Can the right unite in its fear mongering? At least be on a united front with your apocalypse tales..

  • nanidesukedo

    Posts: 1036

    Jul 01, 2012 10:54 PM GMT
    So, interestingly enough, since the debate over the healthcare reform act have started (and now, heated up with the supreme court ruling), the right wingers have been out doing the usual fear-mongering with their tales of the apocalypse.

    Unfortunately - there's been a small problem - the two main tales of the apocalypse are completely opposite...So, I'm just asking that y'all unite in a singular, unified tale of the apocalypse caused by healthcare reform.

    As seen in the news and on threads here, we have these two conflicting views of the Apocalypse:

    1. WOMG YOU GUYS! This is for you AMERICAN RJ'ers! All yours insurance through employees is gonna go down! Yous will have no insurance! No insurance! No one will have insurance and everyone will have to pay mandate/tax! WOMG apocalypse! No one insured - you will all be teh screwed!!

    2. WOMG YOU GUYS! There is gonna be soooo many more new insured people and not enough doctors to take care of everyone!! Peoples will has teh insurance, but there wont be enough doctorz!!!! that means no healthcare! WOMG apocalypse!!

    Which one is it? No one with insurance or too many people with insurance getting healthcare?

    So, I just ask that y'all pick one and stick with it...

    Thank you.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2012 10:56 PM GMT
    Maybe you could offer your insight by a critique of the following:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marcia-angell-md/roberts-romney-health-care_b_1637397.html
    Marcia Angell, M.D., Physician, Author, Senior Lecturer, Harvard Medical School

    "Obamacare is simply incapable of doing what it is supposed to do -- provide nearly universal care at an affordable and sustainable cost."

    She goes on to explain exactly how it will unravel and that she preferred a single payer system. I disagree that single payer would do any better because the law does not address some of the fundamental cost drivers that the Republicans tried, during the brief window when they were allowed to participate, to get inserted in the bill. The Democrats did not want to consider the cost reduction measures that were opposed by the special interest groups the Democrats pander to.

    Would be interesting if any of the law's supporters on RJ were to provide a critique of her assessment. Of the comments I read on the site, I did not see any substantive disagreement of her assessment of the law, though there was disagreement about whether the single payer would work as in other countries.
  • nanidesukedo

    Posts: 1036

    Jul 01, 2012 10:58 PM GMT
    socalfitness saidMaybe you could offer your insight by a critique of the following:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marcia-angell-md/roberts-romney-health-care_b_1637397.html
    Marcia Angell, M.D., Physician, Author, Senior Lecturer, Harvard Medical School

    "Obamacare is simply incapable of doing what it is supposed to do -- provide nearly universal care at an affordable and sustainable cost."

    She goes on to explain exactly how it will unravel and that she preferred a single payer system. I disagree that single payer would do any better because the law does not address some of the fundamental cost drivers that the Republicans tried, during the brief window when they were allowed to participate, to get inserted in the bill. The Democrats did not want to consider the cost reduction measures that were opposed by the special interest groups the Democrats pander to.

    Would be interesting if any of the law's supporters on RJ were to provide a critique of her assessment. Of the comments I read on the site, I did not see any substantive disagreement of her assessment of the law, though there was disagreement about whether the single payer would work as in other countries.


    Maybe you could stop posting the same lame ass article that no one gives a rat's ass about in threads that it isn't pertinent to?

    Oh, of course..spam is what you do, though. Moving on back to the topic. Which tale of the apocalypse do you support?
  • nanidesukedo

    Posts: 1036

    Jul 01, 2012 11:01 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    nanidesukedo said
    1. WOMG YOU GUYS! This is for you AMERICAN RJ'ers! All yours insurance through employees is gonna go down! Yous will have no insurance! No insurance! No one will have insurance and everyone will have to pay mandate/tax! WOMG apocalypse! No one insured - you will all be teh screwed!!

    2. WOMG YOU GUYS! There is gonna be soooo many more new insured people and not enough doctors to take care of everyone!! Peoples will has teh insurance, but there wont be enough doctorz!!!! that means no healthcare! WOMG apocalypse!!

    Which one is it? No one with insurance or too many people with insurance getting healthcare?

    So, I just ask that y'all pick one and stick with it...

    Thank you.



    Both my uninformed fellow RJ member. They are completely distinct from each other.

    What is the business that you own planning on doing? And what have other business owners that you've talked to said they're planning on doing?


    Not distinct at all - either there is a massive rush on healthcare from all the extra insured people...or, as you claim, there is going to be a massive exodus from the insured pool as everyone is dropped by businesses.

    It's one or the other...You can't have both.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2012 11:03 PM GMT
    It's almost Dec 21, 2012.

    Why is this even surprising?
  • nanidesukedo

    Posts: 1036

    Jul 01, 2012 11:06 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    nanidesukedo said
    Not distinct at all - either there is a massive rush on healthcare from all the extra insured people...or, as you claim, there is going to be a massive exodus from the insured pool as everyone is dropped by businesses.

    It's one or the other...You can't have both.


    I edited for clarity after you posted. Re-read please.


    So, you are saying that even if employers drop people you still think that, due to the law's making it easy for them to get healthcare, they will get back on health insurance, and therefore have #2?

    So, in the end, more people end up on healthcare that they are able to afford...leading to a positive gain in the number of people on affordable healthcare?
    Win then.
  • KissTheSky

    Posts: 1980

    Jul 01, 2012 11:07 PM GMT
    Fantasies invented by the desperate don't have to make sense!
    That's part of their charm! icon_biggrin.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2012 11:08 PM GMT
    nanidesukedo saidMaybe you could stop posting the same lame ass article that no one gives a rat's ass about in threads that it isn't pertinent to?

    Oh, of course..spam is what you do, though. Moving on back to the topic. Which tale of the apocalypse do you support?

    That "lame ass" article, written by a liberal physician and Obama supporter, is prominently posted on the Huffington Post web site. It has generated significant discussion there, none from the sample I read refuted her position that Obamacare will not work, backing up many of the same "unpopular" points many of us have been making on RJ. You and the others of your ilk want to ignore it and even denigrate it because it challenges your fundamental positions. You are either unable or unwilling to man up and face facts. It must be even more galling to your likes because it didn't come from Fox or some site you could easily dismiss out of hand.

    I'll continue to post the link and make the point wherever I choose. It is thoughtful, relevant to the general topic at hand even if it does not address your specific, contrived question, and certainly not spam. Do you want to confront the facts, or hide like a cockroach under the refrigerator?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2012 11:11 PM GMT
    The Repubs don't give a shit about the truth.
    They're going to try to sell lie after lie from now to November.

    I'm embarrassed for the Repub party when I see how far it's fallen.
    It's abandoned all rationality credibility and respectability.


  • nanidesukedo

    Posts: 1036

    Jul 01, 2012 11:18 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    nanidesukedo saidMaybe you could stop posting the same lame ass article that no one gives a rat's ass about in threads that it isn't pertinent to?

    Oh, of course..spam is what you do, though. Moving on back to the topic. Which tale of the apocalypse do you support?

    That "lame ass" article, written by a liberal physician and Obama supporter, is prominently posted on the Huffington Post web site. It has generated significant discussion there, none from the sample I read refuted her position that Obamacare will not work, backing up many of the same "unpopular" points many of us have been making on RJ. You and the others of your ilk want to ignore it and even denigrate it because it challenges your fundamental positions. You are either unable or unwilling to man up and face facts. It must be even more galling to your likes because it didn't come from Fox or some site you could easily dismiss out of hand.

    I'll continue to post the link and make the point wherever I choose. It is thoughtful, relevant to the topic at hand, and certainly not spam. Do you want to confront the facts, or hide like a cockroach under the refrigerator?


    FYI - I responded to your "lame ass article" in the thread where you initially posted it.
    Stop acting like a child when you don't get the attention you want and spamming the board with crap that you have already posted elsewhere.
  • nanidesukedo

    Posts: 1036

    Jul 01, 2012 11:19 PM GMT
    RickRick91 saidThe Repubs don't give a shit about the truth.
    They're going to try to sell lie after lie from now to November.

    I'm embarrassed for the Repub party when I see how far it's fallen.
    It's abandoned all rationality credibility and respectability.




    I hope this gets brought up during the debates - will be funny to see the response when confronted with their opposing viewpoints that they've been using to try to scare people away from healthcare reform.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2012 11:26 PM GMT
    nanidesukedo said
    socalfitness said
    nanidesukedo saidMaybe you could stop posting the same lame ass article that no one gives a rat's ass about in threads that it isn't pertinent to?

    Oh, of course..spam is what you do, though. Moving on back to the topic. Which tale of the apocalypse do you support?

    That "lame ass" article, written by a liberal physician and Obama supporter, is prominently posted on the Huffington Post web site. It has generated significant discussion there, none from the sample I read refuted her position that Obamacare will not work, backing up many of the same "unpopular" points many of us have been making on RJ. You and the others of your ilk want to ignore it and even denigrate it because it challenges your fundamental positions. You are either unable or unwilling to man up and face facts. It must be even more galling to your likes because it didn't come from Fox or some site you could easily dismiss out of hand.

    I'll continue to post the link and make the point wherever I choose. It is thoughtful, relevant to the topic at hand, and certainly not spam. Do you want to confront the facts, or hide like a cockroach under the refrigerator?


    FYI - I responded to your "lame ass article" in the thread where you initially posted it.
    Stop acting like a child when you don't get the attention you want and spamming the board with crap that you have already posted elsewhere.

    This was your response to what was posted by another RJ member:

    This is what happens when you deal with Republicans/Conservatives on social issues...you lose. While I'm not happy that he did what he did and compromised what he compromised to get it passed...He did what he had to do and it still represents a huge upgrade from the prior system.

    Is it all that it could have and should have been? No. I, however, am not gonna scoff in the face of progress made despite obstructionist conservatives.


    It was a totally non-substantive response, did not address any of her points, and in turn did not refute any of the points several of us have made here. Not surprising. All you can do is deflect when you don't have a ready made response.
  • nanidesukedo

    Posts: 1036

    Jul 01, 2012 11:34 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    nanidesukedo said
    southbeach1500 said
    nanidesukedo said
    Not distinct at all - either there is a massive rush on healthcare from all the extra insured people...or, as you claim, there is going to be a massive exodus from the insured pool as everyone is dropped by businesses.

    It's one or the other...You can't have both.


    I edited for clarity after you posted. Re-read please.


    So, you are saying that even if employers drop people you still think that, due to the law's making it easy for them to get healthcare, they will get back on health insurance, and therefore have #2?

    So, in the end, more people end up on healthcare that they are able to afford...leading to a positive gain in the number of people on affordable healthcare?
    Win then.


    You are overlooking the fact that up to $81,999 annual income, the Federal government will be paying for it. So millions of new people will be coming on the insurance rolls. That's the big influx.

    The other issue - not at all related - is that for those making more than $81,999 who have got their health insurance paid for by their employer, many of those people are now at risk of losing their health insurance and will be forced to pay for it out of their own pockets, or just pay the "tax" instead.


    If you make above 82k a year, you can afford health insurance...People who make 50k a year can afford health insurance (unless you wanna say that they are single providers for a large family, but even then, you should be thinking about popping out that many kids if 82k ain't enough and you plan on being a single provider o.0).

    Also, I would suspect that most jobs that are paying 82k aren't those jobs that are so financially insecure that employers would be eliminating healthcare.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2012 11:43 PM GMT
    nanidesukedo said
    RickRick91 saidThe Repubs don't give a shit about the truth.
    They're going to try to sell lie after lie from now to November.

    I'm embarrassed for the Repub party when I see how far it's fallen.
    It's abandoned all rationality credibility and respectability.




    I hope this gets brought up during the debates - will be funny to see the response when confronted with their opposing viewpoints that they've been using to try to scare people away from healthcare reform.





    If the Repubs were smart (and lived in the real world) they'd recognize - as even Rupert Murdoch has - that Romney is going to lose - and they could then shift all their energy into trying to hold on to control of the House.

    The Repubs are already trailing the Dems significantly in party preference for the congressional races and if they have any more weeks as disastrous as the last one was for them - they're going to slip into the danger zone.

    Right now the Repubs don't seem to realize that they're slipping.
    There are many deluded Repubs who are living in the past who think it's still 2010.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 01, 2012 11:52 PM GMT
    nanidesukedo saidMoving on back to the topic. Which tale of the apocalypse do you support?


    The reaping hour
  • nanidesukedo

    Posts: 1036

    Jul 02, 2012 12:00 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    nanidesukedo said

    If you make above 82k a year, you can afford health insurance..


    Says who? You? A government panel? A lobbying group? Why not $80K? Why not $70K? Or $40K. At what point "can't" you afford it?





    nanidesukedo saidPeople who make 50k a year can afford health insurance (unless you wanna say that they are single providers for a large family, but even then, you should be thinking about popping out that many kids if 82k ain't enough and you plan on being a single provider o.0).


    Again, says who? Should the government regulate how many kids a family can have so that they can afford health insurance? That's what the Chinese government does.

    Are there any allowances in Obamacare made for the high cost of living in New York or San Francisco? $82K doesn't go very far in those places.



    nanidesukedo saidAlso, I would suspect that most jobs that are paying 82k aren't those jobs that are so financially insecure that employers would be eliminating healthcare.


    You don't know what the margins are at any particular business. If you can cut a significant amount that you are spending per employee, that contributes directly to the bottom line. And you can be sure your peers are doing the same thing.





    82k goes pretty damn far there - I know people living quite well in both those areas for 50k a year...Living in the penthouse suite and eating steak? No. Living comfortably? Yes.

    Also, if you are a parent and you don't have health insurance for your child, there are huge issues afoot there...not having the appropriate insurance set in place to ensure appropriate care for your child in the case of accident or disease is terrifying.

    Thankfully, one area the government has been progressing rather rapidly on is health insurance and good follow-up care for all children, despite the economic standing of their parents (social issues still represent a problem, however, and always will).
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Jul 02, 2012 12:39 AM GMT
    As soon as the Democratic super pacs come out with ads describing the Mormon science fiction nonsense, the Republicans will be eating each other, alive.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2012 2:00 AM GMT
    Webster666 saidAs soon as the Democratic super pacs come out with ads describing the Mormon science fiction nonsense, the Republicans will be eating each other, alive.




    Oh darn - you gave away the October surprise!
  • KissTheSky

    Posts: 1980

    Jul 02, 2012 2:49 AM GMT
    Webster666 saidAs soon as the Democratic super pacs come out with ads describing the Mormon science fiction nonsense, the Republicans will be eating each other, alive.


    I've thought the same thing.
    If only the Christian fundies knew the beliefs of their nominee for Prez...
    Heads will be spinning. icon_lol.gif
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Jul 02, 2012 2:55 AM GMT
    KissTheSky said
    Webster666 saidAs soon as the Democratic super pacs come out with ads describing the Mormon science fiction nonsense, the Republicans will be eating each other, alive.


    I've thought the same thing.
    If only the Christian fundies knew the beliefs of their nominee for Prez...
    Heads will be spinning. icon_lol.gif


    lol

    "Magic underwear? Do what?"
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Jul 02, 2012 3:01 AM GMT
    Just as some Christians here in America are critical of Muslims because of what they have read (or heard comes from) the Qua'ran, how critical will they be of Romney.

    Here are some thoughts of Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism.

    What is it that inspires professors of Christianity generally with a hope of salvation? It is that smooth, sophisticated influence of the devil, by which he deceives the whole world"
    (Joseph Smith, Jr., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, page 270)

    “Nothing less than a complete apostasy from the Christian religion would warrant the establishment of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”
    (Joseph Smith, Jr., History of the Church, verse 1, page 40)

    "When the light came to me I saw that all the so-called Christian world was groveling in darkness."
    (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, verse 5, page 73)

    "With a regard to true theology, a more ignorant people never lived than the present so-called Christian world."
    (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, verse 8, page 199)

    "The Christian world, so-called, are heathens as to the knowledge of the salvation of God"
    (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, verse 8, page 171)

    "Christianity...is a perfect pack of nonsense...the devil could not invent a better engine to spread his work than the Christianity of the nineteenth century."
    (Mormon Prophet John Taylor, Journal of Discourses, verse 6, page 167)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2012 3:06 AM GMT
    Prior to the 1960 election of JFK, there was significant concern about electing a Catholic. In fact, many were positive a Catholic could never be elected. One of the concerns mentioned was his role as President could compromised if he held loyalties to Rome. Wasn't a factor.

    We also saw in the election of Obama an acceptance of Black person.

    We also saw the acceptance of Herman Cain even though he had to drop out for other reasons.

    If anyone is banking on Romney's Mormon religion as being a significant factor, especially among conservatives when the choice is Obama, I think they will be sadly mistaken. I suspect any sudden attempts in October to discredit Romney, even indirectly with the release of Mormon movies, TV jokes, and the like, will backfire among mainstream Americans. They will see it as unseemly and unfair, and will respond accordingly.
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Jul 02, 2012 3:20 AM GMT
    I don't think anyone's banking on it. I believe the issue of his faith has already come and gone. But with many of Romney's supporters still clinging to the belief that President Obama is a Muslim, how do they feel about supporting a man whose Mormon belief is founded on viewing the major Christian religions as evil.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2012 4:03 AM GMT
    KissTheSky said
    Webster666 saidAs soon as the Democratic super pacs come out with ads describing the Mormon science fiction nonsense, the Republicans will be eating each other, alive.


    I've thought the same thing.
    If only the Christian fundies knew the beliefs of their nominee for Prez...
    Heads will be spinning. icon_lol.gif





    Wait until folks find out that Mormons think drinking coffee is evil and against God.

    Yikes!
    I'd vote against Romney for that reason alone!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 02, 2012 4:12 AM GMT
    nanidesukedo saidSo, I just ask that y'all pick one and stick with it...
    Fuck that. There are too many hot guys out there to stick with just one.