Sarah vs Hillary: the Brutal Battle

[Headhunter]

[quote]stokedporcupine8 wrote:
pushharder wrote:
stokedporcupine8 wrote:
…Really I’m not sure what’s worse, an educated dogmatist…

Reminds me of someone on this board… who’s really stoked about his perception of his own intellectual acumen.

Will you please explain to me just in what sense I’m a dogmatist, or what dogmatic views I hold? You may think I’m a snobbish fool, and you might even be right, but a dogmatist I am not.

Virtually all of my posts are attacks on dogmatic views, and I very rarely if ever offer any positive view of my own. Perhaps you think my skepticism is dogmatic, maybe you’re right. Even in this case though, I very rarely expound actual attacks on positive positions, I merely attack bad arguments.
[/quote]

This is how cowards act — they sit back and wait for someone to say something and then attack it with some sort of rhetoric.

You ripped Palin because she’s not an ‘intellectual’ like you. She’s not a Harvard lawyer or some bs philosopher. So she therefore can’t be POTUS. She doesn’t accept the rotten European definition of ‘intelligent’, so she’s just some gun-toting bible thumper (like Obama described Pennsylvanians).

We have had enough of European style lawyer shyster nihilist. We want our country back. Rhetoriticians can stand aside or move to Europe – pick one.

[stokedporcupine8]

[quote]pushharder wrote:
stokedporcupine8 wrote:
pushharder wrote:
stokedporcupine8 wrote:

I never said “Sarah Palin is an idiot” in this thread.

And did I say you said it “in this thread?” No. But you have said it in another thread.

So I guess what we’re dealing with here is someone who is a dogmatist in one thread on the exact same topic but not in another thread (but on the same forum on the same website) and yet wants to claim some superior air of objectivity along with a pathetic aloofness.

Now, would you like to try again? Really, I am, as always, sick of the tendency of conservatives on this board to attack anyone who doesn’t agree with everything they say. I give a fairly harmless political commentary–I remark about Palin’s apparent lack of understanding, I make ironic comments about the anti-intellectual crowd wanting to be seen as wise and learned, I even make jabs against Obama and his ilk–but nevertheless all you focus on is my non-praise of Sarah Palin. Please.

I make attacks on hypocrisy not on “anyone who doesn’t agree with what (I) say.”

Bottom line? You made a dogmatic “Palin is an idiot” comment on another Palin thread and yet here you are decrying dogmatism. You’d be better off reverting to your horrendously stupid prose that you used on the “Preamble to Your State Constitution” thread where a few months ago you made your pompously triumphant yet nauseating entry to PWI.

First, you are splitting hairs.

One man’s hair splitting is another’s interesting dichotomy exploration.

Second, you are judging whether I am a dogmatist based on a few off handed, ironic political remarks.

Where is the “irony” in “Sarah Palin is an idiot?”

[Edit] Maybe the true irony is that this woman is more intelligent and successful than you are. Maybe it bugs you that the University of Idaho cranked out someone superior in ambition and intellect compared to whatever pompous Ivy League school you may have attended.

Besides, if you really want to push this whole “dogmatist” thing then this is quite the case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Precisely. However this is an instance of the pot recognizing and accepting it’s blackness while the kettle pompously and erroneously asserts it is orange.

Third, you, and many others, do make attacks on anyone who doesn’t agree with everything you say. Justify it however you want, but this is a fact.

As do you, O orange kettle.

Your derogatory comments only make it all the better. You’re “horrendously stupid prose” comment also suggests to me why you really have made this attack… you don’t like my anti-anti-intellectualism.

Just calling a spade a spade. Then again you probably think you’re a rake. An orange rake.

Finally, my “pompously triumphant yet nauseating entry to PWI” happened years ago. Lost passwords and email changes have forced a few name changes along the way.

Fair enough. I hereby rephrase my comment to “pompously triumphant yet nauseating reintroduction to PWI.”[/quote]

Ah, this is what I like about you. Eventually clarity arises and we find that we’re really in agreement on many things. I will concede that my dislike of Palin is a bit dogmatic, in some sense of the term, although I still think there’s plenty of substantive evidence to back this up. That of course is another debate, one that I don’t really feel like having. If this though is the worst you can find that I am dogmatic about, I think that is fairly good. Whether or not I like Sarah Palin and whether or not that dislike causes me to dogmatically think of her as an idiot is a small point. At least I am not, say, dogmatic about my ethical views (or at least, dogmatic about my value judgments, to drudge up memories from that wonderful comeback).

As for whether Palin is more successful than I am, surely she is. She is probably more successful than I’ll ever be. Intelligence or intellect though is not a necessary condition for success–things like shrewdness, charisma and luck are. As for where she went to school, I was “cranked out” by a public university myself. As for actual evidence of her lack of “intellect”, as I said above that’s another debate. Suffice to say I’m not losing any sleep over either of these points.

[stokedporcupine8]

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

This is how cowards act — they sit back and wait for someone to say something and then attack it with some sort of rhetoric.
[/quote]

First, please explain to me how “sitting back and waiting for someone to say something and then attack it with some sort of rhetoric” is different than what Palin herself does, or really different than what most people do, regardless of ideology?

Second, with regard to my own criticisms of arguments–what your quote was responding to–I don’t attack with some sort of rhetoric. I attack with valid reasoning. For example, if someone makes a clear flaw in logic, say asserts a universal claim for which there are obvious counter examples, how is it rhetoric to point out the obvious counterexamples?

You ripped Palin because she’s not an ‘intellectual’ like you. She’s not a Harvard lawyer or some bs philosopher. So she therefore can’t be POTUS. She doesn’t accept the rotten European definition of ‘intelligent’, so she’s just some gun-toting bible thumper (like Obama described Pennsylvanians).

No, I don’t rip anyone because they aren’t like me. I rip Palin, just like I rip on Obama, not because of their backgrounds, but because of their inability to state clear, unambiguous points and to back those points up with valid and sound arguments.

Besides, I don’t really care about the word “intelligence” or what anyone thinks it refers to. I care about truth, which the last time I checked isn’t relative. There isn’t “European truth” or “gun-toting bible thumper truth”, just truth. A proposition is either true or it is false. Given that I care about truth, I dislike dogmatic ideologists who think they have the market corned on truth and will concoct all sorts of fallacious arguments and twisted facts to back up their “truths”.

We have had enough of European style lawyer shyster nihilist. We want our country back. Rhetoriticians can stand aside or move to Europe – pick one.

ok

[stokedporcupine8]

[quote]pushharder wrote:
stokedporcupine8 wrote:

Ah, this is what I like about you. Eventually clarity arises and we find that we’re really in agreement on many things. I will concede that my dislike of Palin is a bit dogmatic, in some sense of the term, although I still think there’s plenty of substantive evidence to back this up. That of course is another debate, one that I don’t really feel like having. If this though is the worst you can find that I am dogmatic about, I think that is fairly good.

I wasn’t looking for your “worst.” I was simply addressing your hypocrisy on the topic at hand.[/quote]

Fair enough.

Whether or not I like Sarah Palin and whether or not that dislike causes me to dogmatically think of her as an idiot is a small point.

Maybe as far as you’re concerned it’s a small point. But it is entirely relevant to the discussion. To dogmatically claim Palin is an idiot is to implicitly and falsely claim a superior intellect for yourself. Yet here you present no evidence of your superior intellect. So you end up looking like just another petty led-by-the-nose-by-the-media type.

I completely disagree. To claim Palin is an idiot is to claim Palin is an idiot. This implies nothing about my own intellect, unless you think I am so brutish that you think I could not possibly make this claim without thinking myself better. Clearly it’s possible for me to be ignorant, think myself ignorant, yet still see Palin’s own ignorance and see that she does not see it. So you can read into my words however you want, but they don’t imply anything about me.

At least I am not, say, dogmatic about my ethical views (or at least, dogmatic about my value judgments, to drudge up memories from that wonderful comeback).

As for whether Palin is more successful than I am, surely she is. She is probably more successful than I’ll ever be. Intelligence or intellect though is not a necessary condition for success–things like shrewdness…

Don’t think for a minute that intelligence is not a key ingredient of shrewdness.

I take “intelligence” to mean something like “theoretical understanding”, in the grand traditions of western science and philosophy. Of course, one needs a certain sort of “intelligence” to be shrewd, something like “street smarts” or something, but that’s not what I’m objecting against, nor is it what I’m claiming Palin lacks. So our difference here is mainly terminological.

[quote]
…charisma and luck are. As for where she went to school, I was “cranked out” by a public university myself. As for actual evidence of her lack of “intellect”, as I said above that’s another debate. Suffice to say I’m not losing any sleep over either of these points.

You would do your claim of non-dogmatism some good by simply retracting your “Palin is an idiot” claim and honestly admitting you said that simply because you disagree with her values and politics as well as maintaining a disdain for the cultural differences between you and her.[/quote]

I retract my “Palin is an idiot” claim, but I will not admit that I said that simply because I disagree with her values and politics. That isn’t why I said it for two reasons. First, I said “Palin is an idiot” because of her words. As I briefly mentioned to HH, for example, Palin, like Obama, is unable to state a clear and unambiguous point and then to lay out a non-fallacious argument for that point. Second, I don’t disagree with all of Palin’s values and her politics. In fact, I agree with MORE of Palin’s values and politics than I agree with Obamas! So clearly that motive isn’t even there. Now, I freely admit that I have not dug into Palin and her positions enough to fairly judge whether she is an idiot, and I admit that I have not done that because I disagree with a few of her values and some of her politics, and as you guessed because of cultural differences.

Anyway, that’s enough confessional for the day.

[pittbulll]

[quote]ZEB wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
ZEB wrote:

If I were King of America, I would pull troops out of Afghanistan.

Okay, pull them out, or give them the reserves that they need. But doing what Obama is doing simply puts them in harms way. I think this is a direct reflection of his youth and inexperience, as opposed to his extreme liberalism.

I personally do not think Obama is left; he is way too concerned about being bipartisan to be a left winger.

I’m he has tried (or is trying) to push several wacky left wing ideas into law. By doing this he has not only alienated the republicans in Congress, but also the more conservative “blue dog” democrats. Now, which Obama are you talking about? Is that Harry Obama who lives on Elm Street?

[/quote]

I personally see health care reform as a good thing for all. Right now American companies are paying for health care and trying to compete on a World market where other players Government take care of health care.

I have drank no Kool-Aid, I personally thought you to be above the flat head mentality in these forums.

Yea, that was sort of harsh, sorry about that.

As far as Health Care I have not heard one of the boys club complain about the trillion dollars spent in Iraq. And I would say it is probably more than that. Bush was notorious about not including all aspects of the cost to make the price more palatable

But what does one have to do with the other? I was and am against the war in Iraq. I didn’t like it for many reasons. Now on to health care, how does one turn the economy around by raising taxes in the form of cap and trade and health care on businesses who are able to hire people and lower the unemployment rate thus helping the economy. Please explain.

[/quote]

The thing that Health care and the war in Iraq have in common, for sake of this conversation, is cost. There is no apology needed

As far as cap and trade, there are a lot of scientists that claim that we are causing global warming and if we do not do something we are basically going to hell. I understand that at one time the best minds in the world thought the earth was flat. I know we have a bunch of Republicans that think science is evil. If I were to come down on a side it would be on Scienceâ??s

have not seen a copy of the bill; I doubt that I would read it unless I were paid to do so. (Like being a Congressman). I do hope they get it right.

Get it right like they did the stimulus package that just had to be rushed through? The only way to get it right is to scrap it, it’s a bad idea. In the latest poll 67% of people are happy with their current health insurance. While we both know things could be better what’s the rush on pushing for this thing so hard? Is it good for the nation or simply politics as usual. We know the answer to that one don’t we?

[/quote]

We are back to dealing with forces, that are not easily grasped. Right now one of the stimulus programs giving a tax break to first time home buyers is a very good kick in the pants to the Real Estate market (I believe). I have my doubts about the Auto bail out. But I do see what he tried to accomplish. And I do not think we can call it a failure yet. I think the forces we do not talk much about are that some say this could have rivaled the Great Depression. You are entitled to think what you like, but that could have been averted due to the stimulus

Health Insurance has gone up one hundred and thirty one percent since Nineteen ninety nine. Do you think it is ok for an Ins. Company does quit covering some one that has an illness? Do you think it is ok they refuse to cover some one? I doubt that sixty seven percent of the people have health Insurance right now.

http://www.nchc.org/facts/coverage.shtml

You still have the Birthers, and the people that think Obama is a Nazi (white supremist) He is a Racist, He is the epitome of evil. How can an objective person give these people any creditability?

And during the Bush administration there were many lefties who thought that Bush was “trading blood for oil” and gaining personal wealth from the Iraq war. the list of conspiracies that Bush was supposed to have been involved in were never ending, all nonsense. I can still remember the many loony posts on this board regarding such things. There will always be a minority on both sides that take things to an extreme. This should not reflect on either party at large.

[/quote]

Bush had critics, but it did not start until Late into Bushâ??s second term. I also think a lot of it was justified. I think that most people including most critics of Bush thought Cindy Sheehan was a nut job. The difference with Obama was they never gave him a chance; it was negative right off the bat. They all acting like Cindy Sheehan .I personally think it is a racial issue. I know you will disagree.

Bush and Cheney both , i am sure profited from the Iraq war

I tried to answer line by line . It may not work

[Headhunter]

$83 trillion in debt will make all this moot, though. The interest on the debt is approaching the total income tax receipts.

We either pay this with paper napkin money, or declare bankruptcy. Either one will cause a depression unlike anything we’ve seen before.

Luckily, unlike 1929, we have a huge military. This military will simply take over and establish a military state.

Capitalism was destroyed by giving the vote to everyone. Only property owners should be allowed to vote, and giving benefits out of the public treasury should have been banned. Ah well, maybe next time…

[DoubleDuce]

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
What’s your beef with me Double?

Haven’t elections always been about choosing the lesser of 2 evils anyway? I don’t like either candidate, but HH posted the question the way he did.

[/quote]

No beef, just thought your post way funny. She isnâ??t dim-witted or unintelligent, she didnâ??t set her reputation that way, and your comment of woman thrown in sounds mildly sexist.

I just find it funny that guys like you think she is any dumber than Hilary, or Biden, or even Obama, oh or how about gore. Biden is the king of saying stupid shit. Gore, when running, would make whatever outrageous claims came to mind at the moment. Even Obama had some pretty dumb slip ups during the campaign.

This, â??oh, sheâ??s just dumbâ?? thing is ridiculous.

[Null]

[quote]John S. wrote:
How is letting business drill hurting tax payers? I am pretty sure if we went after are natural resources we would actually be creating Jobs.

Less expenses spent on energy means more money can be saved to pay off debts which means more people can get off welfare. Which means family’s that are struggling can get better.

It seems the only group hurt by this is Government.[/quote]

Well,
By letting them take public resources for nearly no $…

If the resources are on public land then let them pay market price for mineral extraction… Not give it to them for Coke and prostitutes like the Bush’s bureau of land management…

[ZEB]

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
there are a lot of scientists that claim that we are causing global warming and if we do not do something we are basically going to hell.[/quote]

But there are a lot of scientists who claim that global warming is crock. Hmm, who to believe, who to believe? On the one hand you have a bunch of group think politically correct Al Goreites claiming man is responsible for global warming. On the other hand we have scientists who are speaking freely regardless of the many threats they receive for not falling in line who claim that any global warming at all is from the earth, not man made.

Ojay, I choose to believe the non-politically correct group. Call me crazy but I’ve seen what politically correct thinking has done to the rest of the government (and people) and I’m not following them.

[quote]
Health Insurance has gone up one hundred and thirty one percent since Nineteen ninety nine. Do you think it is ok for an Ins. Company does quit covering some one that has an illness? Do you think it is ok they refuse to cover some one? I doubt that sixty seven percent of the people have health Insurance right now.[/quote]

As soon as health insurance becomes the responsibility of the government the following will happen:

1. More government employees to run the massive department.

2. Higher taxes on small business and others who are responsible for creating jobs and the economy suffers even more.

3. The government telling you which doctor you can go to and what operation you can have.

4. Massive mismanagement and fraud, not unlike what we’ve seen with social security.

Why anyone would want to put the government I charge of anything except waging war is totally beyond me they’ve proven themselves ineffective and not at all cost efficient.

This is a very large mistake!

[quote]
Bush had critics, but it did not start until Late into Bushâ??s second term.[/quote]

Maybe you were not paying attention when the critics came out of the wood work about one year after 9-11. That would be inside of two years after he was first elected President. Do a little research. It began with our invasion of Iraq and continued adnauseum forever.

[quote]
Bush and Cheney both , i am sure profited from the Iraq war[/quote]

Just when I thought you were a sane individual you had to say that—(eye roll)–Please tell us all how the President and Vice President benefited from the Iraq war. Make sure you speak in specifics. Don’t quote any nut job web sites, bring some real information because you are not only quite wrong on this, but actually look silly saying it. YOU are acting like one of the birthers right now. But of course you can’t see it any more than they can see. Amazing really.

[Null]

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Maybe you were not paying attention when the critics came out of the wood work about one year after 9-11. That would be inside of two years after he was first elected President. Do a little research. It began with our invasion of Iraq and continued adnauseum forever.

[/quote]

I was paying attention the scandal was late second term.

No it comes from the attitude that the market will solve all problems, that industries are capable of self regulation.

All hail the Meth head messiah… Rand…

[archiewhittaker]

Offtopic:

Headhunter’s best quote ever!
“We have had enough of European style lawyer shyster nihilist.”

I want to be a shyster nihilist lawyer!

HH, that is the most awesome Euro stereotype ever, I hope it catches on

[Headhunter]

[quote]archiewhittaker wrote:
Offtopic:

Headhunter’s best quote ever!
“We have had enough of European style lawyer shyster nihilist.”

I want to be a shyster nihilist lawyer!

HH, that is the most awesome Euro stereotype ever, I hope it catches on
[/quote]

You will then be qualified to be president of this great land. Of course, you have to be 35 years of age and born…on…American…soil. Uh, oh.

[pittbulll]

[quote]ZEB wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
there are a lot of scientists that claim that we are causing global warming and if we do not do something we are basically going to hell.

But there are a lot of scientists who claim that global warming is crock. Hmm, who to believe, who to believe? On the one hand you have a bunch of group think politically correct Al Goreites claiming man is responsible for global warming. On the other hand we have scientists who are speaking freely regardless of the many threats they receive for not falling in line who claim that any global warming at all is from the earth, not man made.

Ojay, I choose to believe the non-politically correct group. Call me crazy but I’ve seen what politically correct thinking has done to the rest of the government (and people) and I’m not following them.

Health Insurance has gone up one hundred and thirty one percent since Nineteen ninety nine. Do you think it is ok for an Ins. Company does quit covering some one that has an illness? Do you think it is ok they refuse to cover some one? I doubt that sixty seven percent of the people have health Insurance right now.

As soon as health insurance becomes the responsibility of the government the following will happen:

1. More government employees to run the massive department.

2. Higher taxes on small business and others who are responsible for creating jobs and the economy suffers even more.

3. The government telling you which doctor you can go to and what operation you can have.

4. Massive mismanagement and fraud, not unlike what we’ve seen with social security.

Why anyone would want to put the government I charge of anything except waging war is totally beyond me they’ve proven themselves ineffective and not at all cost efficient.

This is a very large mistake!

Bush had critics, but it did not start until Late into Bush�¢??s second term.

Maybe you were not paying attention when the critics came out of the wood work about one year after 9-11. That would be inside of two years after he was first elected President. Do a little research. It began with our invasion of Iraq and continued adnauseum forever.

Bush and Cheney both , i am sure profited from the Iraq war

Just when I thought you were a sane individual you had to say that—(eye roll)–Please tell us all how the President and Vice President benefited from the Iraq war. Make sure you speak in specifics. Don’t quote any nut job web sites, bring some real information because you are not only quite wrong on this, but actually look silly saying it. YOU are acting like one of the birthers right now. But of course you can’t see it any more than they can see. Amazing really.

[/quote]

You will have to show me where (A LOT) of Scientist say Global Warming is a crock. I can defiantly show you a lot that say it is real.

Al Gore may be a nut, but so is Palin. She railed about America spending a bunch of money studying fruit flies. Well those studies save a bunch of money; they can act as a canary in the coal mine. They can save a lot of money and potentially lives.

Intellect is worth something and when some one uses it does not necessarily make them politically correct. I personally think that term is hung on any thing that some one can not grasp.

All these things you say will happen if Health Care reform passes, where did you get that info? Is that Rush Limbaughâ??s speculation? (EYE ROLL

Last night I watched Sicko, while I do take Michael Moore with a grain of salt, I thought it to be a very good study of Health Care in America and the world. One case study showed a young lady that was denied an operation because she did not disclose that at one time she had a yeast infection. It showed people that volunteered to dig at Nine Eleven are not being treated for health complications due to working on the site

I know you are alittle older and probably remember Viet Nam Vets that were jacked around when they tried to get treatment from being sprayed with Agent Orange

Another thing Sicko covered was patients that could not pay their bills being dumped on Skid Row because the Hospital figured they would at least get a bed.

I highly recommend seeing the movie. I know he is the leftâ??s Glen Beck.

I am sorry discussing Bush and Cheneyâ??s profit from the war makes you ill, it made a lot of people ill.

I will leave to you to show me that Bush and Cheney were not big investors of Halliburton, KBR and Black water, tell me so and I will consider it

[pittbulll]

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
$83 trillion in debt will make all this moot, though. The interest on the debt is approaching the total income tax receipts.

We either pay this with paper napkin money, or declare bankruptcy. Either one will cause a depression unlike anything we’ve seen before.

Luckily, unlike 1929, we have a huge military. This military will simply take over and establish a military state.

Capitalism was destroyed by giving the vote to everyone. Only property owners should be allowed to vote, and giving benefits out of the public treasury should have been banned. Ah well, maybe next time…[/quote]

I would love to hear what those old guys that fought the first and Second World War would think about the statement that Democracy has ruined Capitalism. Damn that is almost Un-American

[ZEB]

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
ZEB wrote:

You will have to show me where (A LOT) of Scientist say Global Warming is a crock. I can defiantly show you a lot that say it is real.[/quote]

That’s because all you do is listen to the mainstream liberal media. I’d say over 31 thousand is ALOT wouldn’t you? Here you go:

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_128269.asp

[quote]
Intellect is worth something and when some one uses it does not necessarily make them politically correct. I personally think that term is hung on any thing that some one can not grasp.[/quote]

You’re not even close! There’s another phrase for it called “Group Think”. If you stray from what the group wants you to say or think you are an outcast.

[quote]
All these things you say will happen if Health Care reform passes, where did you get that info? Is that Rush Limbaugh�¢??s speculation? (EYE ROLL :)[/quote]

I thought you were a more serious contender, you’re a very big disappointment. Tell me where does all of this money come from to pay for those who cannot afford health care? Do you think it falls from the sky? When taxes go up on small business, small business stops expanding and hiring and unemployment goes up. For every single thing the government GIVES you it comes from someone else’s pocket. You don’t understand that? No seriously, come on.

[quote]
I know you are alittle older and probably remember Viet Nam Vets that were jacked around when they tried to get treatment from being sprayed with Agent Orange[/quote]

That had nothing to do with the healthcare issue as it stands today, sorry.

[quote]
Another thing Sicko covered was patients that could not pay their bills being dumped on Skid Row because the Hospital figured they would at least get a bed.

I highly recommend seeing the movie. I know he is the left�¢??s Glen Beck.[/quote]

I don’t watch propaganda sorry. By the way please point out something of substance that Glenn Beck has lied about.

I am sorry discussing Bush and Cheney�¢??s profit from the war makes you ill, it made a lot of people ill.

I will leave to you to show me that Bush and Cheney were not big investors of Halliburton, KBR and Black water, tell me so and I will consider it

I asked you to show me how they profited and you cannot do it. When you run for office your assets are placed in a blind account in other words you have no idea what you own or do not own.

Don’t post back unless you have some solid evidence that Bush and Cheney profited from the war in Iran. I’m tired of the fringe making such an outlandish claim with zero substantiation.

Post back with the proof, otherwise give it a rest.

[pittbulll]

[quote]pushharder wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
ZEB wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
ZEB wrote:

If I were King of America, I would pull troops out of Afghanistan.

Okay, pull them out, or give them the reserves that they need. But doing what Obama is doing simply puts them in harms way. I think this is a direct reflection of his youth and inexperience, as opposed to his extreme liberalism.

I personally do not think Obama is left; he is way too concerned about being bipartisan to be a left winger.

I’m he has tried (or is trying) to push several wacky left wing ideas into law. By doing this he has not only alienated the republicans in Congress, but also the more conservative “blue dog” democrats. Now, which Obama are you talking about? Is that Harry Obama who lives on Elm Street?

I personally see health care reform as a good thing for all. Right now American companies are paying for health care and trying to compete on a World market where other players Government take care of health care.

I have drank no Kool-Aid, I personally thought you to be above the flat head mentality in these forums.

Yea, that was sort of harsh, sorry about that.

As far as Health Care I have not heard one of the boys club complain about the trillion dollars spent in Iraq. And I would say it is probably more than that. Bush was notorious about not including all aspects of the cost to make the price more palatable

But what does one have to do with the other? I was and am against the war in Iraq. I didn’t like it for many reasons. Now on to health care, how does one turn the economy around by raising taxes in the form of cap and trade and health care on businesses who are able to hire people and lower the unemployment rate thus helping the economy. Please explain.

The thing that Health care and the war in Iraq have in common, for sake of this conversation, is cost. There is no apology needed

As far as cap and trade, there are a lot of scientists that claim that we are causing global warming and if we do not do something we are basically going to hell. I understand that at one time the best minds in the world thought the earth was flat. I know we have a bunch of Republicans that think science is evil. If I were to come down on a side it would be on Science�¢??s

have not seen a copy of the bill; I doubt that I would read it unless I were paid to do so. (Like being a Congressman). I do hope they get it right.

Get it right like they did the stimulus package that just had to be rushed through? The only way to get it right is to scrap it, it’s a bad idea. In the latest poll 67% of people are happy with their current health insurance. While we both know things could be better what’s the rush on pushing for this thing so hard? Is it good for the nation or simply politics as usual. We know the answer to that one don’t we?

We are back to dealing with forces, that are not easily grasped. Right now one of the stimulus programs giving a tax break to first time home buyers is a very good kick in the pants to the Real Estate market (I believe). I have my doubts about the Auto bail out. But I do see what he tried to accomplish. And I do not think we can call it a failure yet. I think the forces we do not talk much about are that some say this could have rivaled the Great Depression. You are entitled to think what you like, but that could have been averted due to the stimulus

Health Insurance has gone up one hundred and thirty one percent since Nineteen ninety nine. Do you think it is ok for an Ins. Company does quit covering some one that has an illness? Do you think it is ok they refuse to cover some one? I doubt that sixty seven percent of the people have health Insurance right now.

http://www.nchc.org/facts/coverage.shtml

You still have the Birthers, and the people that think Obama is a Nazi (white supremist) He is a Racist, He is the epitome of evil. How can an objective person give these people any creditability?

And during the Bush administration there were many lefties who thought that Bush was “trading blood for oil” and gaining personal wealth from the Iraq war. the list of conspiracies that Bush was supposed to have been involved in were never ending, all nonsense. I can still remember the many loony posts on this board regarding such things. There will always be a minority on both sides that take things to an extreme. This should not reflect on either party at large.

Bush had critics, but it did not start until Late into Bush�¢??s second term. I also think a lot of it was justified. I think that most people including most critics of Bush thought Cindy Sheehan was a nut job. The difference with Obama was they never gave him a chance; it was negative right off the bat. They all acting like Cindy Sheehan .I personally think it is a racial issue. I know you will disagree.

Bush and Cheney both , i am sure profited from the Iraq war

I tried to answer line by line . It may not work

Good grief, Pitt. Learn how the [qoute] and [/qoute] thing works for crying out loud. You’ve been here long enough to understand it.[/quote]

If you could explain it to me I would sincerely appreciate it

[pittbulll]

[quote]ZEB wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
ZEB wrote:

You will have to show me where (A LOT) of Scientist say Global Warming is a crock. I can defiantly show you a lot that say it is real.

That’s because all you do is listen to the mainstream liberal media. I’d say over 31 thousand is ALOT wouldn’t you? Here you go:

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_128269.asp

Intellect is worth something and when some one uses it does not necessarily make them politically correct. I personally think that term is hung on any thing that some one can not grasp.

You’re not even close! There’s another phrase for it called “Group Think”. If you stray from what the group wants you to say or think you are an outcast.

All these things you say will happen if Health Care reform passes, where did you get that info? Is that Rush Limbaugh�?�¢??s speculation? (EYE ROLL

I thought you were a more serious contender, you’re a very big disappointment. Tell me where does all of this money come from to pay for those who cannot afford health care? Do you think it falls from the sky? When taxes go up on small business, small business stops expanding and hiring and unemployment goes up. For every single thing the government GIVES you it comes from someone else’s pocket. You don’t understand that? No seriously, come on.

I know you are alittle older and probably remember Viet Nam Vets that were jacked around when they tried to get treatment from being sprayed with Agent Orange

That had nothing to do with the healthcare issue as it stands today, sorry.

Another thing Sicko covered was patients that could not pay their bills being dumped on Skid Row because the Hospital figured they would at least get a bed.

I highly recommend seeing the movie. I know he is the left�?�¢??s Glen Beck.

I don’t watch propaganda sorry. By the way please point out something of substance that Glenn Beck has lied about.

I am sorry discussing Bush and Cheney�?�¢??s profit from the war makes you ill, it made a lot of people ill.

I will leave to you to show me that Bush and Cheney were not big investors of Halliburton, KBR and Black water, tell me so and I will consider it

I asked you to show me how they profited and you cannot do it. When you run for office your assets are placed in a blind account in other words you have no idea what you own or do not own.

Don’t post back unless you have some solid evidence that Bush and Cheney profited from the war in Iran. I’m tired of the fringe making such an outlandish claim with zero substantiation.

Post back with the proof, otherwise give it a rest.

[/quote]

I read your article on Global warming, I found it interesting and could not discredit in any way, like I say my mind is not made up on that particular subject.

The only thing I have made my mind up to was that we have to be the best Stewarts of the world possible and that article agreed with my feelings

You term Group think is most evident in these forums , the GROUP is Republican with a strong Libertarian streak, and a couple right wing Wackos, Most of them agree on Abortion, Anti Poor, and that any body that does not see things the way the group dictates is to be ridiculed and deemed not as intelligent as the GROUP. I see it differently, I see the GROUP as being incapable (for the most part) of original thought

Oh please, do not be disappointed Right now we are in a major recession, and there is no way to break even. (Ask Any State).The last two Presidents that balanced the budget did not do so by cutting expenditures. They did it by creating the environment that creates a robust economy.

The only President I ever saw treat the economy any other way than you would run a business was George W Bush , even his Dad knew if you increase spending you have to increase taxes.

I have heard many Republicans say our health care system is broke that it is unsustainable, that we need to fix it. But they are afraid to do so, because the Insurance and Pharm companies have them by the balls

Glen Beck may or may not be a liar but he is truley an IDIOT.

- YouTube

I think most people are going to side with me on Cheney; this is not a legal proceeding. I and most Americans feel he profited handsomely from the rise in Halliburton stock. I can not prove anything , this is a court of public opinion.

A few posts back I asked you if you thought our health care system was good or does it need fixing.