MLD Woody Posted March 6, 2012 Report Share Posted March 6, 2012 I never got why politicians talked about the Economy and made decisions about it. Shouldn't we let economists do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 6, 2012 Report Share Posted March 6, 2012 I'll try to explain it to you once: most economists don't favor deficit reduction now, while the economy is recovering. They favor long-term deficit reduction, meaning entitlements, military, and health care spending. The idea that the deficit is a problem, but not wanting to cut spending now, is not a flip flop. It's sound economic policy. Both parties have to come to an agreement on long-term deficit reduction. They got in the neighborhood this past year, but couldn't do it and now we're in an election year and nothing will happen until after it's over. It's too bad Toop isn't here for this. I have no idea what consensus all economists could come too but I rarely hear any saying that the national debt explosion is good for anyone. At the risk of being attacked for repeating myself I'll say: Simpson Bowles. Once had a splinter in my right index finger that became infected. I couldn't even play. I went to a doctor hoping for antibiotics or pain killers or something and as he looked over the finger he picked up a medical device with the other hand jabbed it in grabbed the splitter and yanked it out. It hurt like a son of a bitch! It was all better in a day or two. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 6, 2012 Report Share Posted March 6, 2012 I never got why politicians talked about the Economy and made decisions about it. Shouldn't we let economists do that? They do Woody. There are just varying ideas among economists and politicians have to choose which to buy into and which plan they can sell to the voter. That's one reason democracy sucks. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taco918 Posted March 6, 2012 Report Share Posted March 6, 2012 Where was the leftwinged outrage when MAHER called Sarah Palin the "C" word? Where was the outrage when the left supported David Letterman when he said Sara Palin's little kid was having sex with a 3 baseman during baseball game? I see a DOUBLE STANDARD here, she is a public citizen also and none of you guys would stand up for her when the media was attacking her and her family. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U83fHHkHLS0 but you will condone this behavioran artist painting a picture of nailing Palin to a cross. You do realize that Maher and Letterman are both comedians (who's job is to make fun of other people) and Palin is, like you said, a public citizen/figure. Rush is a "prominent" conservative voice trashing Fluke, a private citizen who until Rush was a complete non-entity in the public consciousness, for having a differing opinion. Does that make what Maher and Letterman said right? No, but Palin is, like you said, a public figure who knows full and well that her name will be dragged through the mud. Fluke was giving a testimony to congress, not running for office or bidding for a VP nomination. If Palin didn't want attention (positive or negative), she probably shouldn't have gotten into politics, been the star of a reality TV show, gone on a cross country speaking tour with her name and face plastered all of the side of a bus, ect. Needless to say, your comparison doesn't work. Im not sure if it was you or someone else talking about pulling a male "expert" in order to allow Fluke to give her testimony, but does it not make more sense to have a woman who uses contraceptives and is the most affected by this policy then by a man who really has no horses in the race? To give you an example, if you were interested in joining and wanting to learn more about the Air Force, would you rather talk to Tom Cruise because he was in Top Gun (male "expert") or an actually member of the Air Force (Fluke)? I bet the actual member of the Air Force would provide the most insight and usable knowledge. Now if Fluke had no education, spoke with the vocabulary of a fifth grader, was wearing a mini skirt that can't cover her ass and flashing her who-ha to the Congressional Board then yeah I could understand the slut thing. The only thing is she wasn't doing any of that. She came across as intelligent, professional, and insightful, basically the complete opposite of your boy Rush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted March 6, 2012 Report Share Posted March 6, 2012 Or do you want to imagine, like Rick Santorum, that we're going to change people's attitudes about fucking and how much fun it is, and that it really isn't right and you should only do it when you're married? And only in the missionary position, you liberal scum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted March 6, 2012 Report Share Posted March 6, 2012 Well honestly it doesn't seem like anyone is taking issue with Rushs Stand on whether or not to make the church pay for abortions etcetra it seems like everyone is upset because he used some harsh rhetoric making fun of a political operative. So you are defending Rush on this one? Did I miss a big turn this thread made? WSS No, but I don't lose sleep over what Rush Limbaugh says. Politically, it's a big winner. Personally, I know that's how many on the right think. I talk to you guys, after all. So I'm hardly surprised when the slut and whore comments come out. Also, you want to have a discussion about religious liberty. I would rather do that too. Problem is, everyone now knows that the religious liberty is the discussion that a minority of Republicans want to have, and the majority wants to talk about sexual promiscuity and sexual morality and contraception giving women a license to be a slut. The left is happy to follow Rush and the Republicans right into this ditch because it's a huge winner for the Democrats. But it's all a circus now. I've lost interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted March 6, 2012 Report Share Posted March 6, 2012 It's too bad Toop isn't here for this. I have no idea what consensus all economists could come too but I rarely hear any saying that the national debt explosion is good for anyone. At the risk of being attacked for repeating myself I'll say: Simpson Bowles. Once had a splinter in my right index finger that became infected. I couldn't even play. I went to a doctor hoping for antibiotics or pain killers or something and as he looked over the finger he picked up a medical device with the other hand jabbed it in grabbed the splitter and yanked it out. It hurt like a son of a bitch! It was all better in a day or two. WSS We went over this before, but the problem would be if Obama were adding to the structural deficit by adding long-term costs. But most of the deficit on his watch is due to the effects of the recession and the stimulus to try and get out of it, extending Bush's tax cuts, and the wars. Heath care reform is scored as a deficit reducer, though who knows how that will eventually play out. But with all the additional revenue in the bill, plus the cuts, plus the reforms, it should be paid for, or at least close to it. So, declining tax receipts and automatic payments have gone way up, but Obama hasn't really added to the long term structural deficit in any real way. Those costs are already baked in the cake. If he doesn't address them in term two when the economy is (hopefully) on sound footing, he will have failed in this regard. But remember: he did offer his plan, and it died in Congress. I would have preferred something closer to Simpson-Bowles, too. I think Obama didn't want to do it because it would have meant going back on his pledge not to raise taxes on the middle class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted March 6, 2012 Report Share Posted March 6, 2012 I'm not quite sure where this thread is going but you appear to at me for not answering a question right? I thought I did but I'll try again. I remember saying I don't care. That means if insurance companies or businesses or whoever don't want to pay for birth control pills and abortiins fine. If they do fine too. And I don't think my other examples were unrelated. There are lots of things that I'm sure people would have a valid use for that aren't covered under various plans. Are you asking me about civil discourse? Sure I think both sides could tone down the real nastiness, but I'm not shocked and it's nothing new. It seems to me that it's a lot worse from the left but for some reason that seems to be more acceptable, huh? WSS I'm not mad at you, if that's the word you were typing in there. I'm trying to talk about something that doesn't make my eyes bleed, and Bunker and Cal are so obviously incapable of anything even remotely close to a political discussion. But saying you don't care isn't really an answer. Not caring, or leaving it up to the insurers to decide, isn't really one of the options. But that's fine. As for the discourse, you think everything is worse on the left, even when the polls tell the exact opposite, so what else is knew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 6, 2012 Report Share Posted March 6, 2012 Bunker you suck at reading Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 6, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 6, 2012 It's news, this Fluke thing. But Obamao used it to try to stop his plummeting popularity with women... from plummeting further. It's all emotionally manipulative crap by the leftists in the Congress and WH. And, just for the record. FLUKE DID NOT TESTIFY. The Dems tried to get her to be accepted by the Reps at the last minute. They wouldn't buy it, they knew what the Dems were up to. So, the Dems had a press conference and made it look like Congressional testimony, because they wanted that diversion, and her emotionalism to quell the resentment of religious orgs being ordered to contradict themselves on the issue. Of course, Obamao would love to have the religious schools go out of business. That way he and his ilk can indoctrinate his popularity more and more in the schools. The Nazis went after indoctrinating children, too. Marxists in governments have to do that, because their "take from anyone who has, and give it to the poor" garbage only works for a while, then the money runs out. Then they have to have a police force, they have to take guns away from all private citizens, and they have to control movements and communication by the populace. And intimidate them with their power. That's TSA folks, in the near future, if Obamao gets re-elected. In a corrupt election where dead people vote more than once, and gov protected black hoodlums carry nightsticks at polling stations. We are in big, big trouble as a country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted March 6, 2012 Report Share Posted March 6, 2012 So as you were saying Fluke was never sworn in and the whole thing was a media stunt put on by the whitehouse. What a bunch of low lifes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 She's a slut, she's a whore, she's a tramp, she's a plant, she a media stunt, she wasn't even sworn in. And liberals need to respect women, those hypocrites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 It's news, this Fluke thing. But Obamao used it to try to stop his plummeting popularity with women... from plummeting further Well... his "master plan" to get Rush to be a dick worked then, lol Cal, can you prove anything you just said? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 Watch out - T may ban you, too! He's a real stickler for personal attacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taco918 Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 so in your opinion it okay to make fun of someones Retarded kid as long as its a comedian who is inviting hatred and directing towards someone who is on the political spotlight. got it, but i'm sure you wouldn't make those same comments around yur co workers. you have a twisted view on what is exceptable. by the way im not defending limbaugh, i'm stating the OBVIOUS, that liberals are a bunch of HYPOCRITES on this issue. No you don't get it. Either you skimmed my previous post or have difficulty reading. Palin is a PUBLIC figure who has made a conscious decision to be a PUBLIC figure. When you are a PUBLIC figure you have no legal recourse in terms of libel or slander meaning you are fair game in the public forum. However a PRIVATE citizen such as Fluke or your hypothetical mentally Retarded child are protected by our libel and slander laws, because they are PRIVATE citizens, meaning that any falsehoods spoken, wrote, broadcast, ect. that are disparaging or malicious in nature and cause monetary or physiological harm are illegal and subject to litigation in a civil court. Now I don't see this heading to court but considering that Rush is a PUBLIC figure whom I can only assume has a basic understanding of the law, especially in regards to libel and slander considering he is a member of the media, it was an unbelievably stupid decision, at best, but more likely a punk ass move made by an amorphous blob masquerading as a "heroic man" standing up to oppressive left. GTFO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 Am I the only one who notices that the political views on this board seem to correlate perfectly with the ability to form sentences and paragraphs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 welcome to the age of primitive behavior, yur a part of it. we can blame it all on the paragraph use your words Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 I'm not mad at you, if that's the word you were typing in there. I'm trying to talk about something that doesn't make my eyes bleed, and Bunker and Cal are so obviously incapable of anything even remotely close to a political discussion. But saying you don't care isn't really an answer. Not caring, or leaving it up to the insurewwwrs to decide, isn't really one of the options. But that's fine. As for the discourse, you think everything is worse on the left, even when the polls tell the exact opposite, so what else is knew. Actually I think that the I don't care is a fine answer. If you have an a versus b for me go ahead. But it's like asking should insurance companies cover dental bills? Eyeglasses? Bariatric surgery? Breast enlargement? Psychiatric treatment? Unlimited physical therapy? All of which would benefit americans, right? So I don't see why you would insist it be an either or. WSS P s the mad part was just a glitch in the speech to text and subsequent editing ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 Am I the only one who notices that the political views on this board seem to correlate perfectly with the ability to form sentences and paragraphs? Yep. You are . WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 Yep. You are . WSS I doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 Actually I think that the I don't care is a fine answer. If you have an a versus b for me go ahead. But it's like asking should insurance companies cover dental bills? Eyeglasses? Bariatric surgery? Breast enlargement? Psychiatric treatment? Unlimited physical therapy? All of which would benefit americans, right? So I don't see why you would insist it be an either or. WSS P s the mad part was just a glitch in the speech to text and subsequent editing ... I'm just suggesting that this is not how it works in the real world, so why pretend it does in here? In the real world there are procedures required of insurance companies. Funny that among all the procedures that are required, contraception is the only one the right has a problem with. Hmm. I wonder why that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosar_For_President Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 I'm just suggesting that this is not how it works in the real world, so why pretend it does in here? In the real world there are procedures required of insurance companies. Funny that among all the procedures that are required, contraception is the only one the right has a problem with. Hmm. I wonder why that is. The same reason they hate Obama, prejudice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 Insurance companies covering contaceptives is a mute point, soon they will go by the way of antihistamines and you will have to buy them over the counter. It will be cost effective for the insurance companies to be able to remain in business and create a profit. This has nothing to do with prejudices or anything of the liking. This is a failing attempt from liberal media and the white house to create a divide among voters. And so far it has worked for those who are wagged by the tail of the dog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 Every other industrialized country covers birth control for women. This isn't even an issue in other countries. Many insurance companies in America already cover birth control for women. They're not going to take a hit on profit because they'll pass on the cost of the birth control to the customer. And again, T, the word you're looking for is "moot" not "mute." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 Heck you should have left when you had the chance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 I would say the same to you. You're young. You're at college. Go out and find some girls who use that horrible, horrible birth control stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 Most of these posts occur in lecture or when I'm doing HW, so I'm not losing much time. Plus I'm an engineer, I don't even know what a female is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 Point taken. I'm in front of a computer much of the day/night, so most of my posts are just scattershot when I have a spare minute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 I'm just suggesting that this is not how it works in the real world, so why pretend it does in here? In the real world there are procedures required of insurance companies. Funny that among all the procedures that are required, contraception is the only one the right has a problem with. Hmm. I wonder why that is. Contraception is a procedure? Do you mean abortion? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosar_For_President Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 Contraception is a procedure? Do you mean abortion? WSS Nuva Ring? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.