The Atheist Communist Caliphate Made Flesh, Spread the Clusterfuck Around Thread

[R-V]

Morph, name one idea that the Republicans have proposed under Obama that will address the following national concerns:

Health care coverage and affordability.
Climate change.
Spiraling Medicare costs.
Unemployment.
Financial regulatory reform.
Iraq.
Afghanistan.

"No" is not an acceptable answer, nor is "blow the fuckers up" for the last two.

Gil... you approach this whole thing as if government is the solution to all problems.  If you view the world through that prism, then you will always find a conservative or smaller-government party lacking (and I also wonder whether the GOP is such a party, given its performance during the Bush years).  But anyway, let's play the game your way.

1) The GOP proposed an alternative which simply removed the state monopolies on insurance and added some malpractice caps.  That's not "nothing."  It may not be your preferred solution of a complete government takeover of questionable constitutionality, but it's not nothing.

2)  Climate change... what should we do?  Cripple the world economy, transfer huge amounts of wealth from developed to developing economies, all based on "science" that is more corrupt than the Haitian government?  Um, I vote no.

3)  Spiraling Medicare costs.  A tough nut to crack, but you assume that the Democratic proposal will tackle this.  Sure... by assuming that the "doc fix" will not happen.  i.e.: Pretend.

4) Unemployment.  THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT CREATE JOBS.  The government can only take resources from one sector and transfer them to another.  I will never understand why this simple fact of basic economics gets past people.  You want the government to create jobs?  Tell the government to get the fuck out of the way.  Businesses are not hiring right now because they are scared to death of the increased costs of doing business.  That's not just me talking.  See page 6 of this.

5) Financial regulatory reform.  What do you have in mind?  A tax on banking transactions (that will ultimately hurt consumers of banking services, since like all taxeds the ultimate cost is borne by the consumer)?  Perhaps stricter oversight of Fannie and Freddie?  Oh, wait, that was proposed during the Bush years and shot down by "roll the dice" Barney Frank.  Anything else?

6) Iraq & Afghanistan.  The GOP's proposal is to win, not to say to the other side "as long as you hold on until date x you'll win."

I totally guessed right. What do I win?

[Chuck to Chuck]

6) Iraq & Afghanistan.  The GOP's proposal is to win, not to say to the other side "as long as you hold on until date x you'll win."

Not good enough without a "how."  And the how has been, "Well, the 22nd Amendment means we don't have to figure out the how."

[Jon]

Morph, name one idea that the Republicans have proposed under Obama that will address the following national concerns:

Health care coverage and affordability.
Climate change.
Spiraling Medicare costs.
Unemployment.
Financial regulatory reform.
Iraq.
Afghanistan.

"No" is not an acceptable answer, nor is "blow the fuckers up" for the last two.

Gil... you approach this whole thing as if government is the solution to all problems.  If you view the world through that prism, then you will always find a conservative or smaller-government party lacking (and I also wonder whether the GOP is such a party, given its performance during the Bush years).  But anyway, let's play the game your way.

1) The GOP proposed an alternative which simply removed the state monopolies on insurance and added some malpractice caps.  That's not "nothing."  It may not be your preferred solution of a complete government takeover of questionable constitutionality, but it's not nothing.

2)  Climate change... what should we do?  Cripple the world economy, transfer huge amounts of wealth from developed to developing economies, all based on "science" that is more corrupt than the Haitian government?  Um, I vote no.

3)  Spiraling Medicare costs.  A tough nut to crack, but you assume that the Democratic proposal will tackle this.  Sure... by assuming that the "doc fix" will not happen.  i.e.: Pretend.

4) Unemployment.  THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT CREATE JOBS.  The government can only take resources from one sector and transfer them to another.  I will never understand why this simple fact of basic economics gets past people.  You want the government to create jobs?  Tell the government to get the fuck out of the way.  Businesses are not hiring right now because they are scared to death of the increased costs of doing business.  That's not just me talking.  See page 6 of this.

5) Financial regulatory reform.  What do you have in mind?  A tax on banking transactions (that will ultimately hurt consumers of banking services, since like all taxeds the ultimate cost is borne by the consumer)?  Perhaps stricter oversight of Fannie and Freddie?  Oh, wait, that was proposed during the Bush years and shot down by "roll the dice" Barney Frank.  Anything else?

6) Iraq & Afghanistan.  The GOP's proposal is to win, not to say to the other side "as long as you hold on until date x you'll win."

I totally guessed right. What do I win?

168 more pages of this thread by June.

[SKO]

6) Iraq & Afghanistan.  The GOP's proposal is to win, not to say to the other side "as long as you hold on until date x you'll win."

Not good enough without a "how."  And the how has been, "Well, the 22nd Amendment means we don't have to figure out the how."

I didn't realize that there were new proposals the Democrats have made to "win the war in Iraq and Afghanistan." Iraq has undergone serious improvement since the surge strategy of 2006. The troop increases in Afghanistan are merely an attempt to apply that same strategy to Afghanistan. Those troop movements have been under development for quite some time. I didn't see any new or bold ideas from either party this year on how to win those wars.

[Slaky]

Remember Page 202. Never forget.

[Gil Gunderson]

Morph, name one idea that the Republicans have proposed under Obama that will address the following national concerns:

Health care coverage and affordability.
Climate change.
Spiraling Medicare costs.
Unemployment.
Financial regulatory reform.
Iraq.
Afghanistan.

"No" is not an acceptable answer, nor is "blow the fuckers up" for the last two.

Gil... you approach this whole thing as if government is the solution to all problems.  If you view the world through that prism, then you will always find a conservative or smaller-government party lacking (and I also wonder whether the GOP is such a party, given its performance during the Bush years).  But anyway, let's play the game your way.

1) The GOP proposed an alternative which simply removed the state monopolies on insurance and added some malpractice caps.  That's not "nothing."  It may not be your preferred solution of a complete government takeover of questionable constitutionality, but it's not nothing.

2)  Climate change... what should we do?  Cripple the world economy, transfer huge amounts of wealth from developed to developing economies, all based on "science" that is more corrupt than the Haitian government?  Um, I vote no.

3)  Spiraling Medicare costs.  A tough nut to crack, but you assume that the Democratic proposal will tackle this.  Sure... by assuming that the "doc fix" will not happen.  i.e.: Pretend.

4) Unemployment.  THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT CREATE JOBS.  The government can only take resources from one sector and transfer them to another.  I will never understand why this simple fact of basic economics gets past people.  You want the government to create jobs?  Tell the government to get the fuck out of the way.  Businesses are not hiring right now because they are scared to death of the increased costs of doing business.  That's not just me talking.  See page 6 of this.

5) Financial regulatory reform.  What do you have in mind?  A tax on banking transactions (that will ultimately hurt consumers of banking services, since like all taxeds the ultimate cost is borne by the consumer)?  Perhaps stricter oversight of Fannie and Freddie?  Oh, wait, that was proposed during the Bush years and shot down by "roll the dice" Barney Frank.  Anything else?

6) Iraq & Afghanistan.  The GOP's proposal is to win, not to say to the other side "as long as you hold on until date x you'll win."

How is the Senate bill a "complete government takeover" of health care?  There is no public option, or Medicare buy-in.  What is the government taking over, exactly?  Passing a law to curb the abuses of the industry is a takeover?

Thank you for denying climate change and proving RV's point.  Next issue.

The government creates the climate for business to operate and jobs to be created.  No, it does not create jobs.  Point understood.  But to suggest that the government should do nothing so as to allow the private sector free reign is absurd.  We learned that lesson already.

Right, the collapse was all on Fannie and Freddie, not BoA, Citi, AIG, or any of the "Too Big To Fail" institutions.  You're right, my mistake.

Win is a great policy, ain't it?  Can I use a poll-tested bromide rather than an actual idea too?

[SKO]

Morph, name one idea that the Republicans have proposed under Obama that will address the following national concerns:

Health care coverage and affordability.
Climate change.
Spiraling Medicare costs.
Unemployment.
Financial regulatory reform.
Iraq.
Afghanistan.

"No" is not an acceptable answer, nor is "blow the fuckers up" for the last two.

Gil... you approach this whole thing as if government is the solution to all problems.  If you view the world through that prism, then you will always find a conservative or smaller-government party lacking (and I also wonder whether the GOP is such a party, given its performance during the Bush years).  But anyway, let's play the game your way.

1) The GOP proposed an alternative which simply removed the state monopolies on insurance and added some malpractice caps.  That's not "nothing."  It may not be your preferred solution of a complete government takeover of questionable constitutionality, but it's not nothing.

2)  Climate change... what should we do?  Cripple the world economy, transfer huge amounts of wealth from developed to developing economies, all based on "science" that is more corrupt than the Haitian government?  Um, I vote no.

3)  Spiraling Medicare costs.  A tough nut to crack, but you assume that the Democratic proposal will tackle this.  Sure... by assuming that the "doc fix" will not happen.  i.e.: Pretend.

4) Unemployment.  THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT CREATE JOBS.  The government can only take resources from one sector and transfer them to another.  I will never understand why this simple fact of basic economics gets past people.  You want the government to create jobs?  Tell the government to get the fuck out of the way.  Businesses are not hiring right now because they are scared to death of the increased costs of doing business.  That's not just me talking.  See page 6 of this.

5) Financial regulatory reform.  What do you have in mind?  A tax on banking transactions (that will ultimately hurt consumers of banking services, since like all taxeds the ultimate cost is borne by the consumer)?  Perhaps stricter oversight of Fannie and Freddie?  Oh, wait, that was proposed during the Bush years and shot down by "roll the dice" Barney Frank.  Anything else?

6) Iraq & Afghanistan.  The GOP's proposal is to win, not to say to the other side "as long as you hold on until date x you'll win."

How is the Senate bill a "complete government takeover" of health care?  There is no public option, or Medicare buy-in.  What is the government taking over, exactly?  Passing a law to curb the abuses of the industry is a takeover?

Thank you for denying climate change and proving RV's point.  Next issue.

The government creates the climate for business to operate and jobs to be created.  No, it does not create jobs.  Point understood.  But to suggest that the government should do nothing so as to allow the private sector free reign is absurd.  We learned that lesson already.

Right, the collapse was all on Fannie and Freddie, not BoA, Citi, AIG, or any of the "Too Big To Fail" institutions.  You're right, my mistake.

Win is a great policy, ain't it?  Can I use a poll-tested bromide rather than an actual idea too?

Here's the thing, Gil. This whole mess started as an argument over whether you were being partisan by saying the Republicans don't have any ideas. Morph told you that they did in fact have ideas. You disagree with those ideas, that's fine. But to suggest that only one side is even making suggestions that they feel will help the American people is pure partisan hackery, good sir.

[Gil Gunderson]

Morph, name one idea that the Republicans have proposed under Obama that will address the following national concerns:

Health care coverage and affordability.
Climate change.
Spiraling Medicare costs.
Unemployment.
Financial regulatory reform.
Iraq.
Afghanistan.

"No" is not an acceptable answer, nor is "blow the fuckers up" for the last two.

Gil... you approach this whole thing as if government is the solution to all problems.  If you view the world through that prism, then you will always find a conservative or smaller-government party lacking (and I also wonder whether the GOP is such a party, given its performance during the Bush years).  But anyway, let's play the game your way.

1) The GOP proposed an alternative which simply removed the state monopolies on insurance and added some malpractice caps.  That's not "nothing."  It may not be your preferred solution of a complete government takeover of questionable constitutionality, but it's not nothing.

2)  Climate change... what should we do?  Cripple the world economy, transfer huge amounts of wealth from developed to developing economies, all based on "science" that is more corrupt than the Haitian government?  Um, I vote no.

3)  Spiraling Medicare costs.  A tough nut to crack, but you assume that the Democratic proposal will tackle this.  Sure... by assuming that the "doc fix" will not happen.  i.e.: Pretend.

4) Unemployment.  THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT CREATE JOBS.  The government can only take resources from one sector and transfer them to another.  I will never understand why this simple fact of basic economics gets past people.  You want the government to create jobs?  Tell the government to get the fuck out of the way.  Businesses are not hiring right now because they are scared to death of the increased costs of doing business.  That's not just me talking.  See page 6 of this.

5) Financial regulatory reform.  What do you have in mind?  A tax on banking transactions (that will ultimately hurt consumers of banking services, since like all taxeds the ultimate cost is borne by the consumer)?  Perhaps stricter oversight of Fannie and Freddie?  Oh, wait, that was proposed during the Bush years and shot down by "roll the dice" Barney Frank.  Anything else?

6) Iraq & Afghanistan.  The GOP's proposal is to win, not to say to the other side "as long as you hold on until date x you'll win."

How is the Senate bill a "complete government takeover" of health care?  There is no public option, or Medicare buy-in.  What is the government taking over, exactly?  Passing a law to curb the abuses of the industry is a takeover?

Thank you for denying climate change and proving RV's point.  Next issue.

The government creates the climate for business to operate and jobs to be created.  No, it does not create jobs.  Point understood.  But to suggest that the government should do nothing so as to allow the private sector free reign is absurd.  We learned that lesson already.

Right, the collapse was all on Fannie and Freddie, not BoA, Citi, AIG, or any of the "Too Big To Fail" institutions.  You're right, my mistake.

Win is a great policy, ain't it?  Can I use a poll-tested bromide rather than an actual idea too?

Here's the thing, Gil. This whole mess started as an argument over whether you were being partisan by saying the Republicans don't have any ideas. Morph told you that they did in fact have ideas. You disagree with those ideas, that's fine. But to suggest that only one side is even making suggestions that they feel will help the American people is pure partisan hackery, good sir.

So any suggestion or policy, regardless of how good it is, represents a party's intent to better the safety and welfare of the country?  The GOP's health care policy was and is a love letter to the insurance industry, their climate policy is deny, and they think that any, ANY, government intervention is tantamount to treason.

Fine, the GOP has proposed ideas...ideas that will immensely benefit their friends in high places.

[Quality Start Machine]

[morpheus]

I think Fork just won.  Damnit.

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

Win is a great policy, ain't it?  Can I use a poll-tested bromide rather than an actual idea too?

That's why we needed a President McCain.

His anti-bullshit-tolerance stance is the stuff of legend.

[Kermit IV]

So you have the same indignation toward Cheney doing it as Gil? If you don't, then it's relevant as a motherfucker.

This is your standard M.O., Fork.  "They all do it."  For the record, I don't think that the left doesn't have an interest in said safety and improvement, OK?  I believe that the left's policies will not bring it about, but that's another story.  And if Cheney said something to that effect (which I don't know about) then he was wrong to say it.

Have you been in a cave? He's called Obama a traitor, accusing him of "giving aid and comfort to our enemies". He said in 2004 if John Kerry was elected, we'd get attacked again. His douchebaggery is pretty well chronicled.

And I'm not using the "they all do it" argument. I'm using the "Morph is being pretty selective in his outrage" argument.

I have yet to see anything in your argument that addresses my statement to Gil, which was about a political party and not the actions of one individual.

That's because it's a retarded argument.  But I'll help end it for you.

Yes, Fork, I'm sure if Morph had personally met Cheney, and Cheney posted something similar on Desipio, Morph would probably be as indignant as he is about Gil's comments.  Or maybe if you give Morph Cheney's e-mail address, he can personally call him out on it.  Would that make you stop for a while?

[morpheus]

So any suggestion or policy, regardless of how good it is, represents a party's intent to better the safety and welfare of the country?  The GOP's health care policy was and is a love letter to the insurance industry, their climate policy is deny, and they think that any, ANY, government intervention is tantamount to treason.

Fine, the GOP has proposed ideas...ideas that will immensely benefit their friends in high places.

The health care policy might also be called "it ain't as broke as you say it is, and your proposed solution will completely fuck it up."  The climate policy can be described as "before we wreck the economy with trillions of dollars in taxes to be transferred to developing countries we should at least have something more than 'value-added' data from HadCRU."  And "less government intervention is better than more as a rule of thumb."  (I wonder whether that's the GOP's policy but I think it's supposed to be.)

And on your last point... is that as opposed to the Democrats who are proposing huge government programs out of the goodness of their hearts?  Please.

[SKO]

Morph, name one idea that the Republicans have proposed under Obama that will address the following national concerns:

Health care coverage and affordability.
Climate change.
Spiraling Medicare costs.
Unemployment.
Financial regulatory reform.
Iraq.
Afghanistan.

"No" is not an acceptable answer, nor is "blow the fuckers up" for the last two.

Health care- We are NO FANS of Obama-Care.

Also, Eugenics is the product of TOO MUCH GOVERNMENT Control, which this campaign, as a REAL CONSERVATIVE, is against.

Climate Change- OFF-SHORE Oil Rigs will lower U.S. Gas Prices, and Create Countless Good Stable American Jobs - Careers nationwide. If elected to U.S. Congress, I will FIGHT with all legal ethical methods, to bring OFF-SHORE Oil Rigs to the Atlantic Ocean North Carolina East Coast.

Spiraling Medicare costs-The GEORGE HUTCHINS For U.S. Congress 2010 Campaign desires to assist all organizations which assist the poor, through creating a larger tax base, WITHOUT Raising Taxes, through DEREGULATION, which will bring more companies and corporations back to North Carolina, to include Nationwide.

Unemployment- Through a U.S. Constitutional Amendment, we need to remove these ridiculous, STUPID, so-called Anti-Racial Discrimination Laws, in order to, bring our corporate jobs back to American, in order to, establish a LESS Hostile, LESS EXPENSIVE FOR THE EMPLOYER, Work Environment by Law; for, more Better Paying Careers, and Good Paying Jobs, for ALL Americans, nationwide, on U.S. Soil.

Financial Regulatory Reform- Ehem- The GEORGE HUTCHINS For U.S. Congress 2010 Campaign desires to assist all organizations which assist the poor, through creating a larger tax base, WITHOUT Raising Taxes, through DEREGULATION, which will bring more companies and corporations back to North Carolina, to include Nationwide.

Iraq and Afghanistan- Defending America, NEVER becomes out of date, and is very important today, during the 21st Century, no matter what type of grammar is used.

[Quality Start Machine]

So you have the same indignation toward Cheney doing it as Gil? If you don't, then it's relevant as a motherfucker.

This is your standard M.O., Fork.  "They all do it."  For the record, I don't think that the left doesn't have an interest in said safety and improvement, OK?  I believe that the left's policies will not bring it about, but that's another story.  And if Cheney said something to that effect (which I don't know about) then he was wrong to say it.

Have you been in a cave? He's called Obama a traitor, accusing him of "giving aid and comfort to our enemies". He said in 2004 if John Kerry was elected, we'd get attacked again. His douchebaggery is pretty well chronicled.

And I'm not using the "they all do it" argument. I'm using the "Morph is being pretty selective in his outrage" argument.

I have yet to see anything in your argument that addresses my statement to Gil, which was about a political party and not the actions of one individual.

That's because it's a retarded argument.  But I'll help end it for you.

Yes, Fork, I'm sure if Morph had personally met Cheney, and Cheney posted something similar on Desipio, Morph would probably be as indignant as he is about Gil's comments.  Or maybe if you give Morph Cheney's e-mail address, he can personally call him out on it.  Would that make you stop for a while?

Since Cheney was Vice President of the United States for 8 years, Morph probably knows him better than he knows his internet pals.

Besides, I'm pretty sure they have the same monacle guy.