doesn't operate that way. I admit I do as much as anyone with the mudslinging and partyline politics but it is all in fun. I have wondered how long it was going to take Dusty to go off like he did.

To me, that was so predictable but that is just who he is. I don't mean that in a bad way and actually like the old cranky shit. I think he just takes this forum to damn serious for his own good. Even if he could convince the entire cast here to vote for Obama would be as meaningful as putting a tablespoon of water in the ocean and expecting to affect its level. That's my Jaques Casteau Anology of his thinking, lol.

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#21296 Jun 17, 2012
"Mitt Romney would pursue some type of comprehensive, long-term reform to America's immigration system, the former Massachusetts governor and his supporters said on Sunday.

Republicans accused President Obama of playing politics on Friday when he announced that the government would no longer seek the deportation of immigrants who were illegally brought to the U.S. as children, under certain conditions.

"What I would do, is I’d make sure that by coming into office, I would work with Congress to put in place a long-term solution for the children of those that have come here illegally," Romney said Sunday on "Face the Nation.""

Criticize Obama for "playing politics" when in fact what Romney then says HE would do is..........uh something(let's not talk specifics, something will have to hold you).........work with congress (only if the Democrats don't stall you on every bill like the GOP does Obama. Which they will in retaliation, and wheels on the bus go round and round).........reform (There's a good GOP work. Means nothing. Never has).........long term (translation too complex to get at anytime soon, gotta study it for about 8 years....But that damn Obama is playing poltics. Not me. I wilk mumble and babble and say absolutely NOTHING.

What all this means is Romney has no solution. Doesn't care about illegals, not going to talk about illegals. I might not agree with Obama on illegals but he has deported more than Both Bushes and Reagan combined. That is better than nothing and nothing is what we're going to get from Romney.
TAMARA

Edmond, OK

#21297 Jun 18, 2012
Well Dusty I would say Obama forced Romney to come up with something on the illegal situation. Yes Romney was right this move by Obama was a political move.He wants to assure the extra voting thing. So I was running against Obama I would have to come up with a good move on this situation. That is what's called playing the game.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#21298 Jun 18, 2012
TAMARA wrote:
Well Dusty I would say Obama forced Romney to come up with something on the illegal situation. Yes Romney was right this move by Obama was a political move.He wants to assure the extra voting thing. So I was running against Obama I would have to come up with a good move on this situation. That is what's called playing the game.
==========

Doesn't matter what Romney is "forced" to do, the point was Romney accuses Obama of playing politics with immigration but then says he is not playing politics with the issue.

These folks running for elective office are politicians seeking a political job, and everything they do is politics.

The advantgage is to Obama for acting first, for leading on the issue.
TAMARA

Edmond, OK

#21299 Jun 18, 2012
WMCOL wrote:
<quoted text>
==========
Doesn't matter what Romney is "forced" to do, the point was Romney accuses Obama of playing politics with immigration but then says he is not playing politics with the issue.
These folks running for elective office are politicians seeking a political job, and everything they do is politics.
The advantgage is to Obama for acting first, for leading on the issue.
He making some happy but then again he has turned many off! I do agree this policy should have gone thru Congress and the House just not the President deciding this policy. Maybe it should have gone to the vote of the people! To many have their own view point about immigrants and more so them going thru the legal steps to be here,

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#21300 Jun 18, 2012
TAMARA wrote:
<quoted text>He making some happy but then again he has turned many off! I do agree this policy should have gone thru Congress and the House just not the President deciding this policy. Maybe it should have gone to the vote of the people! To many have their own view point about immigrants and more so them going thru the legal steps to be here,
==========

Executive Orders don't go through Congress. That's why they are Executive Orders.

As far as the people, they voted for Obama to lead as President, but just about all that Obama proposes is blocked by the opposition. The opposition even blocks their own long standing proposals when they think passing them may help Obama.

Not a single Republican has been willing to work with Obama on getting immigration reform.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#21301 Jun 18, 2012
DustyOutlaw wrote:
"Mitt Romney would pursue some type of comprehensive, long-term reform to America's immigration system, the former Massachusetts governor and his supporters said on Sunday.
Republicans accused President Obama of playing politics on Friday when he announced that the government would no longer seek the deportation of immigrants who were illegally brought to the U.S. as children, under certain conditions.
"What I would do, is I’d make sure that by coming into office, I would work with Congress to put in place a long-term solution for the children of those that have come here illegally," Romney said Sunday on "Face the Nation.""
Criticize Obama for "playing politics" when in fact what Romney then says HE would do is..........uh something(let's not talk specifics, something will have to hold you).........work with congress (only if the Democrats don't stall you on every bill like the GOP does Obama. Which they will in retaliation, and wheels on the bus go round and round).........reform (There's a good GOP work. Means nothing. Never has).........long term (translation too complex to get at anytime soon, gotta study it for about 8 years....But that damn Obama is playing poltics. Not me. I wilk mumble and babble and say absolutely NOTHING.
What all this means is Romney has no solution. Doesn't care about illegals, not going to talk about illegals. I might not agree with Obama on illegals but he has deported more than Both Bushes and Reagan combined. That is better than nothing and nothing is what we're going to get from Romney.
==========
"]"Mitt Romney would pursue some type of comprehensive, long-term reform to America's immigration system, the former Massachusetts governor and his supporters said on Sunday."

If that is so then what Obama did is exactly right for the interim until that "comprehensive, long-term reform" is a reality.
Packing Heat

United States

#21302 Jun 18, 2012
DustyOutlaw wrote:
<quoted text>
That is better than nothing and nothing is what we're going to get from Romney.


Actually Americans get much more with Romney than liberals say and here is why. Progressives realize Obama has been a complete failure and will be a complete failure again if he were to be re-elected. For Progressive Liberals there is much more at stake as I will lay out for all to read and evaluate from their own perpective and personal beliefs. Like it or not, all Americans are entitled to the truth, not just your biased truth but the whole truth.

Dusty, you speak many truths as anyone can read but and I too respect a lot of what you say but you are absolutely wrong in my opinion to think America can afford Obama for another 4 years. Free Entitlements for anyone including Corporations with nothing in return is why this nation is on the verge of bankruptcy.

Chief Justice Roberts conceded that the justices in the majority had much of the weight of modern history on their side.“Our precedents do not ask for much from government in this area,” he said, adding that “we give great leeway to taxing authorities in this area, for good and sufficient reasons. But every generation or so a case comes along when this court needs to say enough is enough, if the Equal Protection Clause is to retain any force in this context.”

So it is the next set of justices who will come to sit on the Court who will have the important say on this extreme Progressive Entitlement Movement. And who those justices will be is whats really at stake in the next presidential election. Four justices are in their 70s. The odds are someone will retire.

This is the new Liberal Progressives Agenda now according to Daily Kos:
"The re-election of President Obama is the most important progressive project in this election year. You don't have to love or even like what the president has accomplished in his first four years to understand this." so of course... if you are for free handouts of unfunded entitlements to all then of course Obama is your man.

Yuval Levin expressed the sentiment perfectly in a definitive essay for The Weekly Standard called “Our Age of Anxiety”: Romney’s challenge is to address the deep uneasiness in America and point the way to a comeback.
Read the entire story here:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/our-ag...
Packing Heat

United States

#21303 Jun 18, 2012
There is something very strange about the 2012 presidential race so far. The election comes at a time of extraordinary public unease, which clearly demands some response from the political system, and especially from the men running for the highest office in the land. But the two presidential candidates are both running campaigns oddly detached from what is rightly worrying voters.

If you were to judge the state of the country by listening only to the Obama campaign, you would conclude that we are on the verge of the long-awaited triumph of the liberal welfare state, and that all that stands in the way is a gang of retrograde Social Darwinists who somehow manage to be simultaneously nihilistic and theocratic. That band of reactionaries ran the economy into the ground for the sake of their wealthy patrons, and now they’re coming for our social programs and for women’s freedoms. Only if they are held off can the forward march of history proceed.

If you were to judge the state of the country by listening only to the Romney campaign, you would conclude that all was well in America until we took a wrong turn four years ago and elected a president hostile to freedom and prosperity. If we just correct that error and undo what he has done, our economy will be ready to bloom again.

But neither of these stories speaks to what actually seems to have voters uneasy. The persistently weak economy is at the core of that uneasiness: Thirty-five months after the recession technically ended, economic growth remains anemic, and unemployment remains very high. But Americans are nervous not only because the economy has yet to bounce back, but also because we have a sense that the economic order we knew in the second half of the 20th century may not be coming back at all—that we have entered a new era for which we have not been well prepared. To say that we are not, in fact, on the verge of the triumph of welfare-state liberalism is of course a gross understatement. We are, rather, on the cusp of the fiscal and institutional collapse of our welfare state, which threatens not only the future of government finances but also the future of American capitalism. But at the same time, American capitalism is not exactly ready to bloom once the shadow of Obama is lifted at last. While our welfare state has grown bloated and bankrupt, our economy has grown increasingly sclerotic—weighed down by a grossly inefficient public sector, the rise of crony capitalism, demographic changes transforming the workforce, and a general loss of focus on productivity and innovation. The American economy still has great stores of strength, but it is not well prepared to make the most of those strengths or to address its deficiencies as a global competitor.
Read the entire story here:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/our-ag...
Packing Heat

United States

#21304 Jun 18, 2012
This is not the fault of conservative plutocrats or of Barack Obama. It is not the fault of income inequality or of the Federal Reserve. It is the fault of our country’s failure to adequately modernize its governing institutions and its economy—its public sector and its private sector. This failure exposes us to a grave risk of stagnation, and, therefore, decline. And it is that risk, which we all have been sensing in our bones in recent years, that has Americans exceptionally anxious.

It is easy to see why President Obama would avoid taking up this challenge: As the incumbent, he bears responsibility for the fiscal disaster and poor economic performance of the past few years. Worse yet, the vision of the liberal welfare state is the very core of his own governing philosophy, and to acknowledge the failure of that vision and the end of the economic order in which it was dominant is to acknowledge that Obama has nothing constructive to offer. It is to confront directly the disastrous failure of his economic policies, and the dismal unpopularity of his signal domestic achievements. The president can only win reelection by changing the subject—by getting the public to ask questions to which his brand of liberalism might be an answer. And so he desperately seeks to tell a story in which income inequality is at the heart of our economic woes and our existing entitlement system is the key to prosperity and security—a story both internally incoherent and utterly detached from reality, and which could only be sustained by misdirection and distraction.

It is more difficult, however, to see why Mitt Romney would not be laying out the nature of America’s predicament before the public. He has begun to offer an agenda that speaks to some key elements of the predicament, but he has not made a coherent case for that agenda as a whole, and so ends up presenting voters with laundry lists of policy ideas wrapped in general criticisms of Obama. He has yet to state clearly the problem to which he offers up his economic policies as a solution.

The problem is that America is unprepared for the future, and Barack Obama is not so much the cause of that problem as the embodiment of it. He stands for what has gone wrong, and his ideological views, his party’s most powerful constituencies, and his policy commitments stand in the way of America’s future prosperity.

A proper understanding of the nature of that problem would not only help to show voters why Obama must be sent packing, but would also reinforce the case for Romney’s particular strengths in this unusual moment. The Romney campaign has yet to make an overarching case for the candidate. They would be wise to notice that a careful assessment of what America lacks as a new global economic order takes shape could add up to just such a case.
Read the entire story here:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/our-ag...
Packing Heat

United States

#21305 Jun 18, 2012
The Great Slowdown
The American public knows that the nation’s economic prospects are in exceptional peril. Huge majorities of voters say that this recovery feels like a recession, that the country is on the wrong track, and that their children’s economic prospects seem dimmer than their own. There is more going on than a cyclical downturn. There are many ways to describe what appears to be worrying these voters, but if we were to sum up the danger in one word it would be stagnation. After decades of galloping growth, America now faces the prospect of a harsh and sustained deceleration, and therefore of falling behind in the world economy.

In the 60 years following World War II, the American economy grew at an average rate of 3.4 percent per year—a truly astounding persistent pace of expansion. This growth brought with it sustained improvements in income and standards of living—improvements that we have come to regard not as miraculous advances but as the normal course of American life. Our sense of the nation’s overall standard of living takes such growth for granted, so that a period of significantly slower growth feels like a real step down. We have been living through such a period lately. Annual economic growth averaged 3.5 percent between 1960 and 1999, but only 1.7 percent between 2000 and 2009. In the Obama years, we have averaged 0.6 percent growth.

It will not be easy to regain our old trajectory. Economic growth is in essence a function of two factors—workforce expansion and productivity improvement—and the growth of the past half-century has involved both in roughly equal measure. As the population grew in the wake of the baby boom and women entered the workforce en masse, the American labor force grew by leaps and bounds, accounting for just under half the total economic growth in this period. Meanwhile, as new technologies and business-model innovations emerged in fierce succession, productivity gains accounted for the rest.

It is already perfectly clear that this balance of factors cannot be sustained. As the baby boomers retire and the proportion of women in the workforce plateaus, the growth of the labor force contributes less and less to the growth of the economy. In the past decade, productivity gains accounted for 80 percent of total economic growth, up from 53 percent in the 1990s and 47 percent in the 1980s, according to a recent study by McKinsey and Associates. The role of the labor force is diminishing quickly as the growth of that labor force slows. This suggests that economic growth in the coming decades will depend decisively on productivity growth. If we are to experience anything like the prosperity of the postwar era, our economy will need to be more productive than ever. Efficiency must be the watchword of our economic policy.
Read the entire story here:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/our-ag...

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.

Pauls Valley Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Doughnut shop in Davis May '15 Armando Dupri 6
News Michael Jackson's pets burnt alive in park fire Apr '15 L Ron Hubbard 2
News Date now set for murder trial (Nov '13) Apr '15 David Anderson 9
Girls Night in OKC Mar '15 Chris Dungan Elk ... 2
Fatality wreck couple of hours earlier today (Dec '14) Dec '14 Ranch dawg 1
Murray Co. deputy terminated for alleged violen... (Oct '11) Dec '14 thome mcmasters 42
Meth (Apr '14) Nov '14 bloodshart 5 2
More from around the web

Pauls Valley People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Pauls Valley Mortgages