Pages: 1 … 202 203 204 205 206 … 696

 

2012-02-11 20:57:17
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5815|London, England

AussieReaper wrote:

Jay wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

who's whining?

you just picture those on welfare as lazy and screaming for hand outs. if you honestly still believe that bs I suggest you try some independant thought on the issue.
That has anything to do with what I said?
bolded for 6 year olds.
The Catholic church whined and Obama gave them what they wanted. Because he caved, the rest of us now have to foot the bill that the Catholic institutions refused to. Why is this so difficult for you to comprehend? My rates are going to go up to pay for employees of Catholic institutions that are now exempt. The only winners here are the Catholic church.

Now, please explain how what I said had anything at all to do with welfare, or people asking for handouts.

Last edited by Jay (2012-02-11 20:58:35)

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2012-02-11 21:11:30
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6862|North Carolina

Jay wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

oh so it's just a wah wah taxes stance from you. ok
So you're cool with people whining and forcing you to pay a bigger share? He forced the insurance companies to provide coverage, ok, do you think the insurance companies will take the hit or do you think they'll pass off the costs to the rest of us? So now my insurance premiums will go up because he's a pussy.
Our system has been bought by insurance companies since about 40 years ago.

When most of our peers socialized their systems, we stuck with the old design and are getting raped on medication prices and treatment prices.

So, if anyone's a pussy, it's our society in general.  We sold out a long time ago.
2012-02-11 22:12:41
13rin
Member
+977|6936

Jay wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

Jay wrote:


That has anything to do with what I said?
bolded for 6 year olds.
The Catholic church whined and Obama gave them what they wanted. Because he caved, the rest of us now have to foot the bill that the Catholic institutions refused to. Why is this so difficult for you to comprehend? My rates are going to go up to pay for employees of Catholic institutions that are now exempt. The only winners here are the Catholic church.

Now, please explain how what I said had anything at all to do with welfare, or people asking for handouts.
Not sure but...

Hi Jay.  Nice to see you again...

Catholics by and large don't believe in abortion so how are you going to have to pay for abortions that aren't going to happen?
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.  - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
2012-02-11 22:38:51
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6610|what

Jay wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

Jay wrote:

That has anything to do with what I said?
bolded for 6 year olds.
The Catholic church whined and Obama gave them what they wanted. Because he caved, the rest of us now have to foot the bill that the Catholic institutions refused to. Why is this so difficult for you to comprehend? My rates are going to go up to pay for employees of Catholic institutions that are now exempt. The only winners here are the Catholic church.

Now, please explain how what I said had anything at all to do with welfare, or people asking for handouts.
Obama has given them nothing they wanted. What planet are you living on? In fact they've out right rejectd the "compromise" Obama has claimed:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld … 8647.story

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/1 … ompromise/

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/12/us/ca … posal.html

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/catholi … acceptable

etc etc ad nauseum

How are they winning?
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
2012-02-11 22:43:26
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7058|132 and Bush

That's because he's a muslim
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2012-02-12 04:10:32
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5815|London, England

13rin wrote:

Jay wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

bolded for 6 year olds.
The Catholic church whined and Obama gave them what they wanted. Because he caved, the rest of us now have to foot the bill that the Catholic institutions refused to. Why is this so difficult for you to comprehend? My rates are going to go up to pay for employees of Catholic institutions that are now exempt. The only winners here are the Catholic church.

Now, please explain how what I said had anything at all to do with welfare, or people asking for handouts.
Not sure but...

Hi Jay.  Nice to see you again...

Catholics by and large don't believe in abortion so how are you going to have to pay for abortions that aren't going to happen?
Hiya DB, and because it's the employers balking at paying for abortions. Doesn't mean the employees are all devout catholics that would never get an abortion or use an IUD or take the pill.

Last edited by Jay (2012-02-12 04:11:23)

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2012-02-12 04:19:13
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5815|London, England

Turquoise wrote:

Jay wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

oh so it's just a wah wah taxes stance from you. ok
So you're cool with people whining and forcing you to pay a bigger share? He forced the insurance companies to provide coverage, ok, do you think the insurance companies will take the hit or do you think they'll pass off the costs to the rest of us? So now my insurance premiums will go up because he's a pussy.
Our system has been bought by insurance companies since about 40 years ago.

When most of our peers socialized their systems, we stuck with the old design and are getting raped on medication prices and treatment prices.

So, if anyone's a pussy, it's our society in general.  We sold out a long time ago.
That's a pretty funny stance to take regarding the insurance companies when they're the most heavily regulated industry in the country. They're so heavily regulated that they might as well be the post office for all the independence they have. They were left in place for two reasons: they get to be the perpetual bogeyman for politicians to blame about the costs of healthcare and because everyone was crying about nationalization. Insurance companies get to be the bad guy that says no to excessive treatments (as per the wishes of Sebilius) without there being any more stories about government death panels. Insurance companies are simply the thinly veiled surrogates for government health policy.

Insurance companies have been told who their customers are, how much they can charge them, what their maximum allowable profit is, what services are valid to cover, how much they can spend on overhead, etc. Please point out the autonomy that qualifies them as being independent businesses, let alone strong enough to have bought our government.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2012-02-12 10:39:25
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6862|North Carolina

Jay wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Jay wrote:


So you're cool with people whining and forcing you to pay a bigger share? He forced the insurance companies to provide coverage, ok, do you think the insurance companies will take the hit or do you think they'll pass off the costs to the rest of us? So now my insurance premiums will go up because he's a pussy.
Our system has been bought by insurance companies since about 40 years ago.

When most of our peers socialized their systems, we stuck with the old design and are getting raped on medication prices and treatment prices.

So, if anyone's a pussy, it's our society in general.  We sold out a long time ago.
That's a pretty funny stance to take regarding the insurance companies when they're the most heavily regulated industry in the country. They're so heavily regulated that they might as well be the post office for all the independence they have. They were left in place for two reasons: they get to be the perpetual bogeyman for politicians to blame about the costs of healthcare and because everyone was crying about nationalization. Insurance companies get to be the bad guy that says no to excessive treatments (as per the wishes of Sebilius) without there being any more stories about government death panels. Insurance companies are simply the thinly veiled surrogates for government health policy.

Insurance companies have been told who their customers are, how much they can charge them, what their maximum allowable profit is, what services are valid to cover, how much they can spend on overhead, etc. Please point out the autonomy that qualifies them as being independent businesses, let alone strong enough to have bought our government.
Oh, I forgot that in minarchy land, you can only blame the government.

What, you think insurance companies don't manipulate the system via lobbyism?  How else did we go from the idea of a national healthcare system to mandatory private insurance?

Hold on, lemme guess, that's purely governmental fault.  It couldn't possibly be private industry which wouldn't hurt a fly, but might deny one coverage over a pre-existing condition.

It's ok though, I'm sure the market could fix everything.  It's certainly fixed our elections.
2012-02-12 10:55:47
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|6042

I wonder if war related PTSD is a first world occurrence. I wonder if ancient peoples suffered the same psychological problems after military services as our vets do. The conditions they suffered during war times was pretty much the same terrible conditions they suffered throughout life. Taking someone from NYC and dropping them in Baghdad is a big change in circumstance. A bigger one than a Roman soldier having to fight in France. I don't know.
2012-02-12 17:44:05
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6868|'Murka

Macbeth wrote:

Jay wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

Isn't this a victory for Obama?

Those who wanted coverage, are now covered by the insurance company directly.

The Repubs were kicking and screaming about whether abortion is right or wrong, (guess what they think?), meanwhile Obama has completely circumvented the issue and been able to provide the coverage to women regardless of who their employer is.
It's largely irrelevant. Placating one small interest group doesn't change the fact that the mandate is unlikely to stand when the Supreme Court hears the two primary cases challenging it. If anything it makes him look weak and craven before special interest groups.
What part of the constitution does it violate? The same system was upheld at the state level. The only real difference between that and this is the that this is being done at the Federal level.

Bill of Rights to the US Constitution wrote:

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
There are plenty of things done at the state level which would be unconstitutional at the federal level, as those powers are not enumerated to the federal government by the Constitution, and thus are held only by the states and people--not the federal government.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2012-02-13 07:36:34
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6862|North Carolina

FEOS wrote:

There are plenty of things done at the state level which would be unconstitutional at the federal level, as those powers are not enumerated to the federal government by the Constitution, and thus are held only by the states and people--not the federal government.
The Catholic Church is suggesting that this law goes against freedom of religion.  If that argument has any validity, then the mandates at the state level that are already in place should be considered unconstitutional as well, but they haven't.

That is, unless you're suggesting that state governments can choose to infringe on the freedom of religion without recourse -- which would be rather fucked up.

If the argument is just that anything that is done by the feds that isn't specifically enumerated by the Constitution is unconstitutional, then the courts have a ton of things to rule as unconstitutional -- which again, they don't seem very likely to do.
2012-02-13 16:01:22
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|6042

Justice Stephen Breyer was robbed last week by a machete-wielding intruder at his vacation home in the West Indies, a Supreme Court spokeswoman said Monday.

The 73-year-old Breyer, wife Joanna and guests were confronted by the robber around 9 p.m. EST Thursday in the home Breyer owns on the Caribbean island of Nevis, spokeswoman Kathy Arberg said. The intruder took about $1,000 in cash and no one was hurt, Arberg said.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02 … z1mJFa1rLU
Stories like this make me wonder why our elected officials don't get murdered more often. You would think that with all of the disgruntled people in the U.S. and the high stakes of politics there would be more political assassinations. It is really a miracle if you think about it.
2012-02-13 16:33:29
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5716|foggy bottom
now breyer will have to recuse himself from any cases involving armed robbery and home invasion
Tu Stultus Es
2012-02-13 16:50:45
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6868|'Murka

Turquoise wrote:

FEOS wrote:

There are plenty of things done at the state level which would be unconstitutional at the federal level, as those powers are not enumerated to the federal government by the Constitution, and thus are held only by the states and people--not the federal government.
The Catholic Church is suggesting that this law goes against freedom of religion.  If that argument has any validity, then the mandates at the state level that are already in place should be considered unconstitutional as well, but they haven't.

That is, unless you're suggesting that state governments can choose to infringe on the freedom of religion without recourse -- which would be rather fucked up.

If the argument is just that anything that is done by the feds that isn't specifically enumerated by the Constitution is unconstitutional, then the courts have a ton of things to rule as unconstitutional -- which again, they don't seem very likely to do.
The state vs federal issue on mandates is more tied to the Commerce Clause and its applicability, rather than first amendment grounds. However, if the churches wanted to object based on first amendment grounds, they would probably have a decent case. It doesn't go before the SCOTUS unless it's first challenged in lower courts.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2012-02-13 17:05:14
Superior Mind
(not macbeth)
+1,755|7150

Macbeth wrote:

I wonder if war related PTSD is a first world occurrence. I wonder if ancient peoples suffered the same psychological problems after military services as our vets do. The conditions they suffered during war times was pretty much the same terrible conditions they suffered throughout life. Taking someone from NYC and dropping them in Baghdad is a big change in circumstance. A bigger one than a Roman soldier having to fight in France. I don't know.
I would argue that a Roman soldier fighting in Gaul would have had a very similar emotional experience to a New Yorker fighting in Iraq. Assuming the Roman is from the city of Rome they both would come from cosmopolitan cities. Both would be fighting in foreign lands against a local enemy. If anything the Roman would have it worse since he might have to fight in brutal hand to hand combat.

Last edited by Superior Mind (2012-02-13 17:07:44)

x
2012-02-13 17:17:45
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5716|foggy bottom
combat is combat.  i had a buddy who beat down an insurgent with one hand while the hand was keeping that same insurgent from letting go of the spoon he held in his fist. 

and the nature of modern combat means 99% of the time you dont see it coming and the way it has evolved i would safely say that combat technology of today is far more brutal and damaging to the human body than a simple bashing of the brain or slicing off of a limb
Tu Stultus Es
2012-02-13 17:21:06
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5716|foggy bottom
spoon being the one on the grenade
Tu Stultus Es
2012-02-13 17:21:25
Superior Mind
(not macbeth)
+1,755|7150
In terms of emotional trauma what is worse: surviving a wave of screaming barbarians trying to cut you to pieces or several isolated instances of extreme trauma (explosions)?

Last edited by Superior Mind (2012-02-13 17:21:35)

x
2012-02-13 17:24:49
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5716|foggy bottom
its not really isolated since the nature of asymetrical warfare requires those taking part to constantly be on alert.  you could see a wave of screaming barbarians from a distance.  the only time you ever hear a indirect fire is when its detonated near you and you die.  lets not forget about tramatic brain injury, the wound that keeps on giving.  nothing in the olden golden days could compare to someone getting the inside of his head rattled by the explosion he just survived just to feel the consequences of that explosion for the rest of his life, even when no apparent physical injury ocurred
Tu Stultus Es
2012-02-13 17:26:15
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|6042

Yeah I guess you are right.

Last edited by Macbeth (2012-02-13 17:29:41)

2012-02-13 17:27:16
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5815|London, England
Randomness is more galling than anything. In the old days, combat lasted a day or so and you'd expect to be in danger a few days a year. Today, with the IEDs and the mortars and the rockets, it's so fucking random that I can understand if people get a bit shell shocked. I was always fatalistic about it and didn't worry too much, but the randomness of it was what always bothered me most. At least in the old days if you lost you could say (ha, you're dead) that you were beaten by someone stronger/smarter/tougher/quicker.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2012-02-13 17:32:25
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5716|foggy bottom
also that wave of barbarians could do the same amount of damage as one man with a machine gun and a 200 round belt.
Tu Stultus Es
2012-02-13 17:33:17
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5716|foggy bottom
so instead of fearing a bunch of stinky barbarians you could see a mile away, you fear one man with a great shot who you cant see
Tu Stultus Es
2012-02-13 17:34:40
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5815|London, England
The diabolical asshole that thought of freezing a round in a mortar tube and setting it in a Baghdad field to melt in the midday sun...
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2012-02-13 17:39:01
eleven bravo
Member
+1,399|5716|foggy bottom
i think the most inventive insurgent tactic i experienced was when they would roll tires with remote detonated mortars inside down a hill and timed their release every time we passed by but only half of them would detonate and the other other half would sidewind and the occasional few that hit wouldnt do damage even on an up armored gun truck because you could only fit the smaller rounds in the tires.  but that shit was pretty cool, i give em props for inventiveness
Tu Stultus Es

 

Pages: 1 … 202 203 204 205 206 … 696

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard