Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - kidcoyote

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 249
1
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: Yesterday at 10:54 PM »
Bob Schieffer, owned by the WH. Sad. Destroying a long career, and for what? Access? Justice contacts Sharryl Attkinson' producer and Schieffer to get her to shut up. Welcome to Venezuela, or Russia. At least they're not killing journalists like in Russia, yet. And trying to discredit Issa by influencing the press? Wow. Makes Nixon look like Snow White. Corruption at the highest levels. Endemic.

Judicial Watch on Holder's Justice Dept

Here's the relevant email. Can you believe Schultz asks why nobody but Sharryl Attkinson wrote about it? And Schmaler answers, NYT, AP, Reuters, WaPo, NBC, Bloomberg....(meaning nothing). In the tank for the WH. Then they get set to use influence to shut her up. Chilling. Used to be a time when the left supported freedom of speech, and did 'real' investigative journalism. No wonder MSM is tanking in viewership/readership. They're corrupt.


2
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: Yesterday at 10:32 PM »
http://www.wired.com/2014/11/solutions-shape-factual-belief


More cognitive stuff? When the facts don't support you, use the old Marxist trick. When pressed by the London School of Economics to explain certain parts of his economic theories, Marx responded, "You have a bourgeosie mind, you need a proletariat mind to understand it." While you don't realize it, you're doing the same thing. Like some fell for climate change, and the ACA, in Gruber's words on the latter, due to their stupidity, it's always better to stick to facts, not question the mindset or the preconceptions of those who disagree. Otherwise, Gruber's right. But, if one can't do that, then resort to tricks Marx used. Hollow. Unsupported by facts. Desperate.

The ACA is likely to go down in flames, based on facts, not preconceptions. And on climate change, wake me up when the sea level rises another foot, or the temperature comes within 10% of these dire model predictions, which have been laughable to date. I'll take my lawn furniture in when those days come. But as we are seeing record low temperatures in the US, I'm more concerned at the moment with my heating bill, as most Americans are. Wait, don't tell me, global warming causes global cooling. Guess one has to have a proletariat mind to get it.


Like I have to keep reminding you, what you are experiencing is LOCAL cooling not global.   2014 will go down as the hottest year on record.


I know, every year is the hottest year on record. You realize you've stated that 5 years in a row. Get serious. You just had 141 year cold record in Florida. Let's just stick to the US, cause that's all I care about. We had over 1800 cold records set this week. Okay, October was warm, November is the coldest ever. You want to talk global? Talk to this chart. Satellite chart, the most reliable and tamper proof. Can't wait til Mann gets his butt shot off in court. He's toast. Are you aware of this, from Steyn's site?

A few weeks ago, you'll recall, the ACLU, The Washington Post, NBC News, The Los Angeles Times and various other notorious right-wing deniers all filed amici briefs opposed to Michael Mann and his assault on free speech. They did this not because they have any great love for me, but because their antipathy to wackjob foreign blowhards is outweighed by their appreciation of the First Amendment - and an understanding of the damage a Mann victory would inflict on it. After noting the upsurge of opposition to Mann, Reuters enquired of Catherine Reilly (one of his vast legal team) whether there would be any amici filing pro-Mann briefs:

I asked Reilly if the professor would have any supporting briefs next month when he responds to the defendants in the D.C. appeals court.

"At this point, we don't know," she said.


No one is supporting Mann in his ridiculous lawsuit, not by filing briefs supporting him.  And he's been counter sued, I think for $5 million, maybe $10 million.

Gruber's right. The stupidity of the American people allowed them to believe the premiums for a family of 4 would drop by $2,500, they could keep their health plan, period, they could keep their doctor, period, and costs would go down for all. The taxes would be on the insurance companies, not them(Gruber pointed out the stupidty of this on numerous occasions). And now, climate change, which used to be known as global warming, is taking advantage of the same American stupidity, funded by multimillionaire/billionare rent seekers like Gore, George Kaiser, Vinod Khlosam RFK, Jr. and Tom Steyer(the former coal king).

You see a "heat" problem with this satellite chart? If you do, tell me what you see. These are facts.


3
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: November 19, 2014, 07:43 PM »
I've posted this before, but think it's worthy. No, it's not on cognitive dissonance(aka preconceived notions), but fact based.

Super Amnesty will turn all Cities Into Detroit

For those think the above is far fetched, let's use Sweden as an example. Sweden, with a large Muslim population, as they sort of have open borders for these "oppressed people", has some very big issues, including:

6 x the rate rape of the US, only surpassed by South Africa. No, they did not have this rate prior to the Muslim immigration.
80% of its welfare recipients are Muslims
It's estimated that 25+% of Stockholm is Muslim
There are 55(I'm not making this up) no-go zones in Sweden, places so dangerous that the police won't even go. See link.

55 No Go Zones

Anybody here for super amnesty? Why?

4
OT / Re: King v. Burwell
« on: November 19, 2014, 07:27 PM »
The Ultimate Grubergate. Anybody want to defend this guy and this process? How is this guy going to avoid jail time? I mean, conning Americans in what represents 1/6th of the US economy. Can anyone imagine if a corporate CEO did such a thing? This makes Bernie Madoff's scheme look like chump change.  Outright fraud and deception, including the WH. And he's bragging about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDomkBtJC7Q

5
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: November 19, 2014, 03:17 PM »

6
OT / Re: OT - Music Thread
« on: November 19, 2014, 01:48 PM »
Lake Street Dive, IMO, one of more interesting new groups. This girl has pipes. Playing tonight in Philly, tomorrow in Burlington, VT(sold out) and Portland, ME on the 22nd. Don't hear many young girls with voices like this, certainly not live.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kELt1iqHwfY

7
OT / Re: OT: Movie Thread
« on: November 19, 2014, 01:47 PM »
Don't think I mentioned this film, sort of stumbled on it. Very good, low budget, lots of awards won at film festivals. Simple story. Guy convicted of double murder is getting out after 20 years. The child of the two killed(his parents), now in his 30's, wants justice and peace of mind. Tense. For a low budget film, as good as it gets.

Where can you find the movie?  Is it in theaters or Netflix?

Sorry, missed this one. I dowloaded it off the net. Netflix? Yes, just googled it. Google play apparently has it for $3.99. Not bad.

https://play.google.com/store/movies/details?id=DbP2cu-SK28&utm_source=HA_Desktop_US&utm_medium=SEM&utm_campaign=ActionAds&pcampaignid=MKTAD0610MO1DAM&gclid=COiQtLOsh8ICFYJ5KgodqjYATg&gclsrc=ds


8
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: November 19, 2014, 11:30 AM »
For what will be said an enormous times, older people  made up a greater portion of the voters than in presidential elections and young people voted 33% less than they had in 2012. The Republicans win is not an indictment of the Demcocratic party on its face. This happened in 2010 as well and Republicans still lost the presidency, which it appears they are set to do again. And i would expect the next mid term elections in 2018 to be better represented by young people. Democrats will push the issue of participation to its supporters more so than they did this last term.

I think you're mistaken. And younger people are moving away. The Dem coaltion is fractured. You can't just abandon people like Mary Landrieu, Kay Hagan, Michele Nunn. There are no moderate Dems, other than say, Joe Manchin. The party has been stolen by the fringe left. The fight isn't between the right vs. left, it's the left vs the far left. Witness the fake Indian, Liz Warren, now of prominence. You think this is smart based on what happened? You think she sells nationally? NFW. A guy like Manchin has no place in the Dem party, and look at the Arkansas results. Bill Clinton and Hillary couldn't save it. Governorships in MI, MD, MA and IL? Are you kidding me? The EPA, the ACA, the IRS, Justice, are killing jobs. Those are facts. Americans know it, and don't give a s*** about multimillionaire/billionaire environmentalists like Tom Steyer, Gore, George Kaiser(Solyndra bundler), Khlosa, Bloomberg, in many cases, looking to line their own pockets, just like Gruber did with ACA. He made $6 million, supposedly an independent analyst. This is how the party of government works, corruptly. And due to the internet and youtube, everyone knows it.

The Dems, after this recent election, need to look in the mirror. Who do they represent? Did Jay Rockefeller represent his contituents in WV with his vote on Keystone? So, how can a guy like that get elected going forward? You might see a guy like Joe Manchin switch parties. And why not? The Dem leadership doesn't care about him, nor do they care about WV residents hopes and dreams. Why should he care about them?

9
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: November 19, 2014, 10:59 AM »
http://www.wired.com/2014/11/solutions-shape-factual-belief


More cognitive stuff? When the facts don't support you, use the old Marxist trick. When pressed by the London School of Economics to explain certain parts of his economic theories, Marx responded, "You have a bourgeosie mind, you need a proletariat mind to understand it." While you don't realize it, you're doing the same thing. Like some fell for climate change, and the ACA, in Gruber's words on the latter, due to their stupidity, it's always better to stick to facts, not question the mindset or the preconceptions of those who disagree. Otherwise, Gruber's right. But, if one can't do that, then resort to tricks Marx used. Hollow. Unsupported by facts. Desperate.

The ACA is likely to go down in flames, based on facts, not preconceptions. And on climate change, wake me up when the sea level rises another foot, or the temperature comes within 10% of these dire model predictions, which have been laughable to date. I'll take my lawn furniture in when those days come. But as we are seeing record low temperatures in the US, I'm more concerned at the moment with my heating bill, as most Americans are. Wait, don't tell me, global warming causes global cooling. Guess one has to have a proletariat mind to get it.

10
OT / Re: King v. Burwell
« on: November 18, 2014, 09:44 PM »

11
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: November 18, 2014, 09:42 PM »

It's obvious some don't like that, as they don't get their way, don't care what the voters say, encourage the of use executive orders to thwart the will of the people.



Obama issued 147 executive orders during his first term.  He's on pace to issue even fewer this term.   How does that stack up against past presidents?  Well, he's averaging fewer executive orders than any president in the last century (you have to go back to Grover Cleveland in 1897 to find one that used the power less often).   

Don't let that fact get in the way of your rant tho.   ::)


I won't. It's the seriousness of the executive orders, not the quantity. Many of his have changed laws, like welfare reform, in that people no longer need to work(done under Clinton) to get benefits. He destroyed the law. Show me one example of someone who's done that. Show me one instance, one, where a President has taken a law like the ACA, and just changed it on a whim. I can't think of a single example. The employer mandate? The individual mandate? Federal subsidies where none existed. This is unprecedented. I think he's changed the ACA over 20 times. This is 1/6th of the economy. And now it's exposed as fraudulent, and the WH is denying even knowing Gruber, despite him being there 19 times.

What do you think the election was about? People woke up. They're tired of being lied to. "You can keep your doctor, period", "you can keep your insurance, period", "a family of 4 will see their premiums drop by an average of $2,500." Gruber's right. It was able to be implemented due to "the stupidity of the American people". Not me, but apparently you. You were either stupid/ignorant, or you knew it was deceptive and fraudulent, but wanted it anyway. Which is it? There's no other choice. Why don't you look at yourself and see which it is?

You better be careful what you wish for. If a President can just change a law, how would you feel if a future President just eliminated minimum wage laws? Or censored certain publications, like the NY Times, Washington Post, or threatened the removal of broadcast licenses(oh, wait Obama's FCC is already doing that), or taxed the internet based on content(oh wait, Obama's FCC is considering that)? He's setting a precedent of lawlessness. You think it's okay, now. But with a Nixon as President? Or Ted Cruz? Dangerous ground. Get out of your liberal head and think of the consequences of his actions to the republic, not some stupid agenda you may like. Other Presidents have other agendas, and you're not going to like them all. Ever think of that?

12
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: November 18, 2014, 05:57 PM »
The author, Reihan Salam, is a senior fellow at the R Street Institute and lead writer of The Agenda blog at National Review.


The economist Brad DeLong addresses Salam's arguments and claims:

Continuing on the “What Are Conservative Policy Ideas for Replacing ObamaCare?” Beat: (Early) Wednesday Focus


Brad DeLong from Berkeley? The epicenter of left wing nut jobs? You've put up his posts before. Next we'll hear from Said, and his buddy. Only the extreme fringe listens to fringe economists at whacko universities.

Forget what's better for a moment. We have a nation of laws. We have a separation of powers. It's obvious some don't like that, as they don't get their way, don't care what the voters say, encourage the of use executive orders to thwart the will of the people. We know that. But some of us respect the Constitution and the vote. We just had an election, now we'll have a court case in King v Burwell. Let's see what the justices say. Let's see if this law, and the federal subsidies hold up. The law is clear, and one's opinion really doesn't matter. It is what it says it is. Regarding repeal and replace, the free market is significantly better, cheaper, and better serves the people, the medical community and all involved in the patient/doctor relationship. And it's not coercive, but voluntary. The left likes coercion, at least when they're doing the coercing. Most don't.

Or use Obama's words if you like: "we won, you lost", or "go win some elections". I wouldn't say that. I'd say let's see what the Supreme Court says. But the left doesn't like laws. They have an agenda, the law be damned. Like a child who doesn't get his way, screaming in defiance.  Elections have consequences. The left needs to get over it. But they'd rather undermine the Constitution and the rule of law. Dangerous stuff. Can you imagine Nixon unrestrained? Nixon turned over the tapes. Obama's IRS destroyed hard drives. Be careful what you wish for. Regroup and win in '16.

This should be interesting as well. A liberal law prof, who voted for Obama twice, is now going to be representing Congress v the President on Constitutional grounds. Big stuff. My bet: Hillary won't run. Too much damage to the Dem brand, and she can't get far enough away from Obama, who has destroyed his party. They'll have to look to 2020, with new blood, and not fake Indian Liz Warren, but someone who can get votes outside the Northeast, DC and California, and 1 or 2 other states. Most Americans don't like liars, and she's a liar.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/boehner-taps-jonathan-turley-for-obamacare-lawsuit/article/2556315#!

13
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: November 18, 2014, 05:24 PM »

14
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: November 18, 2014, 02:19 PM »
For those of you a bit mystified by all the references to Gruber in your Facebook Crazy Uncle timelines:



Sort of like peering through the wormhole in Interstellar!


Everybody knows that Tim. MSM and left wing nutjob stations are avoiding it. The NY Times had it on page 12, lower corner, but their spin was, "Republicans are mad". Scandal of the first order, and one station reporting it. That chart kind of also represents viewership. Nobody watches CNN and MSNBC.  Not many interested in programs, supposedly news programs, which hide or bury stories to protect politicians who are clearly deceptive and lying. Gruber was at the WH 19 times, yet Pelosi and Obama say they don't know him, or they just heard of him this week. It doesn't pass the laugh test. You have to be aware that MSNBC is a lunatic fringe station. Rachel Maddow? And CNN sinking to new lows by the week. Look at the ratings. Fox, by default, is mainstream. This says it all. If Fox isn't mainstream, what does that make CNN and MCNBC? Fringe stations?

September 30 quarter:

FNC: 1,797,000 viewers, up 12 percent (313,000 adults 25-54, up 12 percent)
CNN: 555,000 viewers, up 2 percent (186,000 adults 25-54, up 4 percent)
MSNBC: 557,000 viewers, down 2 percent (150 adults 25-54, down 21 percent)
 

15
OT / Re: King v. Burwell
« on: November 18, 2014, 01:47 PM »
Krauthammer on Gruber. Boy, the case will be decided by June 30. This is going to kill the Democratic Presidential nominee. How do they distance themselves from it? Even if it's upheld, the damage is incalculable. Gruber is going to be called before Congress to testify. It will it be ugly. On top of immigration? Oregon, hardly a right wing bastion, just voted 66% to 34% against non-citizens getting driver's licenses. Oregon!

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: I think the president was not told about what's going on, and the reason is that they have had six years experience of the press essentially conspiring with them and the amazing show of events that you just had in that piece in which the administration issues statements, it uses Gruber reports, it's echoed by their minions in the press that's repeated by Democrats as if this is objective evidence, it's simply one example of it.

The other one is, I think that they calculated the president could go a week without talking about it and then pretend he never heard of it because you wouldn't hear about it in the press and in fact except for FOX, you look at all the networks and you showed that last week, it's been a blackout. I remember reading, I think it was on Saturday, there was a story on this, it was probably the first time in The New York Times on page 12 in a box way down at the bottom and the whole impetus of the story is, Republicans are upset about or criticizing about.

This is a scandal of the first order and they imagined they would actually get away with it. And when you see everybody pretending that they had never heard of this guy, when you show the evidence to everybody, he had meetings in the White House 19 times. So when they make the movie, it will be called The Man Who Never Was. And I think this is an extension of the Secret Service scandal. Gruber jumped the fence into the White House, he got through an open door and sat in the Oval Office and joined 19 meetings and that's exactly what happened.

16
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: November 18, 2014, 12:03 PM »
Congress was set up in a way to give the majority a vote, known as the House of Representatives, where representation was given based on population, and the Senate, so as to give each state equal votes. So, while each state has two senators, the House has the larger population states with far greater representation, e.g.

California 53 representatives
Texas 36 representatives
NY and FL 27 representatives each
Wyoming, Vermont, ND and Montana have 1 representative each.

So, with the current House at 226-179, the largest Republican edge since the 1940's, as both sides are represented by population(unless they don't vote), it appears the country is moving one way. At the state level, with governorships in traditionally Democratic states going to Republicans(or staying with them), like MI, WI, MA, MD and IL, these are big changes. How permanent? Who knows, but at the moment, the people have spoken. Will Obama listen, or will we get more executive actions against the peoples' will?

Jay Rockefeller coming out against Keystone XL is interesting. The voters of WV sent a clear message. Both Joe Manchin and Shelley Capito are for Keystone, but not Rockefeller. Rockefeller, now retiring, wants to hang out in the salons of DC, and voting for Keystone will exclude him from certain DC cocktail parties, so he stiffs his constituents, but they're blue collar, and he doesn't care about the great unwashed like oil/gas and coal workers. Hobnobbing with the DC glitterati much more glamorous. Shelly Capito is the first woman Senator in WV history, and the first Republican in the Senate there since 1959. In Arkansas, it's the first time in state history that there are 2 Republican senators. It's a wave.

17
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: November 17, 2014, 04:35 PM »
Votes cast for the Republicans in 2015 Senate (2010, 2012 and 2014): 48 million. (Will grow by a few hundred thousand when the inevitable happens in Louisiana :) *. )
Votes cast for the Democrats in 2015 Senate (2010, 2012 and 2014): 63.2 million.

GOP gets to call the shots in Congress: Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules. And the Founding Fathers had to give the most populous state the same number of Senators as the least. The most populous state at the time was 11 times larger than the least, and California is now 66 times larger than Wyoming.

So the Dems don't have to buy any of this "The People Have Spoken" stuff and bow to the new Confederacy.


* Independents in Vermont and Maine, who caucus with the Democrats, got 575,000 votes - probably more than the winner in Louisiana will end up with.

Republican votes for Senate 2014- 22,422,000
Senate votes for Senate 2014-20,396,000

Bow to the new Confederacy? You mean they'll copy the slave owning Democrats? Doubt it. Republicans freed the slaves Tim, then Ike had the first two Civil Rights Acts, of which then Senator JFK voted against the second. Then, of course, the Republicans voted in greater percentage numbers for the '64 Civil Rights Act, when Dem leaders like Al Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd voted against, as they did the prior Civil Rights Acts.

Nice try with the Senate thing based on 2 per state, but aren't you missing, the er, House? That's the one based on representation, which you seem to appear to favor. How's your team doing in the House? Ans: Republicans have largest edge since the 1940's. The people have spoken. Like Obama, you're just not listening.

18
OT / King v. Burwell
« on: November 16, 2014, 09:26 AM »
There's been a lot of histrionics about the healthcare law, and I thought a new topic focusing on such an important matter may be in order.

At issue in King v. Burwell, in essence, can people be subsidized in exchanges established by the Federal Government. The challengers say no. Only by state established exchanges.

Jonathan Adler has been the attorney who developed this challenge. Here's a recent piece where he takes on a Harvard attorney.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/11/12/the-test-to-textualism-in-king-v-burwell-a-reply-to-abbe-gluck/

The relevant provisions of the PPACA in Section 1401 (and it is provisions, plural, contrary to what many pundits claim and even if one ignores the cross-references), both make reference to Exchanges established by the State under [Section] 1311.” If these provisions were referring to Exchanges, as generically defined under Section 1563, or even to “Exchanges established . . . under 1311,” there would be no reason to include this additional language. (Language which, it is worth remembering, was added to multiple places at multiple times.) The law is clear about what “establish” means. This word is used throughout the text, and exchanges are identified as those “established” by states (1311) and those “established” by the federal government (1321). Further, Section 1321 instructs HHS to both “establish and operate” its exchanges.  It is also clear what a State is, and that the states and the federal government are quite distinct.

So, we get someone like E. J. Dionne.  To people like Dionne, laws don't matter. Language doesn't matter. Text doesn't matter. While I realize some feel the same, we're a nation of laws, not what one wants in violation of laws.

Obamacare v. Scaliacare

This is quite the canard. What Dionne fails to mention is that this is the same court which ruled in favor of the challengers, then Harry Reid removed the filibuster and Obama packed the court with 4 more justices favorable to him, and they granted an en banc review, allowing them to rule on the case again. Duh how that'd turn out. The Supreme Court snatched this option with its agreeing to hear the case, shocking many, as some had predicted a 2-4% chance of this occurring. Dionne goes on to reference Abbe Gluck's article which Jon Adler takes on in the first link.

To the shock of many neutral legal analysts, four justices decided to take up an absurd legal challenge to the ACA even before a lower court can rehear the case and before there is a conflict that typically triggers the high court's involvement.

Then, there's Gruber, the gift who keeps on giving. Could he make it any clearer about how the tax credits work?

http://www.mrctv.org/videos/gruber-obamacare-tried-squeeze-states-set-their-own-exchanges

The Supreme Court will hear the case in the term ending June 30. I recommend dropping your "preconceived notions" and read the facts about the law. Not what you want, but what it says.
 

19
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: November 16, 2014, 08:40 AM »
Can you imagine having a conversation about universal health care that goes more like this instead of Socialism vs. nut job ism?

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/11/obamacare_faq_everything_you_need_to_know_about_why_conservatives_want_to.html


It's toast Tim. King v Burwell. You're in denial. Might be advisable to read the pertinent parts of the law, or listen to how Gruber presented it. The disdain for Americans by the left knows no bounds. Did you notice the recent election results? Looks to me like you're on the extreme fringe. Talk about nut jobism. You may be of the coalition which doesn't vote, but of those who vote, they spoke on November 4...loudly.


Say what?

Linking an article that presents a moderate middle of the road view of the ACA act demonstrates that Tim is "on the extreme lunatic fringe"?

The only thing your comments show is what a whack job you (and your ilk) are.


The election Lar. Your President stated(paraphrasing, you can google it), "Elections have consequences", "I(we) won, you lost", "If you want things your way, go out and win a few elections".

The recent election puts leftist views, amnesty/open door immigration, climate change, gun control, war on women, at the fringe. The people have spoken. It's the economy, and always is. Some numbers:

Lowest House Dem total since 1946
Lowest State House total since 1860

Resounding defeat.

20
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: November 15, 2014, 10:34 PM »
Can you imagine having a conversation about universal health care that goes more like this instead of Socialism vs. nut job ism?

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/11/obamacare_faq_everything_you_need_to_know_about_why_conservatives_want_to.html


It's toast Tim. King v Burwell. You're in denial. Might be advisable to read the pertinent parts of the law, or listen to how Gruber presented it. The disdain for Americans by the left knows no bounds. Did you notice the recent election results? Looks to me like you're on the extreme fringe. Talk about nut jobism. You may be of the coalition which doesn't vote, but of those who vote, they spoke on November 4...loudly.

21
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: November 15, 2014, 10:32 PM »

22
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: November 14, 2014, 11:02 PM »
On a scale like Obamacare? At the Federal level?


Let's see....

Watergate
Gulf of Tonkin
Operation Northwoods (though it was rejected by Kennedy)
NSA

Give me one example of a law passed that was intentionally deceptive, designed to trick both politicians and the public.


I'm not sure I can name any off hand. I don't think you can either, despite your diatribe on Obamacare.

To suggest that Democrats are the only ones that do deceptive things when some of the biggest political scandals that have happened in this country were led by Republicans is nothing short of ignorant and asinine.


Stop with the diatribe. It's a simple question. Were you duped, as Gruber states, the "stupidity of the American voter", or were you okay with the deception and lying by its architects to achieve what they wanted? Does the ends justify the means? That'd make it Machiavellian's, "effectual truth". Lie, cheat, deceive, win by any means, as if you think you'll do a better job, have better policies, it is, in effect, the truth. You believe that? I don't. Or is Lincoln right, that honesty is the best policy? I think the majority of Americans agree with Lincoln, and that's what the recent election was about. People know they were lied to.  I see nothing on this scale in my lifetime. The lying by a President 31 times, knowingly lying, about, "if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor, period", "if you like your insurance company, you can keep your company, period". When has this ever happened before? Month after month after month? To the American people? Sure, Nixon lied, repeatedly, but on what, a coverup of a break in? Not a law which impacted everyone's lives and caused chaos. The second article of impeachment of Nixon included, "an attempt to the use the IRS to punish opponents". Don't you think we're well past that with this President, attempting to use the IRS? Nixon was unsuccessful, this President has surely used the IRS to punish opponents.

Here's a sober analysis by a Yale trained lawyer. The ACA is toast. And it will bury Democrats. It has to. Something built on such lies, and so untenable, just can't work. This is reminiscent of Lincoln, and his, "a house divided cannot stand", speech. The country is divided, and this law cannot stand. Not the way it was built, sold, forced, represented. Just can't work. And as this lawyer states, King v Burwell will bury it. The law is clear, despite Krugman's ridiculous piece about his family's plot in comparison, Death by Typo. Read the law at volokh.com, by Jon Adler. The intent couldn't be clearer.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/11/william-levin-the-road-to-obamacare-repeal.php

23
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: November 14, 2014, 12:18 PM »
What is it about the left which is so into deception, manipulating, coercion?

This is pretty ironic, given all the scary things that Republicans have done over the years.

Just look at the new Congressional district in PA if you want to see manipulation.

There isn't a lack of deception at any political party imo. All of them have done horrible things, some instances more horrible than others. But I'm just challenging kid's assertion that deception, coercion and manipulation are exclusively Democratic traits.

On a scale like Obamacare? At the Federal level? There's deception and manipulation in everything, business, for sure. But a Federal Government doing such? In the US? Give me one example of a law passed that was intentionally deceptive, designed to trick both politicians and the public.Everybody's greedy, everybody is self serving, including those in government. But they have the power of the purse, taxes, enforcement. How does a business get power illicitly? Paying off politicians, no? George Kaiser bundled $500k for Obama and got $500 million in grants and loans to prop up his investment in Solyndra. This is what always happens with government, or a government institution. Just look at the UN. Oil for food? Kofi Annan's son was implicated, for goodness sakes.

Sure, Nixon bombed Laos without approval, and Reagan did the Iran/Contra thing, but directly lie to the American people, repeatedly? 31 times Obama stated, "if you want to keep your insurance company, you can keep it, period. If you want to keep your doctor, you can keep them, period." They knew this was a lie, and they knew it wouldn't save $2,500 per family of 4. Listen to what Gruber says. BTW, Gruber got $400k each from about 6-7 states, including Vermont. So, he made a fortune. And this is how it always works. People think government work doesn't pay. Not true. He certainly made more doing this than being a prof at MIT. Federal contracts are a gravy train.

So, I repeat, if you were in favor of Obamacare, were you ignorant of the truth and stupid, as Gruber suggests, or did you understand it and went along with the deception to get it passed? There's no other option. Me? I knew it was all BS and was against it. I knew it was a budget buster, knew they wouldn't save money, knew it would be a complex nightmare. I didn't know you'd lose your doctor and insurance provider.

24
OT / Re: OT: Movie Thread
« on: November 14, 2014, 11:59 AM »
Don't think I mentioned this film, sort of stumbled on it. Very good, low budget, lots of awards won at film festivals. Simple story. Guy convicted of double murder is getting out after 20 years. The child of the two killed(his parents), now in his 30's, wants justice and peace of mind. Tense. For a low budget film, as good as it gets.

'Blue Ruin' Trailer

25
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: November 13, 2014, 05:08 PM »
This is why the Dems lost. People are sick of elitists, like Gruber, or Tom Steyer, coal billionaire, now looking for subsidies for his 'green energy' business so he can compete against coal and oil. But Gruber, who made $400k advising on Obamacare, has to take the cake.

Elections have consequences. Now, will the WH reflect the will of the people, or once again, try to jam rules down their throats? What is it about the left which is so into deception, manipulating, coercion? Have they looked at election results?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbD5iQQS5KA

Key Architect Admits Obamacare was Passed by Exploiting Political Ignorance

I think those who supported its passage have to ask themselves a question: Were they the 'stupid American voter Gruber talks of", or where they in on the game of jamming deceptive legislation down American's throats? Ignorant or deceptive? Which is it?


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 249