Joe Schmoe

Utica, NY

#244 Oct 4, 2013
Truth Dig wrote:
<quoted text>
You're the same moron no matter what the name. Again, I am not Gleck. Only a f.cking whack job would create another screen name to agree with him on some anonymous forum. Who gives a f.ck? If I was worried about people agreeing with me here, I would be spewing the imbecilic tea party lunacy.
Good grief. I hope you're not a detective.
Any reason we should believe you're not a whack job then?

Level 7

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#245 Oct 4, 2013
Ben Gleck wrote:
<quoted text>When were people not dying? Please tell us again how you would handle al Qaida terrorists. You did say that you would favor invading countries. As I stated from the beginning these drone strikes are a very dangerous, slippery slope. And innocent civilians have been killed. All my friends are opposed to the drone strikes. Except the one's who have actually experienced war first hand. It seems to me that presidents are often given no good choices, only bad choices, horrible choices, and unspeakably horrible choices. I think the drones are the lesser of evil. So untill someone can give me a more viable solution, yes I support it. BTW why don't you read the article. Take a break from the right wing echo chamber you're obviously living in. You just might learn somrething.
I hear where you're coming from Gleck. I certainly empathize with the point that rather than having kids invade and occupy half the world for decades, drones are a preferable option. And I certainly understand that coming from you given your service. Me, I never served, although I guess technically I still have a few years where I could, I doubt it'll happen. We don't listen enough to guys who have actually served when it comes to these issues.

Killing Awlaki and his teenage son, both American citizens, is what really convinced me on the issue. And I worry about us getting carried away with the program to the extent that we end up doing more harm than good. But I certainly understand and respect your point of view here.
Here 24 7

Utica, NY

#246 Oct 4, 2013
Truth Dig wrote:
<quoted text>
I hear where you're coming from Gleck. I certainly empathize with the point that rather than having kids invade and occupy half the world for decades, drones are a preferable option. And I certainly understand that coming from you given your service. Me, I never served, although I guess technically I still have a few years where I could, I doubt it'll happen. We don't listen enough to guys who have actually served when it comes to these issues.
Killing Awlaki and his teenage son, both American citizens, is what really convinced me on the issue. And I worry about us getting carried away with the program to the extent that we end up doing more harm than good. But I certainly understand and respect your point of view here.
Are you seriously conversing with yourself here?

Level 7

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#247 Oct 4, 2013
Da Law wrote:
<quoted text>
That's really not as odd as it sounds.
<quoted text>
I couldn't agree more. Part of the problem with this issue, and a lot of others, is that the leadership of both parties relies on the lever of tribalism to incrementally push the limits of what the government is allowed to do. Team Red is in power, so the bar for what's allowable surveillance gets pushed up a little bit more. And then Team Blue comes into power after excoriating that policy...and not only doesn't repeal it, but pushes it just a little bit further.
Lather. Rinse. Repeat. Ad infinitum. Next thing you know every single phone call and email is being monitored, and the laws controlling the practice are themselves secret.
<quoted text>
In all seriousness, thanks for writing this.
Something that gets frequently lost in political discussions is that everyone involved genuinely wants what's best. And while it's fun to be snarky, and I'm obviously as guilty of that as anyone else, a lot more can be accomplished by stepping back and assuming good will on the part of those that disagree with you.
One of the things I dislike about Obamacare is that it's such a missed opportunity. Seriously, who doesn't support quality health care for everyone? But I think the secret to solving that problem is making it cheap. We still haven't done anything about equalizing healthcare supply with demand.
I could have gotten behind a "medical Manhattan project" that emphasized a massive increase in the number of doctors, an open source formulary for medicine, and research into miniaturizing diagnostic and treatment tools. Heck, we've had experimental computerized expert systems that can do a complete diagnostic and treatment program for years. Just imagine what could be possible if systems like that could fit on a desktop.
But, sadly, that was not to be, and we've ended up with a system that no one really likes all that much, as opposed to the old system that no one really liked all that much.
I hate to get carried away, but I agree with much, if not everything, written here. I have defended the ACA in certain respects, especially in the context of the government shutdown, but I was not a huge fan of the bill when enacted. I applaud certain aspects of the bill and the goal of expanding coverage, but certainly empathize with opposition to the individual mandate.

Obama is a slightly left-of-center conformist. That's why he would never embrace the things you mention above- they are proposals too unsettling to the status quo. His reforms, far from being radical, were modest changes within the existing system. Expanding the rolls of private health insurance companies (and their profits) while strengthening their role in the system, in exchange for eliminating pre-existing conditions exclusions and certain objectionable underwriting practices, etc. Paying for the law with modest tax increases AND cuts to Medicare. It's Mitt Romney's health care law for God's sake.

Oh, some people deserve snark, and lot worse.

Level 7

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#248 Oct 4, 2013
Here 24 7 wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you seriously conversing with yourself here?
No dummy. We are 2 different people dipshit.

And please stop stalking me, you f.cking weirdo.

Yikes.
Here 24 7

Utica, NY

#249 Oct 5, 2013
Truth Dig wrote:
<quoted text>
No dummy. We are 2 different people dipshit.
And please stop stalking me, you f.cking weirdo.
Yikes.
Whoa, back away from the coffee and keyboard. You've had too much of both baby! I'm not a weirdo at all. If you could only know3 me you'd realize how far from accurate you are. I am such a unique person.
wow

Utica, NY

#250 Oct 6, 2013
John Boehner wants to renegociate legislation already passed by his House of Representatives and signed into law by the president. If Boehner had done his job initially the US would not be shut down today.
Loonie Dems

United States

#251 Oct 6, 2013
Try as they may they just can't get around the fact that the word is out the democrat liberals are full blow lunatics and the truth is easy for all to see.
Loonie Dems

United States

#252 Oct 6, 2013
Here 24 7 wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you seriously conversing with yourself here?
Yes. Yes he is!
wow

Utica, NY

#253 Oct 6, 2013
Loonie Dems wrote:
Try as they may they just can't get around the fact that the word is out the democrat liberals are full blow lunatics and the truth is easy for all to see.
It is so sad to see your level of stupidity in someone with the power to vote.
Imagine that

Utica, NY

#254 Oct 7, 2013
Obama’s response to shutdown is just ‘shut up’.

Polls show Americans are worried about the implementation of Obamacare — worried about keeping their current health insurance plans, the new law itself, the exchanges, potential fines, personal privacy, keeping their jobs, their work hours and a host of other issues too numerous to list here. Both the country and the Congress have much to discuss.

Right now, though, President Obama refuses to engage in any debate or discussion. The president is demanding that he get 100 percent of what he wants, and if he doesn’t, he and his Democratic allies in the Senate will keep the government shuttered.(Imagine that)

Republicans have offered compromises that might stop or dull some of the negative effects of Obamacare but that would also pass a budget and keep the government functioning. Still, Mr. Obama refuses to budge. He will not even consider compromise.(Imagine that)

Republicans are told that the law has already passed and that we’re being obstructionists for attempting to question or modify it. However, since when in this country after a law is passed is it eternally set in stone? When has it ever been true that Congress cannot look at and alter or improve existing law?-Paul Wash.Times OpEd
John Boehner

Utica, NY

#255 Oct 7, 2013
I'm gonna take my ball and go home.

Level 6

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#256 Oct 7, 2013
cormac wrote:
Justice,
You are so bad at this sock puppetry that just reading your posts makes me sense a certain desperation.
Firstly you refer to "...(T)he republicans" and then refer to "we...". Also no Republican that was conservative would ever use the term "teabaggers". No you are just another sock puppet that is increasingly showing its wear.
After that you just assert talking points that are threadbare nonsense that you have picked up from listening to too much MSM and lefty sites. You are calling for the Republican party to become more like the Democrats so as to not scare those "independents" away with all that icky liberty nonsense.
I've have always been an "independent" and I'm not trembling with fear at the thought of a more conservative Republican party.
And the thought that Mitt Romney is some sort of raging right winger is down right laughable. How stupid do you think everyone is?
No I'm afraid that you are a pathetic sock puppeteer. Perhaps you should roll up all those other socks, put them away in your sock drawer and try using one name and take the intellectual beating that "da law" has put upon you like a man.
The reason I refer to “Republicans” and also “we” is because I am a republican. I have always voted for republican and conservative candidates. I also believe that the shift to the right that is the direct result of the Tea-Party movement is destroying my party. The Republicans have been losing support since the beginning of Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, Tea Party movement. This philosophical shift has alienated all but the most conservative members of the party. It may make you happy that this has made the Republican Party more to your liking but it has caused many to abandon the party. The thing you need to understand is that we cannot win a nationwide election unless we attract more voters. We are also in danger of losing more ground in the House and Senate if we continue down the path we are on. We lost the last presidential election because we were TOO conservative. Our strategy since then has been to get MORE conservative. That doesn’t make sense. Can you honestly tell me that this government shutdown is making us look good? Do you really think we are winning the budget battle in Washington? You can put the blame on the democrats, the media or whoever else you think is at fault, but the truth is we are losing. Until and unless we change our tactics we will continue to suffer in the polls and the voting booth.
Ben Gleck

Utica, NY

#257 Oct 7, 2013
JusticeDefiled13501 wrote:
<quoted text>
The reason I refer to “Republicans” and also “we” is because I am a republican. I have always voted for republican and conservative candidates. I also believe that the shift to the right that is the direct result of the Tea-Party movement is destroying my party. The Republicans have been losing support since the beginning of Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, Tea Party movement. This philosophical shift has alienated all but the most conservative members of the party. It may make you happy that this has made the Republican Party more to your liking but it has caused many to abandon the party. The thing you need to understand is that we cannot win a nationwide election unless we attract more voters. We are also in danger of losing more ground in the House and Senate if we continue down the path we are on. We lost the last presidential election because we were TOO conservative. Our strategy since then has been to get MORE conservative. That doesn’t make sense. Can you honestly tell me that this government shutdown is making us look good? Do you really think we are winning the budget battle in Washington? You can put the blame on the democrats, the media or whoever else you think is at fault, but the truth is we are losing. Until and unless we change our tactics we will continue to suffer in the polls and the voting booth.
You are *absolutely correct.-++++++++ytttttttttttt tttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt tttttttt=]
The last line is by my cat.LOL. He agrees as well.
cormac

Tully, NY

#258 Oct 7, 2013
Justice,

The reason the republicans haven't been fairing as well as could be is because it's leadership thinks that it needs to move closer to the dems. This logic is ridiculous on it's face.

Since Rush Limbaugh premiered in 1988 republicans have held the presidency for three terms the dem four terms. The presidential elections that the republicans lost had candidates that meet your specifications. G.H.W. Bush lost his second term, Bob Dole lost his run in '96, McCain in '08 and Romney in 2012.

All those candidates are from the left wing of the Republican party. To not admit that is to admit that you are not really a republican.

In 1994 the republicans won both houses and held them for 12 years. They won by being conservative (Contract with America anyone?). They eventually lost control of both houses by voting for things like Medicare part #(?) and migration reform not to mention relentless negative reporting from the MSM. They lost because they moved too far left and the conservatives stayed home.

So it would be safe to say that when republicans act as you think they should they lose elections.

Now get back in that drawer you sock puppet and stop with the faux conservative tripe.
cormac

Tully, NY

#259 Oct 7, 2013
Now I'm going to go make some popcorn and sit back and watch Da law kick the snot out of all of your sock puppets.

It hasn't been much of a battle so far. Maybe you need to create a few more puppets to try to even the odds.

Oh wait it isn't the numbers if they are all the same person with just one feeble little mind.

Well carry on this has been fun.

Go get 'em Da law.

Level 7

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#260 Oct 7, 2013
Imagine that wrote:
Obama’s response to shutdown is just ‘shut up’.
Polls show Americans are worried about the implementation of Obamacare — worried about keeping their current health insurance plans, the new law itself, the exchanges, potential fines, personal privacy, keeping their jobs, their work hours and a host of other issues too numerous to list here. Both the country and the Congress have much to discuss.
Right now, though, President Obama refuses to engage in any debate or discussion. The president is demanding that he get 100 percent of what he wants, and if he doesn’t, he and his Democratic allies in the Senate will keep the government shuttered.(Imagine that)
Republicans have offered compromises that might stop or dull some of the negative effects of Obamacare but that would also pass a budget and keep the government functioning. Still, Mr. Obama refuses to budge. He will not even consider compromise.(Imagine that)
Republicans are told that the law has already passed and that we’re being obstructionists for attempting to question or modify it. However, since when in this country after a law is passed is it eternally set in stone? When has it ever been true that Congress cannot look at and alter or improve existing law?-Paul Wash.Times OpEd
Congress is free to "look" at any law it wants. It can modify it, repeal it, cancel it, whatever. There is a process for doing that though. It's written in the Constitution. Of course Republicans don't like that. They can't get what they want through Constitutionally defined democratic processes, so they've resorted to blackmail: Obama is to give Republicans what they demand, and in return, Republicans won't hurt the country by defaulting on the national debt.

And this is what passes for "compromise" in the world of right wing fanaticism: Republicans "give up" destroying the nation's economy, and Obama "gives up" a law which was democratically enacted.

Why don't Republicans demand Obama's resignation in exchange for not destroying the economy? Obamacare seems small potatoes.

Level 7

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#261 Oct 7, 2013
cormac wrote:
Justice,
The reason the republicans haven't been fairing as well as could be is because it's leadership thinks that it needs to move closer to the dems. This logic is ridiculous on it's face.
Since Rush Limbaugh premiered in 1988 republicans have held the presidency for three terms the dem four terms. The presidential elections that the republicans lost had candidates that meet your specifications. G.H.W. Bush lost his second term, Bob Dole lost his run in '96, McCain in '08 and Romney in 2012.
All those candidates are from the left wing of the Republican party. To not admit that is to admit that you are not really a republican.
In 1994 the republicans won both houses and held them for 12 years. They won by being conservative (Contract with America anyone?). They eventually lost control of both houses by voting for things like Medicare part #(?) and migration reform not to mention relentless negative reporting from the MSM. They lost because they moved too far left and the conservatives stayed home.
So it would be safe to say that when republicans act as you think they should they lose elections.
Now get back in that drawer you sock puppet and stop with the faux conservative tripe.
You're a moron on its face. The reason why Republicans lost the House and Senate in '06 had nothing to do with Medicare Part D dummy- the measure was, and is, enormously popular. Even maniac Republicans aren't calling for its repeal. The reason why they lost congress is because George Bush proved to be an incompetent imbecile who royally f.cked up two wars, one under totally false pretenses, presided over a stagnant economy, and was too stupid and inept to adequately respond to a natural disaster in one of America's great cities. Oh, he also tried to implement a scheme to turn Social Security over to Wall Street, which the American people had enough good sense to realize was a f.cking idiotic idea. And they repudiated him for it. You may also want to google Jack Abramof and Mark Foley.

God what dope.
Lame

United States

#262 Oct 7, 2013
Truth Dig wrote:
<quoted text>
You're a moron on its face. The reason why Republicans lost the House and Senate in '06 had nothing to do with Medicare Part D dummy- the measure was, and is, enormously popular. Even maniac Republicans aren't calling for its repeal. The reason why they lost congress is because George Bush proved to be an incompetent imbecile who royally f.cked up two wars, one under totally false pretenses, presided over a stagnant economy, and was too stupid and inept to adequately respond to a natural disaster in one of America's great cities. Oh, he also tried to implement a scheme to turn Social Security over to Wall Street, which the American people had enough good sense to realize was a f.cking idiotic idea. And they repudiated him for it. You may also want to google Jack Abramof and Mark Foley.
God what dope.
"You're a moron on its face"? That's not even proper English imbecile. Did it ever occur to you your posts aren't even worth reading? All you do is jump around and call names. Like the true liberal retard you are.

Level 7

Since: May 11

Location hidden

#263 Oct 7, 2013
Lame wrote:
<quoted text>"You're a moron on its face"? That's not even proper English imbecile. Did it ever occur to you your posts aren't even worth reading? All you do is jump around and call names. Like the true liberal retard you are.
LOL at the moron who criticizes me for name calling by...wait for it, wait for it, wait for it.... you got it, calling me names!!!!

LMFAO!!!

Oh, please stop stalking me you f.cking weirdo.

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.

Utica Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Any truth that NH rehired the same basketball c... 10 min joe 3
More Proof Of Welfare Hockey 21 min Cheerleader 87
Judge Bernie Clark back in the news again 26 min Barrister 30
NY Who do you support for Governor in New York in ... (Oct '10) 35 min positronium 6,465
The Arc 37 min utican 1
ebola now in the usa 38 min Lock and Load 3
More money for the Auditorium... 38 min Cheerleader 445
Utica Comets have the highest number of season ... 46 min Cheerleader 44
Belvidere Dairy's Meatballs 55 min in the know 6
yanadasis closes club house 6 hr No Club needed 73
Picente fires back at Astornio's 'smoke and mir... 7 hr Back To The Future 53

Utica Jobs

Utica People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Utica News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Utica

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]