This was put together by college and high school students.
-
Recent Posts
Archives
Categories
- Art (88)
- Behavior and Psychology (20)
- Business, Industry and Finance (63)
- Constitution and Law (370)
- Consumer Affairs (4)
- Culture (17)
- Deep State (5)
- Economy (3)
- Education (238)
- Environment (74)
- Fraud Alert (8)
- Global Issues (1)
- Health and Medicine (149)
- History (8)
- Humour (94)
- Military (115)
- Morals and Ethics (149)
- News Media (11)
- Police, Crime, Security (215)
- Politics and Government (144)
- Religion (91)
- Science and Technology (19)
- Veterans' Issues (13)
- World (12)
Recent Comments
- ClayPidgeon on Scam Calls from the American Police Association
- Michael Davis on Life In Chico and Other Places Infected by Bums
- Patricia Lieder on Scam Calls from the American Police Association
- Dawn on Thaddeus Kerns Boy Aviator
- scott sproat on Scam Calls from the American Police Association
Recent NorCal Blogs Posts
There are many parts of this video that are hilarious, but the funniest may be the girl decrying the government forcing citizens to buy health insurance. Because it’s not like Mitt Romney has ever done that. Oh wait: he forced citizens of his state to buy health insurance long before Obama ever adopted that idea. Newt Gingrich also used to support it. So did the Heritage Foundation. It only became “socialism” when Obama adopted that policy.
Chris no one could ever accuse you of being anything but a partisan progressive democrat.
A. Romney signed legislation that a state legislature wrote and the people approved. States have that power as the Constitution clearly indicates.
B. Unless you can tell me otherwise the legislation was written and passed without bribery or collusion and in the normal legislative process rather than behind closed doors in a private partisan caucus.
C. The state law does not impose this law on the rest of the country.
D. Citizens in his state had the option, if they were
adamantly opposed to the law, moving to a state without a state insurance mandate.
E. It was always socialism. It was considered as one in a group of ideas for reform. That’s what think tanks and thinkers do. Then they weigh the pro’s and cons. Once the HF saw the result in Massachusetts they were less enamored. Once it became a national mandate, that left no option, they rejected it as a sound proposition for national reform. Gingrich is a wonk…no surprise there either.
F. Libertarians are the “you’re on your own” party. Conservative Republicans believe in a safety net for those who truly cannot depend on themselves.
G. The unsustainability of the other entitlement programs should have served as evidence (and a wake up call) that Obamacare was a bad idea (Probably at the state level as well)…but Democrats don’t care about that.
Once again you show your own, and your party’s, negative bias against conservative republicans as heartless, cruel, unreasonable, thoughtless, and uncaring.
You are such a hard a**.
Wow, very powerful!
Chris, our states each have the right to set up different types of systems just like they can set their own tax lever or not have state tax at all. That’s where the, “Vote with your feet” came from.
With national health care we can’t vote with our feet unless we move to another country.
The state Romney was governor of had a mojority of democrat legislators who wanted health care and they got it.
Why do you refuse to see the difference between state’s rights and the limitation of powers for our federal government?
Big deal Romney had a similar plan in his state. If other states want it fine, just don’t force the whole country to have it when the majority have said they don’t want it.
The only reason it passed congress was because of all the bribing that took place to get enough votes. The 2010 election results reflected just how upset the people were. We’ll see what happens in Nov.
“Chris no one could ever accuse you of being anything but a partisan progressive democrat.”
What? … for pointing out one of many, many, many logical inconsistencies, factual discrepancies and so on, and so forth, of the conservative political position?
“A. Romney signed legislation that a state legislature wrote and the people approved. States have that power as the Constitution clearly indicates.”
Yes he did. He signed it. He didn’t have to sign it, but he did … sign it into law … AFTER … he negotiated it through the legislature. But you go on … tell us some more how he had nothing to do with it. This whole disowning of RomneyCare has been the most consistently entertaining aspect of the man’s campaign.
“C [& D]. The state law does not impose this law on the rest of the country.”
Yes. So? The citizens of Pennsylvania want to be shelling out bookoo bucks for unreimbursed ER expenses of those Massachusetts refugees? I don’t think so, and then they will embrace RomneyCare.
“E. It was always socialism. …”
Yes. But there is nothing wrong with socialism. It is the most efficient civic mechanism contrived to date for the equitable satifaction of all yer basic human needs.
“F. Libertarians are the “you’re on your own” party. Conservative Republicans believe in a safety net for those who truly cannot depend on themselves.”
That is, RomneyCare.
“G. The unsustainability of the other entitlement programs should have served as evidence (and a wake up call) that Obamacare was a bad idea (Probably at the state level as well)…but Democrats don’t care about that.”
Either you are committed to this “safety net” or you are not. If you are, you pay. If you are not, please just say so.
Libby: “What? … for pointing out one of many, many, many logical inconsistencies, factual discrepancies and so on, and so forth…”
No…for defending Obama with silly arguments that don’t hold water…like pretending he isn’t involved in expanding the free phone business.
“Yes he did. He signed it. He didn’t have to sign it…etc”
As I said, states have that right under the US Constitution. Romney knew he would govern in a liberal progressive state. Like Bush he respected the will of the people.
The progressives in our Congress that broke congressional rules, bribed representatives, and worked behind closed doors (against the will of the people) and against the tenets of the Constitution, had no respect for the Constitution, their high office, their oath of office, the opposition party, or the people! They delivered a law that is complex, expensive, oppressive, and doesn’t do what was promised. The people are not happy!
“But there is nothing wrong with socialism. It is the most efficient civic mechanism contrived to date for the equitable satifaction of all yer basic human needs.”
Pure Marxist claptrap! But thanks for sharing.
“Either you are committed to this “safety net” or you are not.”
WRONG! Alcoholism is not a permanent disability that keeps a person from caring for himself. He is capable he just chooses not to be responsible. A quad with a breathing tube is permanently disabled and although some manage to contribute in one way or another, many still need to rely on others for their livlihood and care. Our country has failed to make the distinction in its march toward the Marxist utopian dream.
Progressive have also delivered bad schools, permanent entitlement, preference for crime and gang activity through generations of people that are (or could be) quite capable of earning a living and contributing to society but because of your preference for socialism they have not been given a chance to find out.
I pay…we all pay…we pay in taxes but we also pay in bad decaying neighborhoods, jails that are overflowing, hopeless, helpless, uninspired hordes of people who should have seen their lot in life improve.
There is no excuse for the numbers of people on welfare and in our jails. We have cultivated them like a garden…feeding, fertilizing and watering liberally with handouts, excuses, low expectations, and crumby politicians using them for votes by pandering to them with free stuff.
Obama is out there helping the folks. If he had any respect for them he would stop helping most of them and offer them an opportunity!
Our servicemen and women earn the educational opportunities they are given as part of the military experience. Why is this model not used?
Ypp, you gotta love this. Especially since it makes Chris sneer. The fear is palpable.
Obamacare is a train wreck and national disaster, Massachusetts health care reform is not. It is really quite as simple as that.
On a related note, Obama campaign scum in Ohio make it about the Mormon religion —
… a group calling itself Catholics for Obama had been making push poll phone calls in support of the president’s re-election bid. Among the questions being asked, he said, was “How can you support a ‘Mormon’ who does not believe in Jesus Christ?”
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2012/09/27/obama-supporters-dirty-tricks-to-win-the-catholic-vote
Oh yeah, “Catholics for Obama” attacking the Mormon religion is no doubt completely legit. Something like Paraplegics for Obama attacking quadriplegics.
Libby and Chris, this one is for you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oi_KaZ53eDg&feature=player_embedded
Tina: “No…for defending Obama with silly arguments that don’t hold water…like pretending he isn’t involved in expanding the free phone business.”
What are you talking about? You haven’t presented any evidence that Obama is involved in expanding this bipartisan program. Personally I wouldn’t have a problem if he had expanded it, but so far, it looks like he hasn’t touched it. The program was expanded to include cell phones under President Bush.
Back to the healthcare law. The fact is that no one called this socialism when it was proposed by Newt and Heritage. No one said, “This is socialism, but we’re going to tolerate it because it’s the best policy of those available.” When Romney implemented it in his state, no on called it socialism. It was recognized as a free market solution, as it helped ease the free rider problem and got more people onto private insurance.
“Socialism” is just a label. In truth, we’ve had socialism in this country to one degree or another since it’s inception, and we always will. People like having the government put out their house fires. We don’t trust private firms to do the same.
The fact is, Tina, you were already paying for other people’s healthcare long before this law was passed. When people have to wait until there is an emergency situation to get healthcare, instead of taking preventative action, that is far more expensive. Since these people have no insurance and can’t pay, health care costs go up for everyone. Ensuring that more people have access to preventative care makes costs go down. Having your tax dollars go to pay for other people’s health insurance is, in the long run, much cheaper than paying for their emergency health care.
But even though Romney used to understand this, he is now pretending that he’s never heard of this concept. On “60 Minutes” last week, Romney claimed that we do have free healthcare in this country, because anyone can go to an emergency room if they have a heart attack:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/23/mitt-romney-60-minutes-health-care_n_1908129.html
“Well, we do provide care for people who don’t have insurance,” he said in an interview with Scott Pelley of CBS’s “60 Minutes” that aired Sunday night. “If someone has a heart attack, they don’t sit in their apartment and die. We pick them up in an ambulance, and take them to the hospital, and give them care. And different states have different ways of providing for that care.”
Do I need to point out how egregiously stupid this is? This is literally the most expensive way for a country to pay for healthcare! How can Romney be trusted to change this system when his response is this idiotic and glib?
HuffPo documents some of Mitt’s flip-flops on this important issue:
“This constitutes a dramatic reversal in position for Romney, who passed a universal health care law in Massachusetts, in part, to eliminate the costs incurred when the uninsured show up in emergency rooms for care. Indeed, in both his book and in high-profile interviews during the campaign, Romney has touted his achievement in stamping out these inefficiencies while arguing that the same thing should be done at the national level.
And while Romney refused to agree on Sunday that the government’s role is to ensure that every American has health care, he has endorsed such an idea in the past.
When asked in a March 2010 interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” whether he believes in universal coverage, Romney said, “Oh, sure.”
“Look, it doesn’t make a lot of sense for us to have millions and millions of people who have no health insurance and yet who can go to the emergency room and get entirely free care for which they have no responsibility, particularly if they are people who have sufficient means to pay their own way,” he said.”
Tina, if you think Romney has changed his opinion by using reason and looking at the facts, you’re delusional. As Pie pointed out, Romneycare worked. He is only changing his position now due to pressure from his party. The man has no principles and no backbone. He will say anything to get elected. He has never held a position he didn’t change. He used to be pro-choice, until he started running for president as a Republican. This is the man you trust to be your president?
“Obamacare is a train wreck and national disaster, Massachusetts health care reform is not.”
But the only appreciable difference between the two is Romney on the one hand and Obama on the other. Are you sure you don’t have some personal axe grinding here?
Chris: “The fact is that no one called this socialism when it was proposed by Newt and Heritage. No one said, “This is socialism, but we’re going to tolerate it because it’s the best policy of those available.”
You don’t know whether there were people who objected to it as socialist or not. You are making assumptions. A lot of ideas are put forth by think tanks…not all of them are good. There is a very big difference between an idea and a law…especially when you consider that this idea has been expanded into a 906 page document filled with 429 pages of new regulations!
“In truth, we’ve had socialism in this country to one degree or another since it’s inception…”
People are slow learners! At 16 trillion in debt with four decades of warnings about the unsustainability of our social programs it is time to reverse the SIZE and SCOPE of these programs. When the “need” for government assistance continues to grow and expand year after year clearly we are doing something wrong.
Socialism results in an ever expanding broken and needy society. I prefer to live in a country where the goal is to support everyone in being self sustaining productive members of our society. In such a system there will naturally be people who require our help but the number and cost would not be what it is today and the people would have a much higher sense of accomplishment and contribution.
That’s one woman’s opinion.
Here are others:
http://checkthafacts.blogspot.com/2012/01/nine-basic-differences-between-obama.html
http://calldrmatt.com/Differences_Between_RomneyCare_and_ObamaCare.htm
“The Greatest Country in the World”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1E5NmmnySy0&feature=player_embedded