Jump to content

Not Getting Political But...


carnuck
 Share

Recommended Posts

are you tired of what the government is doing to us? (Both sides) On Oct 13th at noon, let them know you are mad as hell and not going to take it anymore!

 

Honk for freedom at noon on Sunday Oct 13th to support the Million Truckers roll on DC for freedom. They got the Mainstream Media to ignore the million bikers on 9/11 but we can't let them ignore this!

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/197571583749334/

 

https://www.facebook.com/events/622033431151094/

 

Don't post your anger here. Let them know that when it comes to politics you think they blow!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I heard some poll results yesterday that made me laugh. When asked which they rated higher in their opinion, Congress or dog poop, 40%  of respondents said Congress - and 46% said dog poop!

.

One more comment - I don't think it is fair to blame both sides. Whether you agree or not with the "ObamaCare" law or not (one side  insists on calling it a "bill" even though it was signed into law, so it is binding and beyond debate) - and frankly, from the point of view of loss of freedom I don't like it one bit - it is the law and there is nothing to "negotiate" about it. Seems to me it is the insurance companies who have the most to complain about because they stand to lose  profits by being forced to take on the uninsured with pre-existing conditions, and they are pushing their lobbyists, corporate shills, and puppet legislators to squawk long and loud to  do all they can to further their cause and protect their interests.           

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no law is above repeal. that is the reason for the shutdown. The law is declared a tax, which congress cannot pass. Only the house can pass taxes.

 

 

All politicians are little more than a skunk turned tail towards us ready to spray, knowing it's going to take ages to get that stink off the people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no law is above repeal. that is the reason for the shutdown. The law is declared a tax, which congress cannot pass. Only the house can pass taxes.

 

 

All politicians are little more than a skunk turned tail towards us ready to spray, knowing it's going to take ages to get that stink off the people.

.

The House of Representatives is only half of Congress, the other half being the Senate. The law is also not a tax, because the gummint is not taking money for health care - it is instead requiring insurance to be purchased from private companies, similar to the requirement to have to purchase automobile insurance. (I don't like such requirements on general principle, but have your car smashed one time by an uninsured motorist and see if  you like that...). I had a sneaking suspicion when the seatbelt law passed, and every time a no smoking law passes, that it was a precursor to some kind of health care legislation, but I have no proof it is part of the same agenda ("protect your health for the good of the collective, guard your contribution to the greater good").

.

Indeed, no law is above repeal, and I am all for that. But the Republicans tried 42 times  (last count I heard) to repeal it once it passed and failed every time - and now they are resorting to the cheap parliamentary trick  of shutting down the government in a final attempt to force their way. I think we can all agree that they don't have your best interest in mind, but rather that of their corporate  sponsors and the dollars they represent. (Not to say that wealth should not be protected - if well managed it represents potential for present and future prosperity, and must be guarded and even nurtured... but that  there is a whole 'nother discussion.)

.

.

.

I like your skunk reference. Here is my favorite: Know how you can tell if a politician is lying? Watch his mouth to see if it is moving...                   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Missouri running out of grave sites? Was walking thru a cemetery out side of Joplin once. Saw a grave stone read "Here lies a lawyer, a politician and a honest man" Figured if they're burying more than one body to a hole they must be short on spaces.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

no law is above repeal. that is the reason for the shutdown. The law is declared a tax, which congress cannot pass. Only the house can pass taxes.

 

 

All politicians are little more than a skunk turned tail towards us ready to spray, knowing it's going to take ages to get that stink off the people.

.

The House of Representatives is only half of Congress, the other half being the Senate. The law is also not a tax, because the gummint is not taking money for health care - it is instead requiring insurance to be purchased from private companies, similar to the requirement to have to purchase automobile insurance. (I don't like such requirements on general principle, but have your car smashed one time by an uninsured motorist and see if you like that...). I had a sneaking suspicion when the seatbelt law passed, and every time a no smoking law passes, that it was a precursor to some kind of health care legislation, but I have no proof it is part of the same agenda ("protect your health for the good of the collective, guard your contribution to the greater good").

.

Indeed, no law is above repeal, and I am all for that. But the Republicans tried 42 times (last count I heard) to repeal it once it passed and failed every time - and now they are resorting to the cheap parliamentary trick of shutting down the government in a final attempt to force their way. I think we can all agree that they don't have your best interest in mind, but rather that of their corporate sponsors and the dollars they represent. (Not to say that wealth should not be protected - if well managed it represents potential for present and future prosperity, and must be guarded and even nurtured... but that there is a whole 'nother discussion.)

.

.

.

I like your skunk reference. Here is my favorite: Know how you can tell if a politician is lying? Watch his mouth to see if it is moving...

:agree: Nobody in Washington has anyone but their own interests in mind. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either extremely naive or a fool. But I shouldn't repeat myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Term Limits Term Limits Term Limits....Two 4 year terms and done...This constant campaigning for re-election is a conflict of interest.

with pay to equal no more than a soldier deployed overseas serving his/her country.Pension??? not even going there.

Greedy Jaded pricks. Political office was intended as an obligation an honor and privilege  to serve your country and its people

NOT A FU*KIN CAREER. Yeah the tea party folks might have started it but everyone is doing what they all do best and posturing to make the most for their side.

Get that? serve its people not special interest campaign donators.

Some of these boys would do well to bag any re-election plans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Term Limits Term Limits Term Limits....Two 4 year terms and done...This constant campaigning for re-election is a conflict of interest.

with pay to equal no more than a soldier deployed overseas serving his/her country.Pension??? not even going there.

Greedy Jaded pricks. Political office was intended as an obligation an honor and privilege to serve your country and its people

NOT A FU*KIN CAREER. Yeah the tea party folks might have started it but everyone is doing what they all do best and posturing to make the most for their side.

Get that? serve its people not special interest campaign donators.

Some of these boys would do well to bag any re-election plans.

.

Hear! Hear!

.

Far worse than the salaries of career politicians is their insider trading - they pass legislation that affects an industry and can legally make stock trades before the facts are public knowledge. Anyone else would go to jail for doing that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The supreme court rulled that it is a tax thats why we are still dealing with it. Originally it was called a penalty but that was ruled unconstitutional buy the supreme court so now its a tax. The law states that everyone is required to buy insurance or pay a tax. It is also very good for insurance companys. They do have to take high risk people but also all people are also forced to purchase insurance if they want to or not. I don't agree with the car insurance argument because its your choice to drive a car but with the health care tax you are required to purchase a product just because you are breathing. The only politicians in this particular case that are doing the bidding of corporations are the dems giving wavers to unions and big business but refuse to do the same for the individual people and small businesses. In my opinion the republicans are doing what the people who elected them are asking them to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The supreme court rulled that it is a tax thats why we are still dealing with it. Originally it was called a penalty but that was ruled unconstitutional buy the supreme court so now its a tax. The law states that everyone is required to buy insurance or pay a tax. It is also very good for insurance companys. They do have to take high risk people but also all people are also forced to purchase insurance if they want to or not. I don't agree with the car insurance argument because its your choice to drive a car but with the health care tax you are required to purchase a product just because you are breathing. The only politicians in this particular case that are doing the bidding of corporations are the dems giving wavers to unions and big business but refuse to do the same for the individual people and small businesses. In my opinion the republicans are doing what the people who elected them are asking them to do.

.

I did not know that reasoning behind the SC's decision. (Don't agree with it either, but then I disagree with the SC quite a lot in recent years.) Still, that only legitimizes the law, whether you like it or not (I don't, as I said, just on general principle).

.

Insurance companies already own a huge chunk of this country, so if there was profit in it for them it doesn't make sense that they fight it through their Congressional proxies. Note that I am not at all against them profiting from their business one bit, either - as private enterprise, they damn well better show a profit or they won't be in business for long. You are correct in shooting down the car insurance analogy too - I hadn't thought about it.

.

I am not sure what would be the best solution for universal health care, but I know Obamacare ain't it. I've lived and worked in a number of countries, and all of them had better options than what we have here - among industrialized nations I think ours is worst in that regard. Unless you are prepared to throw the uninsured to the wolves and abandon Christian/civilized ethics with regard to being your brother's keeper, there must be at least some minimal level of care offered to all. It is after all what divides man from beast... But I don't think for a moment that either the current state of health care or Obamacare are the way to demonstrate the excellence of our country to others.

.

All the above aside, the law is what it is. If there need to be future attempts to repeal or amend it, that's fine - but for now Congress just needs to end this partisan crap and get on with their business of legislation (preferably repealing 2 laws for every new one they pass - then maybe in 100 years or so we'd be back to a decent level of government).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Points well taken...............

as I said all involved are doing whatever they can to make the most out of the squabble, and I stand by my opinion on term limits regardless.

The supreme court rulled that it is a tax thats why we are still dealing with it. Originally it was called a penalty but that was ruled unconstitutional buy the supreme court so now its a tax. The law states that everyone is required to buy insurance or pay a tax. It is also very good for insurance companys. They do have to take high risk people but also all people are also forced to purchase insurance if they want to or not. I don't agree with the car insurance argument because its your choice to drive a car but with the health care tax you are required to purchase a product just because you are breathing. The only politicians in this particular case that are doing the bidding of corporations are the dems giving wavers to unions and big business but refuse to do the same for the individual people and small businesses. In my opinion the republicans are doing what the people who elected them are asking them to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The supreme court rulled that it is a tax thats why we are still dealing with it. Originally it was called a penalty but that was ruled unconstitutional buy the supreme court so now its a tax. The law states that everyone is required to buy insurance or pay a tax. It is also very good for insurance companys. They do have to take high risk people but also all people are also forced to purchase insurance if they want to or not. I don't agree with the car insurance argument because its your choice to drive a car but with the health care tax you are required to purchase a product just because you are breathing. The only politicians in this particular case that are doing the bidding of corporations are the dems giving wavers to unions and big business but refuse to do the same for the individual people and small businesses. In my opinion the republicans are doing what the people who elected them are asking them to do.

.

I did not know that reasoning behind the SC's decision. (Don't agree with it either, but then I disagree with the SC quite a lot in recent years.) Still, that only legitimizes the law, whether you like it or not (I don't, as I said, just on general principle).

.

Insurance companies already own a huge chunk of this country, so if there was profit in it for them it doesn't make sense that they fight it through their Congressional proxies. Note that I am not at all against them profiting from their business one bit, either - as private enterprise, they damn well better show a profit or they won't be in business for long. You are correct in shooting down the car insurance analogy too - I hadn't thought about it.

.

I am not sure what would be the best solution for universal health care, but I know Obamacare ain't it. I've lived and worked in a number of countries, and all of them had better options than what we have here - among industrialized nations I think ours is worst in that regard. Unless you are prepared to throw the uninsured to the wolves and abandon Christian/civilized ethics with regard to being your brother's keeper, there must be at least some minimal level of care offered to all. It is after all what divides man from beast... But I don't think for a moment that either the current state of health care or Obamacare are the way to demonstrate the excellence of our country to others.

.

All the above aside, the law is what it is. If there need to be future attempts to repeal or amend it, that's fine - but for now Congress just needs to end this partisan crap and get on with their business of legislation (preferably repealing 2 laws for every new one they pass - then maybe in 100 years or so we'd be back to a decent level of government).

Poor people in this country already have insurance its called Medicare and Medicaid. The problem is peoples priorities and the fact that they choose to not purchase insurance and spend the money on toys. To those people I say let them get sick and let them figure it out. I am so tired of people not taking responsibility for thier own lives. I believe we are our brothers keepers but our government handouts are not a hand up it only keeps people dependent on government for their life style. I have worked in other countrys as well and our poor people would be considered middle to upper class in those countrys. We have the richest poor people on the face of the earth. There was once a day in this country where food stamps and wellfare was for emergency not to live off from cradle to grave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Points well taken...............

as I said all involved are doing whatever they can to make the most out of the squabble, and I stand by my opinion on term limits regardless.

 

The supreme court rulled that it is a tax thats why we are still dealing with it. Originally it was called a penalty but that was ruled unconstitutional buy the supreme court so now its a tax. The law states that everyone is required to buy insurance or pay a tax. It is also very good for insurance companys. They do have to take high risk people but also all people are also forced to purchase insurance if they want to or not. I don't agree with the car insurance argument because its your choice to drive a car but with the health care tax you are required to purchase a product just because you are breathing. The only politicians in this particular case that are doing the bidding of corporations are the dems giving wavers to unions and big business but refuse to do the same for the individual people and small businesses. In my opinion the republicans are doing what the people who elected them are asking them to do.

Agreed, term limits would be a big help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And anouther thing I bet not one member of congerss has the smarts or the gumption to keep a Jeep Comanche on the road!!! We should run this country I think we would do a much better job!!!

.

Sure as hell couldn't do any worse!      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

The supreme court rulled that it is a tax thats why we are still dealing with it. Originally it was called a penalty but that was ruled unconstitutional buy the supreme court so now its a tax. The law states that everyone is required to buy insurance or pay a tax. It is also very good for insurance companys. They do have to take high risk people but also all people are also forced to purchase insurance if they want to or not. I don't agree with the car insurance argument because its your choice to drive a car but with the health care tax you are required to purchase a product just because you are breathing. The only politicians in this particular case that are doing the bidding of corporations are the dems giving wavers to unions and big business but refuse to do the same for the individual people and small businesses. In my opinion the republicans are doing what the people who elected them are asking them to do.

.

I did not know that reasoning behind the SC's decision. (Don't agree with it either, but then I disagree with the SC quite a lot in recent years.) Still, that only legitimizes the law, whether you like it or not (I don't, as I said, just on general principle).

.

Insurance companies already own a huge chunk of this country, so if there was profit in it for them it doesn't make sense that they fight it through their Congressional proxies. Note that I am not at all against them profiting from their business one bit, either - as private enterprise, they damn well better show a profit or they won't be in business for long. You are correct in shooting down the car insurance analogy too - I hadn't thought about it.

.

I am not sure what would be the best solution for universal health care, but I know Obamacare ain't it. I've lived and worked in a number of countries, and all of them had better options than what we have here - among industrialized nations I think ours is worst in that regard. Unless you are prepared to throw the uninsured to the wolves and abandon Christian/civilized ethics with regard to being your brother's keeper, there must be at least some minimal level of care offered to all. It is after all what divides man from beast... But I don't think for a moment that either the current state of health care or Obamacare are the way to demonstrate the excellence of our country to others.

.

All the above aside, the law is what it is. If there need to be future attempts to repeal or amend it, that's fine - but for now Congress just needs to end this partisan crap and get on with their business of legislation (preferably repealing 2 laws for every new one they pass - then maybe in 100 years or so we'd be back to a decent level of government).

Poor people in this country already have insurance its called Medicare and Medicaid. The problem is peoples priorities and the fact that they choose to not purchase insurance and spend the money on toys. To those people I say let them get sick and let them figure it out. I am so tired of people not taking responsibility for thier own lives. I believe we are our brothers keepers but our government handouts are not a hand up it only keeps people dependent on government for their life style. I have worked in other countrys as well and our poor people would be considered middle to upper class in those countrys. We have the richest poor people on the face of the earth. There was once a day in this country where food stamps and wellfare was for emergency not to live off from cradle to grave.

.

Maybe the solution is to cover everyone with some sort of basic MediCare/MedicAid, and have private companies offer  premium insurance for better care?

.

Don't say we have that already, because from what I have seen, we don't...

.

Oh yeah - insert customary rabble-rousing against Congress for their latest failure here: 

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no law is above repeal. that is the reason for the shutdown. The law is declared a tax, which congress cannot pass. Only the house can pass taxes.

 

 

Just a factual correction.  All "raising revenue" must originate in the House of Representatives.   The Senate and the House can each originat a tax or any other law.  Laws, including spending bills or taxes can only become Laws after being passed by both houses of congress and being signed by the President.  If vetoed (not signed) by the president, a bill can still become law with the concent of 2/3 majority of each house of congress.  (Meaning 2/3 of the House and 2/3 of the Senate.

 

Please see the complete Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution of 1787 below:

 

Section 7

1:  All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

2:  Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it.  If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law.  But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively.  If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

3:  Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

no law is above repeal. that is the reason for the shutdown. The law is declared a tax, which congress cannot pass. Only the house can pass taxes.

 

 

All politicians are little more than a skunk turned tail towards us ready to spray, knowing it's going to take ages to get that stink off the people.

.

The House of Representatives is only half of Congress, the other half being the Senate. The law is also not a tax, because the gummint is not taking money for health care - it is instead requiring insurance to be purchased from private companies, similar to the requirement to have to purchase automobile insurance. (I don't like such requirements on general principle, but have your car smashed one time by an uninsured motorist and see if  you like that...). I had a sneaking suspicion when the seatbelt law passed, and every time a no smoking law passes, that it was a precursor to some kind of health care legislation, but I have no proof it is part of the same agenda ("protect your health for the good of the collective, guard your contribution to the greater good").

.

Indeed, no law is above repeal, and I am all for that. But the Republicans tried 42 times  (last count I heard) to repeal it once it passed and failed every time - and now they are resorting to the cheap parliamentary trick  of shutting down the government in a final attempt to force their way. I think we can all agree that they don't have your best interest in mind, but rather that of their corporate  sponsors and the dollars they represent. (Not to say that wealth should not be protected - if well managed it represents potential for present and future prosperity, and must be guarded and even nurtured... but that  there is a whole 'nother discussion.)

.

.

.

I like your skunk reference. Here is my favorite: Know how you can tell if a politician is lying? Watch his mouth to see if it is moving...                   

Oh my. :hmm:    I think they are trying to delay it a year like the corporations that were given exemptions.   I think some believe it is not ready yet.  Also control the debt ceiling.  The debt is raised more than other presidents combined.  Now it will need raised again.    So they are trying to control that.   Btw, who gets to manage your wealth and who defines what is "well managed"?  The only tricks they can come up with is to block off the monuments or put cones up along Mt Rushmore?

 

Barry's slogan has been changed from "Yes we can" to  "Yes we cone!" :rotf:

 

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America 's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that, 'the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."   Obama 2006 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's sad that the "law" is just going to result in higher costs for everyone from the insurance companies, which is why they aren't screaming. Instead they are just salivating at the thought of collecting from EVERY American. The only thing that was really needed was either 1 payer system (like in Canada, but keep the #$^%@#&* bean counters out of it! They pocket $100,000+ a year to tell people they can't have a $5,000 surgery. Where is the "savings?") or pass a law that forbids them denying coverage for "preexisting conditions" that caused the mess in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing that was really needed was either 1 payer system (like in Canada, but keep the #$^%@#&* bean counters out of it! They pocket $100,000+ a year to tell people they can't have a $5,000 surgery. Where is the "savings?") or pass a law that forbids them denying coverage for "preexisting conditions" that caused the mess in the first place.

.

:agree:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh my. :hmm:    I think they are trying to delay it a year like the corporations that were given exemptions.   I think some believe it is not ready yet.  Also control the debt ceiling.  The debt is raised more than other presidents combined.  Now it will need raised again.    So they are trying to control that.   Btw, who gets to manage your wealth and who defines what is "well managed"?  The only tricks they can come up with is to block off the monuments or put cones up along Mt Rushmore?

 

 

                   

 

Barry's slogan has been changed from "Yes we can" to  "Yes we cone!" :rotf:

 

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America 's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that, 'the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."   Obama 2006 

 

.

So how much is this costing the federal gub'ment, again?         

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...