Jesse LoRe John, You those of your ilk are not the problem with the system, the problem is the ones that do want a bunch of "free" stuff. Let's face it, "Buy One, Get One Free" works for a reason.
hehehehe...could not help myself! Straight from the horse's mouth. How many times should your vote count? This is why I am against early voting and absentee ballots and for Voter ID.
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/02/10/nonexistent-voter-fraud-surfaces-in-critical-battleground-state-of-ohio-19479
www.bizpacreview.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Emr Is that all you've got for the 2012 election? Wait until 2016, we're all going to vote twice for Hillary...
The problem with the system is the greed of the rich, not hungry people. It's one thing to hoard food for survival, it's another to hoard money.
Jeff Thomas Isolated incidents of individuals cheating the system. Cute. Fifteen years a piece. Well deserved.
Governors manipulating voter registration laws to strangle the opposition party. Not so cute. No consequences.
This is the more rational case to be made for extended voting time.
How about requiring every prospective gun owner to provide their voter ID. . . . as for Absentee Ballots: Soldiers overseas . . . their families . . . Corporate employees stationed overseas . . . will you deny travel to citizens during election season? . . . Every Conservative has a case to deny freedoms to others until the moment they suddenly need or lose those same priviledges.
Governors manipulating voter registration laws to strangle the opposition party. Not so cute. No consequences.
This is the more rational case to be made for extended voting time.
How about requiring every prospective gun owner to provide their voter ID. . . . as for Absentee Ballots: Soldiers overseas . . . their families . . . Corporate employees stationed overseas . . . will you deny travel to citizens during election season? . . . Every Conservative has a case to deny freedoms to others until the moment they suddenly need or lose those same priviledges.
Jesse LoRe Jeff--Not a conservative--- to be clear,--- I advocate NO absentee ballots for people that "live" in the district, but can't or won't go to the poll. Of course anyone living or working overseas should have to present their visa number for the vote to be counted. Early voting and mail in ballots just open the system up for fraud and abuse. As to denying freedoms if you knew me you would not say that. I do not see how having such a pervasive Federal Government is considered "freedom" regardless of the good intentions. Remember every time they pass a law regardless of it's intent someone somewhere loses their freedom to make a choice or behave a certain way.
I for one am sick of the Nanny State and restricting freedoms being parsed as "public safety issues". Bullshit, it just a rationalization for denying someone the freedom to be a f*ck-up or subsidizing bad behavior (legal or illegal).
Jeff ThomasYou bring a fresh ambiguity onto the distinction of yourself from some (read: John's) "ilk". Allow me some latitude if I went all binary on the issue as it has become the current signature of Conservative rhetoric to paint with so broad a brush. Please clarify your premise before we spill our focus from my rebuttal to your smoking gun expose on "voter fraud" into the convoluted definition of the Nanny State and it's equivilantly convoluted alternative.
John Emr Voting is a unique act in our society. It's uncomparable to having a drivers licence or a gun permit. ID should never be required for voting since it is the most basic element in a democracy. We don't have to carry "papers" in America. The infirm, elderly and handicapped really like absentee ballots. People who have to work or have other responsibilities are able to vote thanks to early and mail-in voting. Opening the vote as wide as possible is ideal and very American. Restrictions of any kind are unLibertarian. But then again Libertarians are too embarrassed to call themselves Republicans, eh?
Jesse LoRe John if voting is so sacred why not make room in your schedule for it? Those of diminished or limited ability do not need to be voting. I say (with the exception of the Military) if you can't get to the poll then you can't vote. I agree the vote is a precious thing and protecting it from fraud should be paramount, how is unfettered access to the Ballot Box protecting our precious freedom, the freedom to fairly choose those that represent us to the rest of World. Gotta go have a tee time.
John Emr I hope you break 105 again!
- Uh Jeff, flowery speech, I am trying to brief and maybe counting on all parties having a rudimentary grasp of both sides of the argument. In the simplest of terms I believe the experiment that is the US of A was a huge step forward in the evolution of Man and believe History will bare that out. I also see the Progressive Movement as more of a Regressive move to a Dictatorial approach, regardless of good intentions, to governing the behavior of humans.
Jeff Thomas It takes little to perplex the reader these days . . . did you not unleash "ilk" onto the dialogue, or was this simply the unconscious reflex of a staunch advocate of party rhetoric? Until such time as you can demonstrate the shame complicit in advocating to remove the vote from "those of diminished or limited ability", I will consider your rudimentary grasp of my meaning in step with your rudimentary understanding of civil benevolence; both of which would benefit from a deeper comprehension of the harmful influence of the Libertarian cult of Self-Absorption.
. . and you might consider adding some fragrance to your writing style as well . . complete sentences would be a significant start.
Jesse LoRe Wow! Jeff, great critique but still NO argument for your position regarding the dictatorial One Party Rule that you so fervently Desire. Just for shots and giggles, which would you prefer? A government that takes care of your basic needs? Or the opportunity to decide what your basic needs are? I believe that to be a civil question that deserves a civil answer.
Jeff Thomas Thanks, but the critique was modest at best . . . however let's stay focused: you have not addressed my response to your accusations of "voter fraud." You have introduced this as issue number one, not me.
Show me reasonable cause to deny U.S. citizens access to vote; measure the damage of double dipping against documented evidence of systematic, Republican legislaition calculated to change voting guidelines to discourage legitimate, opposition participation.
I am anxious to debate the use of government to distribute resources. As it happens,I have a dog in this fight. Let's simply observe some code of order. (Thanks for being cool enough to have gone this far.
Show me reasonable cause to deny U.S. citizens access to vote; measure the damage of double dipping against documented evidence of systematic, Republican legislaition calculated to change voting guidelines to discourage legitimate, opposition participation.
I am anxious to debate the use of government to distribute resources. As it happens,I have a dog in this fight. Let's simply observe some code of order. (Thanks for being cool enough to have gone this far.
John Emr This tidbit destroys all of your credibility Jesse, "Those of diminished or limited ability do not need to be voting." This is Fascism, this is how Hitler would do things. This comment is very disturbing. Perhaps next will be those of diminished "whiteness", or "diminished youth", maybe "diminished belief in christ", how about "diminished wealth"? Very patriotic.
Jesse LoRe Jeff & John, I am not for denying anyone "the right to vote" rather I am saying everyone should have to vote at their assigned precinct to prevent fraudulent votes from being cast. I am not for denying access to anyone I just think access should be equal for everyone, that does not mean fair, it means the same. It sounds like you are saying manipulating the system is great! If the system is being manipulated to suit your goals. I think early voting and absentee ballots open the "system" up for fraud be it a little or a lot, fraud is fraud, and the integrity of the system is paramount in protecting our Society.
The 'example' I provided shows how the absentee ballots can be and are abused. The subject in the video says she filled out the ballots and signed them for all members of her household and cast those votes for the candidate of HER choice. So I have formulated the position that, if you do not have the where with all to get to a polling station and show your ID for the purpose of preventing multiple votes being cast by one individual and validating your right to vote then you do not need to vote.
It is a problem as old as Government, if the "poor" folks can vote to take from the rich, they will, and when the rich are all gone, what you are left with is poor folks and bureaucrats. Just look at the Soviet Union for an example of how a "collective" economic system works in the post Industrial Age.
The 'example' I provided shows how the absentee ballots can be and are abused. The subject in the video says she filled out the ballots and signed them for all members of her household and cast those votes for the candidate of HER choice. So I have formulated the position that, if you do not have the where with all to get to a polling station and show your ID for the purpose of preventing multiple votes being cast by one individual and validating your right to vote then you do not need to vote.
It is a problem as old as Government, if the "poor" folks can vote to take from the rich, they will, and when the rich are all gone, what you are left with is poor folks and bureaucrats. Just look at the Soviet Union for an example of how a "collective" economic system works in the post Industrial Age.
John Emr The Soviets were as crooked as their American counterparts, we just have the sarcasm or hypocracy to call it a "free market".
This is what you said, "Those of diminished or limited ability do not need to be voting." Own it dude!
This is what you said, "Those of diminished or limited ability do not need to be voting." Own it dude!
Jeff Thomas Rather than advocating voter fraud, my posts addressed your conspicuous silence as regards the significantly larger net cast by specific, Republican controlled State governments to disenfranchise opposition votes.
While I agree that the disproportionate influence of the Republican strategy does not vindicate any other scheme to swindle the system, I am tired of the disingenuous astonishment by the sanctimonious Right at these far fewer, spontaneous incidents;
as comprehensive evidence of some devestating Left-Wing advantage. This thread winds neatly into the refrain of the "flourishing, lazy Left" which fuels the paranoia behind the Libertarian's "Facist, Progressive Agenda" rhetoric which you echo in your messages.
Tell me something about the Libertarian perspective on the growing gap between rich and poor in this country over the past decade.
Explain if you will, the Libertarian assessment of the Income Gap's paralyzing influence on our financial mobility as a Nation. I'll tell you that no critique of my political philosophy bears any merit which ignores these issues.
I'll also ask how one might choose to defer the distribution of a Society's "Needs" which is not already free to define them.
Six weeks seclusion brought Emanuel Kant through a syllogistic meditation on "Pure Reason" to develop his concept of "the Catagorical Imperitive" which forced the existing Philosophy and Theology into a fresh era. No situation can rightfully improve the quality of one individual which does not or cannot avail itself to all. It was a masterpiece of algebraic morality which in the end seems more familiar to most of us through the New Testament (i.e.: Do unto others . . )
Therefore I suggest that you Jesse, and I relieve the burden of such novelty in these discussions from our own potential friendship and allow that greater men have done the arithmetic numerous times over numerous centuries before us. Ours is the decision to Harvest the fruits, choosing by our pallatte which corner of the field we choose to work.
My corner will always include the reality of those who need a hand up. I'll kick no good person down on his luck to the curb just to spite a few lazy freeloaders.
While I agree that the disproportionate influence of the Republican strategy does not vindicate any other scheme to swindle the system, I am tired of the disingenuous astonishment by the sanctimonious Right at these far fewer, spontaneous incidents;
as comprehensive evidence of some devestating Left-Wing advantage. This thread winds neatly into the refrain of the "flourishing, lazy Left" which fuels the paranoia behind the Libertarian's "Facist, Progressive Agenda" rhetoric which you echo in your messages.
Tell me something about the Libertarian perspective on the growing gap between rich and poor in this country over the past decade.
Explain if you will, the Libertarian assessment of the Income Gap's paralyzing influence on our financial mobility as a Nation. I'll tell you that no critique of my political philosophy bears any merit which ignores these issues.
I'll also ask how one might choose to defer the distribution of a Society's "Needs" which is not already free to define them.
Six weeks seclusion brought Emanuel Kant through a syllogistic meditation on "Pure Reason" to develop his concept of "the Catagorical Imperitive" which forced the existing Philosophy and Theology into a fresh era. No situation can rightfully improve the quality of one individual which does not or cannot avail itself to all. It was a masterpiece of algebraic morality which in the end seems more familiar to most of us through the New Testament (i.e.: Do unto others . . )
Therefore I suggest that you Jesse, and I relieve the burden of such novelty in these discussions from our own potential friendship and allow that greater men have done the arithmetic numerous times over numerous centuries before us. Ours is the decision to Harvest the fruits, choosing by our pallatte which corner of the field we choose to work.
My corner will always include the reality of those who need a hand up. I'll kick no good person down on his luck to the curb just to spite a few lazy freeloaders.
John Emr And besdies, we know people who are getting food stamps and living in million dollar condos, eh comrades, eh? I mean, the bullshit people put up with for $135 a month!
Mark Campbell Out here in Washington and Oregon, voting is 100% by mail. The system works very well, though I do miss the ritual of going to the polling place with my fellow citizens. As to the anti socialist rants here, some people need to learn what it means to live in a civilized society.
Jesse LoRe I do not think the system can be secure, but at least it is the same for everyone.
Mark Campbell I doubt any system can be 100%. Statistically, however, only the tightest contests could be decided by fraud. Think 'Landslide Lyndon's' 1948 victory in his Senate race. The margin came from his cronies in the Rio Grande Valley.
Jesse LoRe I have no say or control over what happens in other States, much less what the Republicans do! I do not buy in to every morsel of "wisdom" that emanates from a particular Party, however I am capable of formulating my own thesis on what the role of government should be. It is probably not a coincidence that my political ideals are more in line with the founding Fathers view of tyrannical one Party rule and the dangers of an over reaching Central Government. I, like the framers of the Constitution do not see the Federal Government as a panacea for all that ails the individual, but has the role of protecting the Society as a whole. If we continue to modify the Constitution and "evolve" our interpretation of same, I fear what may fill that void. I do not share your confidence of those in power to "do the right thing", and I think their is plenty of evidence to support my position. Also, I see little evidence that your Fascist Utopian Central Socialist Marxist Empire (F.U.C.S.M.E) is even mathematically possible.
Jeff Thomas 1] I am disappointed by your attempt to distance yourself from the conservative rhetoric, whatever the label. By your own confession, the values of the Republican, Conservative, Tea Party, Libertarian platform coexist inside your private confessions of independent thought. If it smells like shit, your shoes should remain outside.
2] The founding Fathers, as you and your "ilk" love to reference, were an incredibly dynamic lot, capable of such partisanship as the famous rivalry between Jefferson and Hamilton. I have little patience for zealots who claim priesthood for some cherry picked pie-slice of their legacy, pretending to hold authority over well informed, patriotic citizens like myself. You my friend are no such soothsayer. Compassion for the poor, eccentric and disabled was a vision for the New Republic that has been shamefully edited from your rhetoric.
3] Without a "Centralized Government" the United States would cease to exist. The trouble with you Conspiracy Survivalists is the amnesia you demonstrate when condemning the poor, eccentric and disabled who fight to protect your right to "secede", who define our artistic identity and inspire the families who are charged with their care. A Nation of you self centered, sanctimonious "Patriots" would drown the planet with boredom and turn on each other without the rule of law. Allowing the Privateers of Free Capitalism unchecked autonomy is in fact the Facist future you seem the unsuspecting acolyte arguing to defend. Our Government, elected by the majority, is currently paralyzed by the enlightened genius of our Forefathers, who devised a system of Checks and Balances which you conveniently overlook in your tiresome pontifiactions on Marxist-Socialism.
Quite frankly, your argument is repetitive and superficial.
4] Noone has modified the Constitution with the exception of FDR who instituted Social Security, a program whose dissoluton would inspire overwhelming public revolt and in whose spirit our current administration has modeled the National Healthcare initiative. You Libertarians don't seem to care about Social Programs until you are directly affected by conditions which allow for some whimpering justification for personal compromise.
5] I suggest you have someone check your math. I wouldn't trust you with my grocery bill.
2] The founding Fathers, as you and your "ilk" love to reference, were an incredibly dynamic lot, capable of such partisanship as the famous rivalry between Jefferson and Hamilton. I have little patience for zealots who claim priesthood for some cherry picked pie-slice of their legacy, pretending to hold authority over well informed, patriotic citizens like myself. You my friend are no such soothsayer. Compassion for the poor, eccentric and disabled was a vision for the New Republic that has been shamefully edited from your rhetoric.
3] Without a "Centralized Government" the United States would cease to exist. The trouble with you Conspiracy Survivalists is the amnesia you demonstrate when condemning the poor, eccentric and disabled who fight to protect your right to "secede", who define our artistic identity and inspire the families who are charged with their care. A Nation of you self centered, sanctimonious "Patriots" would drown the planet with boredom and turn on each other without the rule of law. Allowing the Privateers of Free Capitalism unchecked autonomy is in fact the Facist future you seem the unsuspecting acolyte arguing to defend. Our Government, elected by the majority, is currently paralyzed by the enlightened genius of our Forefathers, who devised a system of Checks and Balances which you conveniently overlook in your tiresome pontifiactions on Marxist-Socialism.
Quite frankly, your argument is repetitive and superficial.
4] Noone has modified the Constitution with the exception of FDR who instituted Social Security, a program whose dissoluton would inspire overwhelming public revolt and in whose spirit our current administration has modeled the National Healthcare initiative. You Libertarians don't seem to care about Social Programs until you are directly affected by conditions which allow for some whimpering justification for personal compromise.
5] I suggest you have someone check your math. I wouldn't trust you with my grocery bill.
John Emr The one's who are not in power would do worse, that's why the ones in power won.
Jesse LoRe Jeff, you are pretty good at telling me what I think, but unable to comprehend the concept of self reliance. You said you have "skin in game" of "Government hand-outs, and I am sure you vote with your pocketbook, and that is the problem. The Progressives have been running things in the Central Government for nearly one hundred years and it has been one economic crisis after another. I beg you to can the philosophy and point to one real world example of how the policies or system of Government you advocate actually works. Cuz it sure ain't happening for the folks in this country.
Your all inclusive one size fits all government has destroyed the fabric of civil society, and dumbed down the populous to affect the Political aspirations of guys like Barry O. And if you think he gives two shits about your situation you have a rude awaking in your future.
1] Libertarian & Tea Party Yes, Republican Conservative, No. My response regarding voter fraud and the logistics of voting remain the same. Those are my musings.
2]The Founders of this Nation feared the very situation we are in would come to pass, whereas every dumbass in the land voting to manipulate the system for personal gain. See Barry O.
3] Those are your words not mine, I do realize that there is a role for a Central government. However I do not think that role should be favors for everybody. The system is broken and you loony tunes liberals are going to muck it up for everyone, by raiding the treasury to line your pockets with the fruit of others labor. As to the infirm-ed protecting our Freedoms, I do not see that, I see folks becoming infirm-ed in said pursuit as opposed to the other way around.
You are blinded by the euphoria of victory, and fail to see the hypocrisy of Barry and his failed policies. A majority of the vote should not be confused with a majority of the populous, I say they are not the same. As for the current House of Reps. blocking Barry O's agenda, I would argue just as Barry feels he has a mandate, so do they. The House has a mandate from their constituents to STOP Barry from "transforming" America into the FUCSME that you desire.
4] Again, you are interpolating what I say and projecting your own emotion into MY argument. You have no idea about my personal situation. As for my being true to my beliefs I never have and never will ask for shit from FUCSME or the State for that matter. I find no sustenance or comfort in the morsels they dole out to gain political favor, I will make my own morsels , thanks. As for Obamacare how does Obamacare help anyone except his Wall Street cronies that will benefit from the customers Barry has mandated buy their products, through Obamacare.
5] I did some checking and seems like my math is correct your FUCSME model for government has failed on every front starting with the Pilgrims. As for your grocery bill not enough zeroes in front of the decimal to interest me. However, you are correct about my lack of concern for "Social Issues", I see such legislation as affording extra-Constitutional protections to sub groups.
That is all!
Your all inclusive one size fits all government has destroyed the fabric of civil society, and dumbed down the populous to affect the Political aspirations of guys like Barry O. And if you think he gives two shits about your situation you have a rude awaking in your future.
1] Libertarian & Tea Party Yes, Republican Conservative, No. My response regarding voter fraud and the logistics of voting remain the same. Those are my musings.
2]The Founders of this Nation feared the very situation we are in would come to pass, whereas every dumbass in the land voting to manipulate the system for personal gain. See Barry O.
3] Those are your words not mine, I do realize that there is a role for a Central government. However I do not think that role should be favors for everybody. The system is broken and you loony tunes liberals are going to muck it up for everyone, by raiding the treasury to line your pockets with the fruit of others labor. As to the infirm-ed protecting our Freedoms, I do not see that, I see folks becoming infirm-ed in said pursuit as opposed to the other way around.
You are blinded by the euphoria of victory, and fail to see the hypocrisy of Barry and his failed policies. A majority of the vote should not be confused with a majority of the populous, I say they are not the same. As for the current House of Reps. blocking Barry O's agenda, I would argue just as Barry feels he has a mandate, so do they. The House has a mandate from their constituents to STOP Barry from "transforming" America into the FUCSME that you desire.
4] Again, you are interpolating what I say and projecting your own emotion into MY argument. You have no idea about my personal situation. As for my being true to my beliefs I never have and never will ask for shit from FUCSME or the State for that matter. I find no sustenance or comfort in the morsels they dole out to gain political favor, I will make my own morsels , thanks. As for Obamacare how does Obamacare help anyone except his Wall Street cronies that will benefit from the customers Barry has mandated buy their products, through Obamacare.
5] I did some checking and seems like my math is correct your FUCSME model for government has failed on every front starting with the Pilgrims. As for your grocery bill not enough zeroes in front of the decimal to interest me. However, you are correct about my lack of concern for "Social Issues", I see such legislation as affording extra-Constitutional protections to sub groups.
That is all!
Jeff Thomas When the "System" provides the results you like, it is working fine. When the "System" yields to a majority position you don't like, it has failed. Relax my friend, I survived eight years of GW Bush, despising his Administration while laughing at the man, but I did not hold my head in my hands, run in circles screaming that America was dying. If it troubles you so much to terminate the unnecessary Tax breaks of the Bush years to help a disabled child get ABA training, then wait a few years. The country will still be here, the dysfunctional Congress will still be here and the new Libertarian Administration will concede to finding it's own war to keep the economy healthy. You and me? . . I hope we'll still be passing notes in class.
Jesse LoRe Ahhhhh! Okay now I can start my day knowing we are still on speaking terms. BTW, what is ABA? A little perspective for you I am a naturalized citizen so I have no feelings of entitlement or legacy. I have been self employed my whole life as a Construction Contractor, so I know about being broke and scrambling to make a payroll, at one time I had 400 craftsmen in my employ, none making minimum wage. I have had to beg, cajole and threaten folks to get paid at times. But the current climate is such that I would not want one employee too much liability. so I will be the blissful idiot you have come to know and love. LOL
Jesse
Jesse
Jeff Thomas Welcome back Jesse . . . (with reference to your last, numerated response above), I was beginning to think you subcontracted a few of your responses to some lesser talent for a while there. Good to see you back behind the keyboard and in good form.
It seems that we have decended to a dreadful, table-tennis strategy of debate, a sure sign of a fatigued open-mindednness within both our houses; two drunks leaning on the street light for support, making no hay of the light it provides. So now I suppose it's my turn to volley, replacing the little white ball with an effigy of your head, reminding you that when you respond with a snapshot of your values, your thoughts, it is fair game to toss the grenade back from whence it came; sorry if you are uncomfortable with your reflection. In the interest of avoiding further injury , I will manage you with a softer touch from now on. No need to spoil a friendship in the rough.
Reality check: The past one hundred years of Progressive control is some myth of your indoctrination. I think I know what you are trying to say, but your continued reliance on hyperbole is only going to keep you back-peddling.
[i.e. "Those of diminished or limited ability do not need to be voting. I say (with the exception of the Military) if you can't get to the poll then you can't vote." . . . only to retreat to the more moderate position: "I am not for denying anyone "the right to vote" rather I am saying everyone should have to vote at their assigned precinct to prevent fraudulent votes from being cast." . . or how about posting a video clip from Ohio to kick off the dialogue and the retract your investment in the cause, writing: "I have no say or control over what happens in other States, much less what the Republicans do!"] . . you're all over the map. . . . what a load of smoke . . did it not occur to you that we are perfectly capable of reading for content?
It seems that we have decended to a dreadful, table-tennis strategy of debate, a sure sign of a fatigued open-mindednness within both our houses; two drunks leaning on the street light for support, making no hay of the light it provides. So now I suppose it's my turn to volley, replacing the little white ball with an effigy of your head, reminding you that when you respond with a snapshot of your values, your thoughts, it is fair game to toss the grenade back from whence it came; sorry if you are uncomfortable with your reflection. In the interest of avoiding further injury , I will manage you with a softer touch from now on. No need to spoil a friendship in the rough.
Reality check: The past one hundred years of Progressive control is some myth of your indoctrination. I think I know what you are trying to say, but your continued reliance on hyperbole is only going to keep you back-peddling.
[i.e. "Those of diminished or limited ability do not need to be voting. I say (with the exception of the Military) if you can't get to the poll then you can't vote." . . . only to retreat to the more moderate position: "I am not for denying anyone "the right to vote" rather I am saying everyone should have to vote at their assigned precinct to prevent fraudulent votes from being cast." . . or how about posting a video clip from Ohio to kick off the dialogue and the retract your investment in the cause, writing: "I have no say or control over what happens in other States, much less what the Republicans do!"] . . you're all over the map. . . . what a load of smoke . . did it not occur to you that we are perfectly capable of reading for content?
. . . "Dog in this fight" . . . "skin in the game" . . . close enough. Without a nod to some philosophic referee, this stumbling debate of ours would have descending into chaos right after your video link. It is my repeated engagement of basic philosophy which has continually shepherded your diatribe on the seven deadly sins of Social Conscience back into some manageable framework. Too many of your colleagues on the twisted Right throw their opinions haphazard, assuming the example from childhood that illogic can be assuaged with volume and a concluding "because I say so!" [ref: "That is all!"]
It is with no regret that I correct the assumption you have made concerning my situation. It was instructive to our conversation to learn how quickly you concluded that my dog (my skin) had its hand out for a tribute from the coffers of your most Noble Brotherhood. If you are the kind and gentle Giant of Industry you would have me believe, it should cause you some humility to learn that I was not referencing any personal history of dependence on "The System". I am married to a school teacher and have a comfortable position at Stony Brook University as a Laboratory Equipment Designer.
Our daughter, however, was the victim of a very complex constellation of developmental disorders which eventually required permanent residency for her care. It was here, at this home, where I first witnessed this Philosophy you dismiss, bleed real human blood; I understood the gravity of our Society's responsibility to our most fragile neighbors and citizens; those children born blind, deaf, autistic, stricken with palsy; taken from neglectful, abusive homes. Kids that depend on Medicare for their treatment and the hospital staff for the love you and I simply look to our families to provide. These principles are not simply words. No, I leave the bullshit jingo-ism to you armchair, amateur social scientist tycoons, (AASST) too preoccupied sewing your pockets tight to look up and see anything more meaningful than a little white flag, waving out beyond the fairway.
The repeated use of “Barry” and “FUCSME” . . (emphasis as always on that Libertarian staple: “ME”) is enough for me to understand the level of character you bring to the keyboard; a desperate character borrowing the dehumanizing tactics employed by real soldiers fighting Krauts, Japs, Nips, Gooks and the like. Soldiers fighting for a slogan they are sold and a cause for which they remain on a “Need to Know” basis. Are you honestly worried about “Barry’s” alliances with Wall Street? The evil Progressive Plot to overthrow the weak and terrified Insurance Industry? If only those guys had the pull to Lobby Washington like that Obama character.
Jesse, this is FaceBook. I have to stop here because the format is prohibitive. You’re a lot of fun, but you’re a prime example of the perfect storm: Self-confident and paranoid with just enough grasp on history to get it wrong, time and again. You are above all, however, still that blissful [knuckle-head] I’ve come to know and love. LOL
jeff
Jesse LoRe Jeff quick note, the Barry and Wall Street reference is only to point out the hypocrisy of Barry's Administration as well as his rhetoric. You decry the rich and the bankers, then you advocate a mandate that we all become their customers. I just do not understand the logic of that, and Obamacare does NOTHING to improve the healthcare or make it affordable. What is the point of Obamacare if not to put money in the pockets of the same wealthy people you bitch about not paying enough taxes to support the rest of us.
Good call on my character, you are spot on about the de-humanizing part. Everybody dies eventually it is a soldiers job to make that happen in timely fashion.
Jeff Thomas Anyone with "Health" needs healthcare. Providing it through the traditional Health Insurance Industry model has divided the customer base resulting in 15% average premium hikes annually for the past decade. Those who were conventionally covered by their employer have become co-partners, maximizing the benefits of "group discounts." The system continues to exclude "personal coverage" from these discount advantages while stranding those with "Preexisting" conditions or financial restriction on their own. Wasn't it Mitt Romney who suggested that our Nation's Emergency Rooms should be able to handle this?
Doctor Practice Insurance premiums have also sky-rocketed, owing to the current, hyper-litigous climate we have cultivated through the meticulous employment of such DeRegulated, Libertarian, Free Enterprise principles, flooding the system with hyper-diligent, unnecessary MRI's, X-Rays and Lab tests and adding to the Insurance Company's heavy expenses. But relax . . . by all accounts, these struggling institutions are somehow managing a robust profit.
Where does the concept of leveraged bargaining lose you? What is it about intelligent, practical Regulations that frightens you and your ilk so much? You and I were the rich-man-banker's customer the day we were born. Don't you think it a bit disingenuous to pretend that we can reverse this truth by ignoring all attempts to fix it?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: FaceBook, being an unusual arena for such debate, proved too small a dojo to host a match of this nature. The two of us ended the discussion here, as friends.
It is with no regret that I correct the assumption you have made concerning my situation. It was instructive to our conversation to learn how quickly you concluded that my dog (my skin) had its hand out for a tribute from the coffers of your most Noble Brotherhood. If you are the kind and gentle Giant of Industry you would have me believe, it should cause you some humility to learn that I was not referencing any personal history of dependence on "The System". I am married to a school teacher and have a comfortable position at Stony Brook University as a Laboratory Equipment Designer.
Our daughter, however, was the victim of a very complex constellation of developmental disorders which eventually required permanent residency for her care. It was here, at this home, where I first witnessed this Philosophy you dismiss, bleed real human blood; I understood the gravity of our Society's responsibility to our most fragile neighbors and citizens; those children born blind, deaf, autistic, stricken with palsy; taken from neglectful, abusive homes. Kids that depend on Medicare for their treatment and the hospital staff for the love you and I simply look to our families to provide. These principles are not simply words. No, I leave the bullshit jingo-ism to you armchair, amateur social scientist tycoons, (AASST) too preoccupied sewing your pockets tight to look up and see anything more meaningful than a little white flag, waving out beyond the fairway.
The repeated use of “Barry” and “FUCSME” . . (emphasis as always on that Libertarian staple: “ME”) is enough for me to understand the level of character you bring to the keyboard; a desperate character borrowing the dehumanizing tactics employed by real soldiers fighting Krauts, Japs, Nips, Gooks and the like. Soldiers fighting for a slogan they are sold and a cause for which they remain on a “Need to Know” basis. Are you honestly worried about “Barry’s” alliances with Wall Street? The evil Progressive Plot to overthrow the weak and terrified Insurance Industry? If only those guys had the pull to Lobby Washington like that Obama character.
Jesse, this is FaceBook. I have to stop here because the format is prohibitive. You’re a lot of fun, but you’re a prime example of the perfect storm: Self-confident and paranoid with just enough grasp on history to get it wrong, time and again. You are above all, however, still that blissful [knuckle-head] I’ve come to know and love. LOL
jeff
Jesse LoRe Jeff quick note, the Barry and Wall Street reference is only to point out the hypocrisy of Barry's Administration as well as his rhetoric. You decry the rich and the bankers, then you advocate a mandate that we all become their customers. I just do not understand the logic of that, and Obamacare does NOTHING to improve the healthcare or make it affordable. What is the point of Obamacare if not to put money in the pockets of the same wealthy people you bitch about not paying enough taxes to support the rest of us.
Good call on my character, you are spot on about the de-humanizing part. Everybody dies eventually it is a soldiers job to make that happen in timely fashion.
Jeff Thomas Anyone with "Health" needs healthcare. Providing it through the traditional Health Insurance Industry model has divided the customer base resulting in 15% average premium hikes annually for the past decade. Those who were conventionally covered by their employer have become co-partners, maximizing the benefits of "group discounts." The system continues to exclude "personal coverage" from these discount advantages while stranding those with "Preexisting" conditions or financial restriction on their own. Wasn't it Mitt Romney who suggested that our Nation's Emergency Rooms should be able to handle this?
Doctor Practice Insurance premiums have also sky-rocketed, owing to the current, hyper-litigous climate we have cultivated through the meticulous employment of such DeRegulated, Libertarian, Free Enterprise principles, flooding the system with hyper-diligent, unnecessary MRI's, X-Rays and Lab tests and adding to the Insurance Company's heavy expenses. But relax . . . by all accounts, these struggling institutions are somehow managing a robust profit.
Where does the concept of leveraged bargaining lose you? What is it about intelligent, practical Regulations that frightens you and your ilk so much? You and I were the rich-man-banker's customer the day we were born. Don't you think it a bit disingenuous to pretend that we can reverse this truth by ignoring all attempts to fix it?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: FaceBook, being an unusual arena for such debate, proved too small a dojo to host a match of this nature. The two of us ended the discussion here, as friends.
