The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: BannedFromDU on October 01, 2013, 02:20:34 PM
-
You might be giddy about the Styx and Humble Pie records you just signed up for at a penny, but wait til the real bill comes. You won't be able to say you don't want next month's selection, either.
That 0dumbo and the Dumbettes record is coming no matter what, and YOU have to pay for it.
-
You also have to pay for the records that other people ordered.
-
You also have to pay for the records that other people ordered.
And the ones shipped to them even if they didn't order.
-
You might be giddy about the Styx and Humble Pie records you just signed up for at a penny, but wait til the real bill comes. You won't be able to say you don't want next month's selection, either.
That 0dumbo and the Dumbettes record is coming no matter what, and YOU have to pay for it.
How in the hell did you know I ordered all if Styx' albums when I joined the Columbia Record club for yes, a penny.
And whenever I missed returning that damn card I got charged $11 (quite a bit back then) for some group no one ever heard of, then or now.
-
One other differance the Columbia Record & Tape Club web sites worked.
How many hundreds of billions has Obama the Incompetent and his merry band of idiots spent in the last three years to such a monstrous cluster ****.
Also if a private company had rolled anything out near this bad there would be 20 federal agencies up their ass fining and regulating. In the fedgov there will be promotions and bonuses for the train wreck.
-
What's nifty (for those who favor the ACA) is that all the glitches would have been a major news item, but they got overshadowed by the government shut-down.
Serious question here, though. The Republican Party is in trouble. How this shutdown might be useful to conservatives is beyond me. Can anyone explain how this is a good thing for conservatives?
:???:
Hope all my fellow citizens here are well.
-Laelth
-
What's nifty (for those who favor the ACA) is that all the glitches would have been a major news item, but they got overshadowed by the government shut-down.
Serious question here, though. The Republican Party is in trouble. How this shutdown might be useful to conservatives is beyond me. Can anyone explain how this is a good thing for conservatives?
:???:
Hope all my fellow citizens here are well.
-Laelth
Because Obama and Harry Reid own it - lock, stock, and barrel. The news is not favoring obama, especially not since he's out sticking his foot down his throat.
-
What's nifty (for those who favor the ACA) is that all the glitches would have been a major news item, but they got overshadowed by the government shut-down.
Serious question here, though. The Republican Party is in trouble. How this shutdown might be useful to conservatives is beyond me. Can anyone explain how this is a good thing for conservatives?
:???:
Hope all my fellow citizens here are well.
-Laelth
Have the Dimocrat (commie) senators explain to us why corporations should get a break, but we don't. Also, why do they get a break and we don't?
-
What's nifty (for those who favor the ACA) is that all the glitches would have been a major news item, but they got overshadowed by the government shut-down.
Serious question here, though. The Republican Party is in trouble. How this shutdown might be useful to conservatives is beyond me. Can anyone explain how this is a good thing for conservatives?
:???:
Hope all my fellow citizens here are well.
-Laelth
First, there is no way that the democrat propagandists in the MSM would put out anything but glowing reports of the Obama HellCare. It. Just. Wouldn't. Happen. So get over the shutdown pushing it off the front pages.
Second, the republican party is in trouble because it doesn't listen to its base. Remember the million plus voters that stayed home in 2012?
Third, the choices were give Obama everything he wants or finally taking a stand to excite the public.
Fourth, I see this as the sequester. 0 and the evil democrat elites will be out hysterically yelling at how bad things will be and then pffft.
Fifth, and this is important, most people will continue on as if nothing happened. That will creep in that the federal government doesn't need to be so big.
Sixth, between his failure to keep government open AND the complete failure of the cACA exchanges in one day will demonstrate how over their heads Obama and his merry band of idiots truly are.
Seventh, this is not 95 and Obama ain't no Billy Jeff.
Eighth, builds momentum for the debt limit battle where Obama and the entire democrat senate caucus voted NO in 2006.
Is this some kind of slam dunk win? No. Do the republicans come out of it better than the alternative? Yes. The only thing that can really screw the republicans in if the rinos get together and cut off their nose despite their faces for spite.
-
Because Obama and Harry Reid own it - lock, stock, and barrel. The news is not favoring obama, especially not since he's out sticking his foot down his throat.
Sir Golfsalot is not concerned about the shutdown at all in fact he went golfing (shocking I know) on Friday, Sat, Sun and Monday. Focused like a LASER beam he is.
-
Have the Dimocrat (commie) senators explain to us why corporations should get a break, but we don't. Also, why do they get a break and we don't?
Sadly, my answer to this one is simple. It's because the Democrats are as afraid of ruffling the feathers of corporate interests as the Republicans are. I think it was a bad move, but I have no other explanation for the President's fiat on this part of the ACA. Not sure that the Senate had anything to do with it (other than passing the law in the first place).
-Laelth
-
Because Obama and Harry Reid own it - lock, stock, and barrel. The news is not favoring obama, especially not since he's out sticking his foot down his throat.
It will be interesting to see how this plays in the media, but jukin (above) suggests the MSM will protect Obama and the Democrats. So far, one poll (at least) indicates that a majority of Americans are blaming Republicans for the shut-down. This can change, of course. Only time will tell.
Thanks for the response.
-Laelth
-
It will be interesting to see how this plays in the media, but jukin (above) suggests the MSM will protect Obama and the Democrats. So far, one poll (at least) indicates that a majority of Americans are blaming Republicans for the shut-down. This can change, of course. Only time will tell.
Thanks for the response.
-Laelth
Oh gawd it's back.
And still spewing 100% pure bullshit
-
Oh gawd it's back.
And still spewing 100% pure bullshit
Nice to see you, as well, txradioguy. :cheersmate:
-Laelth
-
Nice to see you, as well, txradioguy. :cheersmate:
-Laelth
Wish I could say the same. Whats the matter...OET forget to pay the server bill again?
-
First, there is no way that the democrat propagandists in the MSM would put out anything but glowing reports of the Obama HellCare. It. Just. Wouldn't. Happen. So get over the shutdown pushing it off the front pages.
Thanks for a thorough and thoughtful response. I'll let you and wasp69 debate this first point. Only time will tell how this will play out in the media.
Second, the republican party is in trouble because it doesn't listen to its base. Remember the million plus voters that stayed home in 2012?
Those of us on the left (the Democratic Party's base) think the mainstream party doesn't listen to us, either. Oddly enough, it appears the Republican Party is actually listening to its base now, in a way I haven't seen in the recent past. That, in fact, may be part of the Republican Party's problem. It's so afraid of its base that the national party must fight the ACA by any means possible, including shutting down the government.
Third, the choices were give Obama everything he wants or finally taking a stand to excite the public.
That's interesting. I was unaware that some conservatives see this issue in such stark terms. Thanks for that insight.
Fourth, I see this as the sequester. 0 and the evil democrat elites will be out hysterically yelling at how bad things will be and then pffft.
Fifth, and this is important, most people will continue on as if nothing happened. That will creep in that the federal government doesn't need to be so big.
I don't understand your fourth point, but the fifth one I see, and the government shutdown will, I think, test how much the American people want various government services. I think it's good to remind people how much they actually do want various government services, and the shutdown will serve as a useful reminder, but, if you're right, and we discover that various government employees/services are neither wanted nor needed, we will have a golden opportunity to fire/retrain said employees and eliminate wasteful programs. Not sure this is a good idea in this economic climate, but you could be right, and we may see a public outcry for less government, but I doubt it.
Sixth, between his failure to keep government open AND the complete failure of the cACA exchanges in one day will demonstrate how over their heads Obama and his merry band of idiots truly are.
That, or the ACA will prove to be popular and wildly successful and the shutdown will be blamed on Republicans. Hard to say, really, but if you're right, then I see your point. That would be good for the Republican Party, presumably.
Seventh, this is not 95 and Obama ain't no Billy Jeff.
Democrats are banking on the notion that this shutdown will have the same results as the 1995 shutdown, but you're right to say that BO is not BC. How that difference will play out remains to be seen. I am on record as naming BC the best Republican President since Eisenhower, but BO is giving him a run for his money (from my perspective).
Eighth, builds momentum for the debt limit battle where Obama and the entire democrat senate caucus voted NO in 2006.
The debt limit battle will be the real test, agreed. It's just not cool to muck with the full faith and credit of the United States. I suspect our business leaders will reign the Republican Party in on this one, but they'll pressure Democrats too, and we may see some compromise.
Is this some kind of slam dunk win? No. Do the republicans come out of it better than the alternative? Yes. The only thing that can really screw the republicans in if the rinos get together and cut off their nose despite their faces for spite.
I very much appreciate your sharing your perspective on this. Thanks.
-Laelth
-
Wish I could say the same. Whats the matter...OET forget to pay the server bill again?
LOL. Don't worry. I can't stay long. Lots of people are going to want to take a bite out of this chew toy, and I won't be able to keep up with my responses (as always). Regards, all the same.
-Laelth
-
I don't understand your fourth point
Your fellow Libtards in and out of the MSM have been running around in wide eyed terror proclaiming the end of the world as we know it starting with the sequester.
They seemed to be the only ones worried because the rest of the shrugged shrugged their shoulders and went on about their daily life.
Same thing is happening now. The media is all in a tizzy over 800K of a total workforce of 2.9 million getting what amounts to a paid vacation.
Meanwhile the rest of America has more important thigns to worry about.
Translated: "pfft"
-
The debt limit battle will be the real test, agreed. It's just not cool to muck with the full faith and credit of the United States. I suspect our business leaders will reign the Republican Party in on this one, but they'll pressure Democrats too, and we may see some compromise.
The isue on the debt limit isn't about current spending. We're not going to default interest on money borrowed will stil be paid etc etc. We take in almost $200 billion a month in income in this country.
This fight is about future spending and how much of it the President will be able to get away with and how much he'll be allowed to add to the 6 trillion he's already added to the deficit. He wants carte blanche.
There will be no compromise. He's already said he's not going to negotiate.
-
Your fellow Libtards in and out of the MSM have been running around in wide eyed terror proclaiming the end of the world as we know it starting with the sequester.
They seemed to be the only ones worried because the rest of the shrugged shrugged their shoulders and went on about their daily life.
Same thing is happening now. The media is all in a tizzy over 800K of a total workforce of 2.9 million getting what amounts to a paid vacation.
Meanwhile the rest of America has more important thigns to worry about.
Translated: "pfft"
That makes sense. Thanks for the clarification. I am not sure I agree with you, however. People really do miss government services when they lose them. Case in point: Just yesterday a local elementary school had to cancel a field trip to a federally-funded national monument in my home town. Some people were upset about that. How upset remains to be seen. I suppose it depends on how long the shutdown lasts.
-Laelth
-
That makes sense. Thanks for the clarification. I am not sure I agree with you, however. People really do miss government services when they lose them. Case in point: Just yesterday a local elementary school had to cancel a field trip to a federally-funded national monument in my home town. Some people were upset about that. How upset remains to be seen. I suppose it depends on how long the shutdown lasts.
-Laelth
They haven't lost any necessary government services. The monument will still be there when this thing is over. Federally funded National Monuments in a town most likely in the Congress critters home state are nothing more than pork to keep the votes coming his/her way.
The necessary functions of the Government won't shut down. Obama has already signed into law an order making sure that they stay open and operating.
-
They haven't lost any necessary government services. The monument will still be there when this thing is over. Federally funded National Monuments in a town most likely in the Congress critters home state are nothing more than pork to keep the votes coming his/her way.
The necessary functions of the Government won't shut down. Obama has already signed into law an order making sure that they stay open and operating.
I agree, ultimately. The national monument isn't going anywhere, and it's a good thing that the President has signed an order keeping certain government services open and operational. Still, people don't like it when those "non-essential" services are closed. My question is about tactics and strategy. My assumption (and I may be wrong) is that this shutdown puts Republicans in a no-win situation, and I wanted to see what intelligent conservatives have to say about that.
I appreciate your response.
-Laelth
-
The isue on the debt limit isn't about current spending. We're not going to default interest on money borrowed will stil be paid etc etc. We take in almost $200 billion a month in income in this country.
Hmm ... are you suggesting that a failure to increase the debt limit will not affect the full faith and credit of the United States? If so, I am not sure that I agree. Our bond ratings and our currency value will both suffer from our failure to increase the debt limit, as far as I know. I would be happy to be proven wrong on this point.
This fight is about future spending and how much of it the President will be able to get away with and how much he'll be allowed to add to the 6 trillion he's already added to the deficit. He wants carte blanche.
There will be no compromise. He's already said he's not going to negotiate.
Well, BO is a politician, and he keeps his options open. What he says one day may be quite different from what he says the next. That said, I hope he does not compromise. I tend to agree with those who suggest that BO should demand more from the Republicans in order to let them save face and get themselves out of the pickle they find themselves in, as I argued here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1016&pid=74669
-Laelth
-
No it will not affect it. What IS affecting it is the out of control spending by the POTUS and his refusal to get a budget passed and use Federal revenue as his personal slush fund.
The only people the POTUS keeps his options open with are al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.
-
Just yesterday a local elementary school had to cancel a field trip to a federally-funded national monument in my home town. Some people were upset about that. How upset remains to be seen.
:panic:
So, did you think that Obumbles "speach" ( O-) ) was NOT a melt-down? The Emperor has thin skin.
-
:panic:
So, did you think that Obumbles "speach" ( O-) ) was NOT a melt-down? The Emperor has thin skin.
Honestly, no, I didn't think that. It seemed to me that the President's speech on this subject was well received by many people, and I suspect the President will continue to call this event "the Republican shutdown" and will continue to push the meme that the Republican House is responsible. Those of us on the left were thrilled, generally speaking, with his response.
-Laelth
-
Honestly, no, I didn't think that. It seemed to me that the President's speech on this subject was well received by many people, and I suspect the President will continue to call this event "the Republican shutdown" and will continue to push the meme that the Republican House is responsible. Those of us on the left were thrilled, generally speaking, with his response.
-Laelth
So what's the view like with your head jammed so far up the President's ass?
-
Honestly, no, I didn't think that. It seemed to me that the President's speech on this subject was well received by many people, and I suspect the President will continue to call this event "the Republican shutdown" and will continue to push the meme that the Republican House is responsible. Those of us on the left were thrilled, generally speaking, with his response.
-Laelth
By 'thrilled,' I assume you mean you were stumbling around, feeling for a wet washcloth with one of your eyes closed while 0bama popped open a beer.
-
Hmm ... are you suggesting that a failure to increase the debt limit will not affect the full faith and credit of the United States? If so, I am not sure that I agree. Our bond ratings and our currency value will both suffer from our failure to increase the debt limit, as far as I know. I would be happy to be proven wrong on this point.
Now this makes no sense at all and is only a leftist talking point. In the real world borrowing more money makes you less credit worthy. Yes, Owing more money, particularly if you have been borrowing at accelerated rates makes you less not more credit worthy.
Well, BO is a politician, and he keeps his options open. What he says one day may be quite different from what he says the next. That said, I hope he does not compromise. I tend to agree with those who suggest that BO should demand more from the Republicans in order to let them save face and get themselves out of the pickle they find themselves in, as I argued here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1016&pid=74669
-Laelth
We do agree in that I too hope that King Barky does not compromise. Just more proof that everything Obama said in 2007 was a pure lie. I particularly hope that His Incompetence starts doing more stupid political tricks like what happened in the WWII OPEN ARI Memorial. If he starts arresting WWII vets I will have a big smile on my face. As well, the more the petulant child gets out and tirades the better for me. Using history, the more Obama reads off his teleprompter the worse he does in the polls. We call this the Fecal Touch. Even better, I hope he goes off teleprompter because that is when his true inner child comes out.
-
So what's the view like with your head jammed so far up the President's ass?
I have been quite critical of the President on a great number of issues. That said, those of us on the left are definitely supportive of his taking a hard line on the ACA, the shutdown, and the debt ceiling. From our perspective, it's rare to see this President play hardball (He likes to compromise and govern from the center), and we tend to support him when he shows some political courage and actually fights for what we (on the left) want.
-Laelth
-
Now this makes no sense at all and is only a leftist talking point. In the real world borrowing more money makes you less credit worthy. Yes, Owing more money, particularly if you have been borrowing at accelerated rates makes you less not more credit worthy.
I am still looking for some real evidence that shows our failure to increase the debt limit (if it happens) will not hurt both our bond ratings and our currency value. I think it will. Very few serious people deny this.
We do agree in that I too hope that King Barky does not compromise. Just more proof that everything Obama said in 2007 was a pure lie. I particularly hope that His Incompetence starts doing more stupid political tricks like what happened in the WWII OPEN ARI Memorial. If he starts arresting WWII vets I will have a big smile on my face. As well, the more the petulant child gets out and tirades the better for me. Using history, the more Obama reads off his teleprompter the worse he does in the polls. We call this the Fecal Touch. Even better, I hope he goes off teleprompter because that is when his true inner child comes out.
No way you'll see BO arresting WWII vets. No way. As for his 2007 promise, well, I'm not sure to which promise you are referring, but if you will kindly remind me, I will try to respond.
-Laelth
-
By 'thrilled,' I assume you mean you were stumbling around, feeling for a wet washcloth with one of your eyes closed while 0bama popped open a beer.
LOL. Credit where it is due. That's funny. :cheersmate:
-Laelth
-
I have been quite critical of the President on a great number of issues. That said, those of us on the left are definitely supportive of his taking a hard line on the ACA, the shutdown, and the debt ceiling. From our perspective, it's rare to see this President play hardball (He likes to compromise and govern from the center), and we tend to support him when he shows some political courage and actually fights for what we (on the left) want.
-Laelth
Yeah...handouts,freebies and envy driven taxes on those who are successful.
Something to be really proud of there.
-
I am still looking for some real evidence that shows our failure to increase the debt limit (if it happens) will not hurt both our bond ratings and our currency value. I think it will. Very few serious people deny this.
No way you'll see BO arresting WWII vets. No way. As for his 2007 promise, well, I'm not sure to which promise you are referring, but if you will kindly remind me, I will try to respond.
-Laelth
I am sure he will arrest those World War II vets.
-
I have been quite critical of the President on a great number of issues. That said, those of us on the left are definitely supportive of his taking a hard line on the ACA, the shutdown, and the debt ceiling. From our perspective, it's rare to see this President play hardball (He likes to compromise and govern from the center), and we tend to support him when he shows some political courage and actually fights for what we (on the left) want.
-Laelth
You don't seem that critical.
http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,91252.0.html
-
Obamacare needs the young people's participation so they can spread the wealth. This won't happen. Young people and those that do not wish to have insurance will simply pay the less expensive fine and wait to purchase insurance if they ever become ill. It's like buying car insurance after you total your car, then filing a claim.
The exchange plans are screwed up. In order to get a deductible that is under $5000 you will need to be able to afford a 40% co-payment. Good luck to the hospitals and doctors collecting from most people that are already having trouble making ends meet. People that had good insurance where they worked that are now getting thrown under the "elimination of benefits" bus due to the rising cost to the employer won't have any other options. It will be even harder for them if they have had their schedules reduced to under 32 hours a week.
Just because a person has health insurance and is able to afford the premium does not mean they can afford to get sick and use the insurance.
-
Making the rounds:
Posted on FB today:
A post from the Obamacare Website:
"I actually made it through this morning at 8:00 A.M. I have a preexisting condition (Type 1 Diabetes) and my income base was 45K-55K annually I chose tier 2 "Silver Plan" and my monthly premiums came out to $597.00 with $13,988 yearly deductible!!! There is NO POSSIBLE way that I can afford this so I "opt-out" and chose to continue along with no insurance. I received an email tonight at 5:00 P.M. informing me that my fine would be $4,037 and could be attached to my yearly income tax return. Then you make it to the "REPERCUSSIONS PORTION" for "non-payment" of yearly fine. First, your drivers license will be suspended until paid, and if you go 24 consecutive months with "Non-Payment" and you happen to be a home owner, you will have a federal tax lien placed on your home. You can agree to give your bank information so that they can easy "Automatically withdraw" your "penalties" weekly, bi-weekly or monthly! This by no means is "Free" or even "Affordable."
-
Obamacare needs the young people's participation so they can spread the wealth. This won't happen. Young people and those that do not wish to have insurance will simply pay the less expensive fine and wait to purchase insurance if they ever become ill. It's like buying car insurance after you total your car, then filing a claim.
I agree, and I am happy about this. Chief Justice Roberts did us a great favor when he ruled that the mandate was a tax. That means it's not a violation of the criminal law to fail to purchase insurance. My hope is that the ACA will cause health insurance companies to fail which will, in turn, usher in some kind of single-payer, national health care system. Ultimately, I think the mandate is a bad idea, and I have said so (http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Laelth/38), but if it gets us to single-payer, I can live with it. Like you, I am hoping the ACA will fail. If you don't want a single-payer system, you'd better hope the ACA succeeds.
The exchange plans are screwed up. In order to get a deductible that is under $5000 you will need to be able to afford a 40% co-payment. Good luck to the hospitals and doctors collecting from most people that are already having trouble making ends meet. People that had good insurance where they worked that are now getting thrown under the "elimination of benefits" bus due to the rising cost to the employer won't have any other options. It will be even harder for them if they have had their schedules reduced to under 32 hours a week.
Just because a person has health insurance and is able to afford the premium does not mean they can afford to get sick and use the insurance.
It's funny (to me) when pro-business conservatives (and I'm not saying you are one) complain about businesses making moves that hurt workers but help the company's bottom line. While a ton of companies are blaming their anti-worker practices on the ACA (and it's an easy target), I think the anti-worker attitudes of our business leaders is far more to blame for cuts in employee benefits (all of which have been eroding since at least 1981).
-Laelth
-
I agree, and I am happy about this. Chief Justice Roberts did us a great favor when he ruled that the mandate was a tax. That means it's not a violation of the criminal law to fail to purchase insurance. My hope is that the ACA will cause health insurance companies to fail which will, in turn, usher in some kind of single-payer, national health care system. Ultimately, I think the mandate is a bad idea, and I have said so (http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Laelth/38), but if it gets us to single-payer, I can live with it. Like you, I am hoping the ACA will fail. If you don't want a single-payer system, you'd better hope the ACA succeeds.
It's funny (to me) when pro-business conservatives (and I'm not saying you are one) complain about businesses making moves that hurt workers but help the company's bottom line. While a ton of companies are blaming their anti-worker practices on the ACA (and it's an easy target), I think the anti-worker attitudes of our business leaders is far more to blame for cuts in employee benefits (all of which have been eroding since at least 1981).
-Laelth
Just STFU about corporations. If they're so evil and anti-worker, explain to me why the single greatest fear of everyone is companies shutting down their healthcare options and tossing all workers into the exchanges? Why do people prefer to keep healthcare through their employer if 0dumbasscare is so great?
-
You don't seem that critical.
http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,91252.0.html
Really? Mike220 suggested I'd be banned from DU for comments critical of the President in this thread: http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,87801.0.html
To be certain, I am less critical of the President than your average CC poster, but that's to be expected.
-Laelth
-
I agree, and I am happy about this. Chief Justice Roberts did us a great favor when he ruled that the mandate was a tax. That means it's not a violation of the criminal law to fail to purchase insurance. My hope is that the ACA will cause health insurance companies to fail which will, in turn, usher in some kind of single-payer, national health care system. Ultimately, I think the mandate is a bad idea, and I have said so (http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Laelth/38), but if it gets us to single-payer, I can live with it. Like you, I am hoping the ACA will fail. If you don't want a single-payer system, you'd better hope the ACA succeeds.
I
How about it ushers in a time where you scum sucking,****ing idiots have to actually pay (oh the horror) for the services and commodities you use.
Mother ****ing useless piece of dog shit parasites.
You are still as stupid as the day is long Laelth,like every leftist out there you can only imagine your fairy tale dreams coming true but trust me,you and your greedy ilk will be the first ones griping when you are deemed not worth treating.
That will be the only happy moment but not enough to offset the disaster you asswipes are determined to inflict on everyone thinking it is a lottery win for you.
-
Just STFU about corporations. If they're so evil and anti-worker, explain to me why the single greatest fear of everyone is companies shutting down their healthcare options and tossing all workers into the exchanges? Why do people prefer to keep healthcare through their employer if 0dumbasscare is so great?
Corporations are not inherently evil. They are legal fictions (created by the state, dissolved by the state, and allowed to exist by the state). At one time in the history of the English common law there was a condition placed upon the existence of a corporation--the state allowed it to exist only so long as it served the public good. These days we let corporations continue to exist without regard to their public benefit. Nevertheless, they are not evil. By and large, they are good.
But, the people who run most of them can't keep their jobs unless their quarterly earnings grow every quarter. As such, they keep their labor costs as low as possible, and while that's their job, and I don't blame them for that, this practice (while the costs of medical care are skyrocketing) leave us with a lot of people who lack access to medical care.
You'll have to ask each business, specifically, why they are cutting medical insurance benefits in order to get a good answer (I certainly can't speak for them), but if they blame the ACA, my assumption is that they're lying.
As for the American people, some of us are scared of change, and that's natural, but the health-care delivery system we have now needs some tinkering, imo, and the ACA will undoubtedly change things, for better or for worse.
-Laelth
-
Corporations are not inherently evil. They are legal fictions (created by the state, dissolved by the state, and allowed to exist by the state). At one time in the history of the English common law there was a condition placed upon the existence of a corporation--the state allowed it to exist only so long as it served the public good. These days we let corporations continue to exist without regard to their public benefit. Nevertheless, they are not evil. By and large, they are good.
But, the people who run most of them can't keep their jobs unless their quarterly earnings grow every quarter. As such, they keep their labor costs as low as possible, and while that's their job, and I don't blame them for that, this practice (while the costs of medical care are skyrocketing) leave us with a lot of people who lack access to medical care.
You'll have to ask each business, specifically, why they are cutting medical insurance benefits in order to get a good answer (I certainly can't speak for them), but if they blame the ACA, my assumption is that they're lying.
As for the American people, some of us are scared of change, and that's natural, but the health-care delivery system we have now needs some tinkering, imo, and the ACA will undoubtedly change things, for better or for worse.
-Laelth
Just like a ****ing liberal, when the answer won't suit your cause, you change the narrative.
-
How about it ushers in a time where you scum sucking,****ing idiots have to actually pay (oh the horror) for the services and commodities you use.
Mother ****ing useless piece of dog shit parasites.
You are still as stupid as the day is long Laelth,like every leftist out there you can only imagine your fairy tale dreams coming true but trust me,you and your greedy ilk will be the first ones griping when you are deemed not worth treating.
That will be the only happy moment but not enough to offset the disaster you asswipes are determined to inflict on everyone thinking it is a lottery win for you.
If what we pass into law doesn't work, it can be repealed. You will note that of the hundreds of programs passed by FDR to combat the Great Depression, very few of them survived. If it works, we'll keep it. If it fails, we can get rid of it. The implementation of one law is not the end of the world.
And I am glad you're having so much fun chewing on me. Hope you feel better. :cheersmate:
-Laelth
-
If what we pass into law doesn't work, it can be repealed. You will note that of the hundreds of programs passed by FDR to combat the Great Depression, very few of them survived. If it works, we'll keep it. If it fails, we can get rid of it. The implementation of one law is not the end of the world.
And I am glad you're having so much fun chewing on me. Hope you feel better. :cheersmate:
-Laelth
No dipshit...you pretend as a lefty to be soooooooo concerned and compassionate but in the blink of an eye you wish an entire industry with all its employees to fail so that something YOU want can be free.
You are disgusting and despicable and I wish you nothing but misery,that is what you deserve.
-
Just because a person has health insurance and is able to afford the premium does not mean they can afford to get sick and use the insurance.
Which is why this needs to be implemented, in full, right now. The greedy pigs should be made to feel the pain of their decisions and the apathetic made all too aware the penalty for not paying attention.
The whole mess would be repealed within a month.
-
I am still looking for some real evidence that shows our failure to increase the debt limit (if it happens) will not hurt both our bond ratings and our currency value. I think it will. Very few serious people deny this.
I'm still waiting for a good explanation as to the why we should increase the debt ceiling when it cost us our bond rating and devalued our currency back in 2011.
-
Honestly, no, I didn't think that. It seemed to me that the President's speech on this subject was well received by many people, and I suspect the President will continue to call this event "the Republican shutdown" and will continue to push the meme that the Republican House is responsible. Those of us on the left were thrilled, generally speaking, with his response.
-Laelth
You do understand that his attempt to push the "Republican sequester" meme pretty much failed, don't you? You do understand that no one, anywhere, is buying his bullshit anymore, don't you?
-
No dipshit...you pretend as a lefty to be soooooooo concerned and compassionate but in the blink of an eye you wish an entire industry with all its employees to fail so that something YOU want can be free.
You are disgusting and despicable and I wish you nothing but misery,that is what you deserve.
When the President announced that he would not push for a single-payer system because it would be, in his words, "too disruptive," i.e. it would kill the health insurance industry, I was quite angry. I want the health insurance industry crippled (and left only selling cadillac plans to the wealthy). I don't think insurance is a good model to use when dealing with health care. Insurance is great for high cost/low risk situations (like replacing a house that has burned down), but health care is different. It's high cost and nearly 100% risk. Nearly all of us will get sick and need medical care at one time or another, and so insurance doesn't work well for that (unless you like insurance companies padding their bottom lines by regularly denying coverage). Health, I think, is a vital, national concern. As such, I want to (mostly) get the insurance companies out of it.
And nothing is free in this society, as you know, but I think tax revenues are a more just and equitable way to pay for healthcare services that we all need.
Thanks for the response.
-Laelth
-
I'm still waiting for a good explanation as to the why we should increase the debt ceiling when it cost us our bond rating and devalued our currency back in 2011.
Um ... because we can't pay our bills unless we increase the debt ceiling? And if we don't pay our bills, we risk the full faith and credit of the United States?
(http://www.democraticunderground.com/emoticons/shrug.gif)
-Laelth
-
You do understand that his attempt to push the "Republican sequester" meme pretty much failed, don't you? You do understand that no one, anywhere, is buying his bullshit anymore, don't you?
Sorry, no. I do not understand either of those statements to be true. Neither of them.
(http://www.democraticunderground.com/emoticons/shrug.gif)
-Laelth
-
When the President announced that he would not push for a single-payer system because it would be, in his words, "too disruptive," i.e. it would kill the health insurance industry, I was quite angry. I want the health insurance industry crippled (and left only selling cadillac plans to the wealthy). I don't think insurance is a good model to use when dealing with health care. Insurance is great for high cost/low risk situations (like replacing a house that has burned down), but health care is different. It's high cost and nearly 100% risk. Nearly all of us will get sick and need medical care at one time or another, and so insurance doesn't work well for that (unless you like insurance companies padding their bottom lines by regularly denying coverage). Health, I think, is a vital, national concern. As such, I want to (mostly) get the insurance companies out of it.
And nothing is free in this society, as you know, but I think tax revenues are a more just and equitable way to pay for healthcare services that we all need.
Thanks for the response.
-Laelth
Well isn`t that special of you...what do you propose happens to all those that work in that industry do since you so magnanimously have wished poverty on them?
-
Um ... because we can't pay our bills unless we increase the debt ceiling? And if we don't pay our bills, we risk the full faith and credit of the United States?
(http://www.democraticunderground.com/emoticons/shrug.gif)
-Laelth
So what do you do when your bills exceed your income? You budget your money and you cut back your expenditures, not add to them.
-
Sorry, no. I do not understand either of those statements to be true. Neither of them.
(http://www.democraticunderground.com/emoticons/shrug.gif)
-Laelth
No,you wish they were not true but look around genius...the only ones fretting are leftist cretins terrified that people have figured out government doesn`t have to grow unchecked to infinity.
-
Well isn`t that special of you...what do you propose happens to all those that work in that industry do since you so magnanimously have wished poverty on them?
Most likely, if we did get a single-payer system, many of those folks would go to work for the government and would help run the new single-payer system.
-Laelth
-
Most likely, if we did get a single-payer system, many of those folks would go to work for the government and would help run the new single-payer system.
-Laelth
Thank you for proving what a brain dead idiot you are.
Eat shit and die.
-
Most likely, if we did get a single-payer system, many of those folks would go to work for the government and would help run the new single-payer system.
-Laelth
So who do you think is going to pay for their salaries?
-
Most likely, if we did get a single-payer system, many of those folks would go to work for the government and would help run the new single-payer system.
-Laelth
Tax and crash, huh? Brilliant plan...
-
Sorry, no. I do not understand either of those statements to be true. Neither of them.
(http://www.democraticunderground.com/emoticons/shrug.gif)
-Laelth
I'm not surprised.
-
Um ... because we can't pay our bills unless we increase the debt ceiling? And if we don't pay our bills, we risk the full faith and credit of the United States?
(http://www.democraticunderground.com/emoticons/shrug.gif)
-Laelth
Yes, we can. Funny thing, that not being able to go grab more credit means you have to live within your means. If we can't pay our bills without borrowing money (something that has already caused a bond rating downgrade in 2011), something has gone terribly wrong.
Wouldn't you agree?
-
So what do you do when your bills exceed your income? You budget your money and you cut back your expenditures, not add to them.
You could, of course, increase your income.
(http://www.democraticunderground.com/emoticons/shrug.gif)
-Laelth
-
Yes, we can. Funny thing, that not being able to go grab more credit means you have to live within your means. If we can't pay our bills without borrowing money (something that has already caused a bond rating downgrade in 2011), something has gone terribly wrong.
Wouldn't you agree?
No, I do not agree. We pay our bills by borrowing money all the time--always have and always will.
-Laelth
-
No,you wish they were not true but look around genius...the only ones fretting are leftist cretins terrified that people have figured out government doesn`t have to grow unchecked to infinity.
If you say so.
-Laelth
-
No, I do not agree. We pay our bills by borrowing money all the time--always have and always will.
-Laelth
You just took idiocy to a new level...what happens when the bill you are borrowing to pay was borrowed money to start with?
-
No, I do not agree. We pay our bills by borrowing money all the time--always have and always will.
-Laelth
Really? This is how you run your household?
-
Most likely, if we did get a single-payer system, many of those folks would go to work for the government and would help run the new single-payer system.
-Laelth
I see. 1+1=POTATO.
Do these people work for free?
Where do the resources come from?
You should read "Basic Economics" By Dr. Sowell. It will do you a world of good.
-
You could, of course, increase your income.
(http://www.democraticunderground.com/emoticons/shrug.gif)
-Laelth
Gee,I want a new computer...how about you give me all the money (yeah,I know as a DUmbass that is less then 20 bucks) you have so I can get one.
See,I just increased my income! :cheersmate:
-
You could, of course, increase your income.
(http://www.democraticunderground.com/emoticons/shrug.gif)
-Laelth
Not in this economy and not with the impending full implementation of Obamacare.
-
If you say so.
-Laelth
It's the truth. Liberals if left unchecked would not have any limits on their spending at the Federal or any level.
Obama proves that every year he doesn't pass a budget.
-
Not in this economy and not with the impending full implementation of Obamacare.
Budgets are tight as the cost to employers skyrocket.
-
You might be giddy about the Styx and Humble Pie records you just signed up for at a penny, but wait til the real bill comes. You won't be able to say you don't want next month's selection, either.
That 0dumbo and the Dumbettes record is coming no matter what, and YOU have to pay for it.
It extends beyond that even.
What the political left is essentially doing is saying "We want to dictate the terms by which we as a country operates," while failing to recognize that those of us who are the political right realize we're the one's who would be paying the bill, and we're not going to cooperate under those terms. Why should we? It's not worth our time or effort to continue to go along. Try and force us to go along with issues and programs we know are destructive and it won't be long until we are completely apathetic towards the whole thing. What happens when roughly 50% of the country doesn't care anymore? It seems that's what the Laelth's of the world want, because that will eventually be what they get at the rate they're going.
.
-
Really? This is how you run your household?
Um ... yes. In fact, so do many Americans. We buy houses and cars we can't afford on credit. We borrow money we don't have (from a bank) and then pay the bank back through a mortgage or a car note. This allows us to have things we can't afford to buy and then pay for those things over time based upon expected future income.
This is exactly what most people do, and it's also what our government does. I see little difference.
-Laelth
-
Um ... yes. In fact, so do many Americans. We buy houses and cars we can't afford on credit. We borrow money we don't have (from a bank) and then pay the bank back through a mortgage or a car note. This allows us to have things we can't afford to buy and then pay for those things over time based upon expected future income.
Way to totally misrepresent the banking and lending system of America to fit your little meme.
This is exactly what most people do, and it's also what our government does. I see little difference.
-Laelth
Most people go to jail when they continue to bounce checks after they've run the bank acount dry.
Most people don't get to arbitraily raise their debt limit when they've used up all the credit the bank has given them.
Most people get their shiny toys repoessessed or have to sell them when they don't have the money to pay for them.
Most people would go to jail for mishandling money the way the government does.
The Government gets to do all of that and give most people a big middle finger as they do it.
So no...AGAIN you're tragically wrong. Most people do NOT operate just like the Federal Government does.
-
No, I do not agree. We pay our bills by borrowing money all the time--always have and always will.
-Laelth
I read this, and weep when I realize that you can vote.
-
I read this, and weep when I realize that you can vote.
What can I say? I am sorry you feel that way.
(http://www.democraticunderground.com/emoticons/shrug.gif)
-Laelth
-
What can I say? I am sorry you feel that way.
(http://www.democraticunderground.com/emoticons/shrug.gif)
-Laelth
Again...if you are to be believed...the way you claim to pay your bills and buy necessities is so out of synch with how most people run their finances as to not be believed.
-
Most people go to jail when they continue to bounce checks after they've run the bank acount dry.
The United States isn't bouncing any checks ... not yet. People around the world are willing to continue to lend us money because we work hard, we pay our taxes, and we pay our bills. Not even a remote risk that the U.S. can't continue to borrow (unless we default on our debts on Oct. 17, and we'll see how that plays out).
Most people don't get to arbitraily raise their debt limit when they've used up all the credit the bank has given them.
Most people get their shiny toys repoessessed or have to sell them when they don't have the money to pay for them.
Most people would go to jail for mishandling money the way the government does.
The Government gets to do all of that and give most people a big middle finger as they do it.
So no...AGAIN you're tragically wrong. Most people do NOT operate just like the Federal Government does.
Indeed, it's actually easier and carries far less risk for the United States to borrow money than it does for the average American. So, why shouldn't we borrow? After all, Vice President Cheney told us "deficits don't matter." Why shouldn't we do what most Americans do (and what our government has done throughout most of its history, and that is to borrow now to get things that we will pay for later, over time)?
(http://www.democraticunderground.com/emoticons/shrug.gif)
-Laelth
-
Um ... yes. In fact, so do many Americans. We buy houses and cars we can't afford on credit. We borrow money we don't have (from a bank) and then pay the bank back through a mortgage or a car note. This allows us to have things we can't afford to buy and then pay for those things over time based upon expected future income.
This is exactly what most people do, and it's also what our government does. I see little difference.
-Laelth
Once again you prove yourself too stupid to breathe.
What the government does is pay off interest on borrowed money with more borrowed money.
I am so glad you dropped by...it puts on display just exactly the level of moron you DUmbasses truly are.
-
The United States isn't bouncing any checks ... not yet. People around the world are willing to continue to lend us money because we work hard, we pay our taxes, and we pay our bills. Not even a remote risk that the U.S. can't continue to borrow (unless we default on our debts on Oct. 17, and we'll see how that plays out).
No they don't bounce checks...they just PRINT MORE MONEY.
Most people go to jail for doing that.
Indeed, it's actually easier and carries far less risk for the United States to borrow money than it does for the average American. So, why shouldn't we borrow?
Less risk? Are you high? There is far greater risk to the economy when our debt to income ratio is at the level it is now. Our debt as a country is 81% of GDP. That is not only dangerous it's reckless and irresponsible and in the long run NOT sustainable.
Yet her you come with your Paul Krugman Keynesian economics bullshit singing the virtues of borrowing beyond our means.
After all, Vice President Cheney told us "deficits don't matter."
Link?
Why shouldn't we do what most Americans do (and what our government has done throughout most of its history, and that is to borrow now to get things that we will pay for later, over time?
Most people save for what they want. They adjust their income to be able to pay for what they want. And in the even they do borrow money for a purchase they pay it back...on time...with interest or face escalating penalties for non payment.
Anything worth having is worth saving for.
[img width=37 height=15]http://www.democraticunderground.com/emoticons/shrug.gif[img]
Take your virus ridden DU graphics and shove them while you're at it. You're linking us back to Du when you do that shit.
-
Once again you prove yourself too stupid to breathe.
What the government does is pay off interest on borrowed money with more borrowed money.
I am so glad you dropped by...it puts on display just exactly the level of moron you DUmbasses truly are.
Yes, Carl. It's nice to see you too. :cheersmate:
-Laelth
-
No they don't bounce checks...they just PRINT MORE MONEY.
Most people go to jail for doing that.
Nobody is putting the United States in jail. We are the greatest Empire in the history of the Earth, the most powerful nation to ever exist on this planet. We can borrow what we want when we want it. And, as you rightly note, we can print more money, and nobody can stop us (so long as the price of oil is tied to the U.S. dollar). They're almost all dependent upon us. I don't see the problem, here.
Less risk? Are you high? There is far greater risk to the economy when our debt to income ratio is at the level it is now. Our debt as a country is 81% of GDP. That is not only dangerous it's reckless and irresponsible and in the long run NOT sustainable.
Our debt to GDP ratio is at about the same level it was during WWII. I am not terribly worried about this. Some are. I am not, and neither is Vice President Cheney.
Here's your link, and there are a lot more: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2013/03/24/cheney_was_right_deficits_don039t_matter_304471.html
Most people save for what they want. They adjust their income to be able to pay for what they want. And in the even they do borrow money for a purchase they pay it back...on time...with interest or face escalating penalties for non payment.
Anything worth having is worth saving for.
You are kidding, right? Most people I know borrow for a house and a car because they can't pay for those things when they need them. I see no difference between that behavior and that of the federal government of the United States. We borrow, and we have for most of our history.
Take your virus ridden DU graphics and shove them while you're at it. You're linking us back to Du when you do that shit.
Sorry, the "shrug" icon is one of my favorites, but I didn't see it as an available option here. If there is one here, I'll use it.
-Laelth
-
Nobody is putting the United States in jail. We are the greatest Empire in the history of the Earth, the most powerful nation to ever exist on this planet. We can borrow what we want when we want it. And, as you rightly note, we can print more money, and nobody can stop us (so long as the price of oil is ties to the U.S. dollar). They're almost all dependent upon us. I don't see the problem, here.
Neither did Greece
You are kidding, right? Most people I know borrow for a house and a car because they can't pay for those things when they need them. I see no difference between that behavior and that of the federal government of the United States. We borrow, and we have for most of our history.
They borrow what they can afford to pay back...if they don`t then they lose the asset.
Are you really that big a cretin to not see the difference or is it a stupid play obtuse game since you have no real argument?
-
Nobody is putting the United States in jail. We are the greatest Empire in the history of the Earth, the most powerful nation to ever exist on this planet.
I never said anyone was putting the U.S. in jail you illiterate dolt. I said "most people" would be put in jail for printing money like the U.S. does.
We can borrow what we want when we want it.
No we can't. Not at the expense of our economy. Not at the expense of the value of our currency.
And, as you rightly note, we can print more money, and nobody can stop us (so long as the price of oil is ties to the U.S. dollar). They're almost all dependent upon us. I don't see the problem, here
Of couse you don't see a problem. You're a tax and spend Keynesian economics Libtard whose answer to everything is borrow and print more consequences be dammed.
Our debt to GDP ratio is at about the same level it was during WWII.
We're not fighting a World War right now. If we were then it would be ok.
Having that kind of debt ratios is dangerous and unless we put it in check RIGHT NOW it's soon to exceed our GDP.
I am not terribly worried about this.
Of course you're not...you're working in the La-la land of D.C. for a Libtard Congress critter.
Some are.
A LOT of people are. They are the people out ther struggling under increased taxes and regulations foisted on us by out of touch Libs like you...who neither pay nor feel any of the consequences for your actions.
Here's your link, and there are a lot more: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2013/03/24/cheney_was_right_deficits_don039t_matter_304471.html
He was quoting Reagan TO Paul O'Neill the SecTreas you obtuse jackass. Should have know a Lib couldn't get the meaning of something corect.
And the ENTIRE quote from Reagan was "deficits don't matter as long as the proceeds were used for tax cuts that were supposed to stimulate savings and investment."
You fail...again.
You are kidding, right? Most people I know borrow for a house and a car because they can't pay for those things when they need them. I see no difference between that behavior and that of the federal government of the United States.
Of course you don't hell you and your tax and spend Keynesian economics Libtard friends think piling on mounds of debt is just peachy keen.
:whatever:
We borrow, and we have for most of our history.
No WE haven't. That is factually and historically a lie.
Sorry, the "shrug" icon is one of my favorites, but I didn't see it as an available option here. If there is one here, I'll use it.
-Laelth
If you like it so much...
<------- DU is that way
-
Are you really that big a cretin to not see the difference
I'm gonna have to say yes on this one.
-
I'm gonna have to say yes on this one.
H5 to the cretin! :tongue: Toujours Pret! :cheersmate:
-
H5 to the cretin! :tongue: Toujours Pret! :cheersmate:
With professional Libs like Laelth you have to be Always Ready!
-
Our dept to GDP was about 50% when Reagan left office. It was 70% in 2008 and now in 2013 it's 117%.
-
With professional Libs like Laelth you have to be Always Ready!
And Always First! :cheersmate:
-
Most likely, if we did get a single-payer system, many of those folks would go to work for the government and would help run the new single-payer system.
I thought the Soviet Union dissolved. :bird:
-
I thought the Soviet Union dissolved. :bird:
It is a socialist/communist dream. Several years ago, I had read where 26% of Britain's citizens worked for their health department, or whatever it's called over there.
-
The premise of your argument is false. Nobody is lending us money since 2009. Since 2009 the federal reserve has increased its balance sheet by $6 trillion dollars. I doubt you know what that means. However, I am a very kind person and will educate you.
The federal reserve has bought 95% of the US debt that Obama has racked up. Not directly by any means. They electronically transfer numbers to banks that then buy the treasury bonds to shore up their balance sheets. This is called monetization. It makes us Zimbabwe where everybody is a billionaire and an apple costs ten billion. I refer you to post WWI Germany and how a wheelbarrow of marks couldn't buy a loaf of bread. Know what happens after you debauch your currency? WAR.
-
Um ... yes. In fact, so do many Americans. We buy houses and cars we can't afford on credit. We borrow money we don't have (from a bank) and then pay the bank back through a mortgage or a car note. This allows us to have things we can't afford to buy and then pay for those things over time based upon expected future income.
This is exactly what most people do, and it's also what our government does. I see little difference.
-Laelth
Tell me, do you think yourself clever?
-
Once again you prove yourself too stupid to breathe.
What the government does is pay off interest on borrowed money with more borrowed money.
I am so glad you dropped by...it puts on display just exactly the level of moron you DUmbasses truly are.
It's like using your visa credit card to pay the interest on your MasterCard, then demanding that Visa raise your credit limit.
-
The premise of your argument is false. Nobody is lending us money since 2009. Since 2009 the federal reserve has increased its balance sheet by $6 trillion dollars. I doubt you know what that means. However, I am a very kind person and will educate you.
The federal reserve has bought 95% of the US debt that Obama has racked up. Not directly by any means. They electronically transfer numbers to banks that then buy the treasury bonds to shore up their balance sheets. This is called monetization. It makes us Zimbabwe where everybody is a billionaire and an apple costs ten billion. I refer you to post WWI Germany and how a wheelbarrow of marks couldn't buy a loaf of bread. Know what happens after you debauch your currency? WAR.
I appreciate the effort you put into educating me. While I do not agree that nobody has been lending us money, I do agree that (through QE1 and QE2) the government is loaning a lot of money to itself.
I agree that it's reckless to devalue our currency too quickly. It's also reckless to default on our obligations. That may happen very soon.
-Laelth
-
I appreciate the effort you put into educating me. While I do not agree that nobody has been lending us money,
China will be surprised to learn this.
I do agree that (through QE1 and QE2) the government is loaning a lot of money to itself.
The Fed isn't loaning money...technically it's not even jsut printing more money...it's digitizing it. Couple key strokes and *poof* accounts are filled again.
8 trillion borrowed on the global economy since 2008 to realize only 1 trillion in growth.
That's a shitty strategy no matter how you look at it.
That you have no problem with it just proves why you tax and spend Keynesian economics idiots should never be trusted with the fiscal policies of the U.S.
I agree that it's reckless to devalue our currency too quickly.
If we were practing sound economic policy there wouldn't be any need for any reason to devaule the currency.
It's also reckless to default on our obligations. That may happen very soon.
-Laelth
On current obligations no we won't. The country brings in $200 billion a month. Enough comes into the treasury every month to cover social security checks military pay and interest payments on current debt. Our bills will be paid unless Obama just refuses to do it.
Raising the debt ceiling is about future spending. It's about your boss on Capitol Hill wanting to continue to spend like a drunken sailor with other peoples money for infinity.
But you know this already.
The fact you think it's no big deal shows just how out of touch with reality you inside the beltway folks really are.
-
Raising the debt ceiling is about future spending. It's about your boss on Capitol Hill wanting to continue to spend like a drunken sailor with other peoples money for infinity.
But you know this already.
The fact you think it's no big deal shows just how out of touch with reality you inside the beltway folks really are.
Who do you work for, laelth?
-
Tell me, do you think yourself clever?
I suppose so though I fail to see how my self-image is relevant. I didn't come here to talk about myself.
-Laelth
-
I suppose so though I fail to see how my self-image is relevant. I didn't come here to talk about myself.
-Laelth
No you came here to spew Liberal talking points and run from threads when hit with facts that counter your propaganda.