epic win

[nontheist]

compliments, smiles, and advice...all can be free. I can name more if you like

Not necessarily most people want to swallow a bullet when listening to liberal drivel.

 

[Red1966]

I fear that, as the government cuts costs while siphoning off a percentage of healthcare funds, there will less and less left for the providers. Older doctors will retire rather than do an increased workload for less money. Fewer students will opt for the lengthy and expensive training required to be a doctor. In order to meet demand, less qualified nurses will preform duties normally reserved for doctors. This is already begun to occur. The number of nurses will also decline for the same reasons.The quality of healthcare will decline over time. When the youth of today (Democrats largely) reach their 40's and 50's, the quality and availability of health care will have seriously declined. Government advisory boards (the so called "death committees") will restrict healthcare procedures for the older population. The average lifespan will decline. The seriously ill, youth included, will be abandoned as being "inefficient use of funds". The system will eventually be abandoned because only the very wealthy will be able to purchase adequate healthcare on the black market. But until then, thousands will die needless deaths. This will fall largely on the young, ignorant youth of today and their children. You sow what you reap.

 

[canndo]

Fox is alone in this universe of ideologies? MSNBC doesn't count? ABC, NBC, and CBS don't count. NBC's "editing mistake" on the Zimmerman 911 call to purposefully make Zimmerman out to be a racist doesn't count? ABC's doctoring of the video tape of Zimmerman to remove the cuts on the back of Zimmerman's head don't count? FOX arose because there was an unfilled void in mass media, before FOX it was left-wing elitists 24/7.

The rise of right-wing media happened for a reason.

The left has tried to create their own version of popular fomenters but it has fallen flat, there is not much of a market for Maddow and Ed Schultz and there is a reason for that.

Yes, in my opinion, Fox is alone. MSNBC has recently been attempting to follow Fox's business model - but they do it poorly at best. FOX has at its core, an agenda that no other "news" organization has. Oh there may be individuals in the other news rooms that promote their individual agendas but they do not follow, it their entirety, a set of marching orders.

I know you don't believe that popularity = truth.

Now, could you point out any other radio show previous to Limbaugh that involves 3 hours a day, every day smearing and insulting liberals and Democrats? Even now, Shultz is the only one who comes close, and he started many years before Limbaugh. Add to that the constelation of others from Wilkow to Hannity to Boortz, and tell me that there is any sort of parity.

The right has even begun to create it's own history and science. You will be hard pressed to find such things on the left.

 

[canndo]

The leftys can listen to Al Fraken on Air America!!!! Oh wait.

That's right, love him or hate him, he is a commentator who put himself in the fray rather than jeer on the sidelines like Limbaugh.

 

[kelly4]

I fear that, as the government cuts costs while siphoning off a percentage of healthcare funds, there will less and less left for the providers. Older doctors will retire rather than do an increased workload for less money. Fewer students will opt for the lengthy and expensive training required to be a doctor. In order to meet demand, less qualified nurses will preform duties normally reserved for doctors. This is already begun to occur. The number of nurses will also decline for the same reasons.The quality of healthcare will decline over time. When the youth of today (Democrats largely) reach their 40's and 50's, the quality and availability of health care will have seriously declined. Government advisory boards (the so called "death committees") will restrict healthcare procedures for the older population. The average lifespan will decline. The seriously ill, youth included, will be abandoned as being "inefficient use of funds". The system will eventually be abandoned because only the very wealthy will be able to purchase adequate healthcare on the black market. But until then, thousands will die needless deaths. This will fall largely on the young, ignorant youth of today and their children. You sow what you reap.

But..But..But.....FUCKING SWEDEN!

 

[JustAnotherHead]

That's right, love him or hate him, he is a commentator who put himself in the fray rather than jeer on the sidelines like Limbaugh.

How is Air America doing?

 

[canndo]

I fear that, as the government cuts costs while siphoning off a percentage of healthcare funds, there will less and less left for the providers. Older doctors will retire rather than do an increased workload for less money. Fewer students will opt for the lengthy and expensive training required to be a doctor. In order to meet demand, less qualified nurses will preform duties normally reserved for doctors. This is already begun to occur. The number of nurses will also decline for the same reasons.The quality of healthcare will decline over time. When the youth of today (Democrats largely) reach their 40's and 50's, the quality and availability of health care will have seriously declined. Government advisory boards (the so called "death committees") will restrict healthcare procedures for the older population. The average lifespan will decline. The seriously ill, youth included, will be abandoned as being "inefficient use of funds". The system will eventually be abandoned because only the very wealthy will be able to purchase adequate healthcare on the black market. But until then, thousands will die needless deaths. This will fall largely on the young, ignorant youth of today and their children. You sow what you reap.

So what you are saying is that there are so many people who currently don't get medical care that they will overwhelm the system when it is afforded to them. And that is a good reason to continue to deny those people that care. Wow.

 

[Gastanker]

I hear poor people can't afford the $34 for a drug test that they get reimbursed for if they pass. How are they going to afford the $99 annual fee?

 

[canndo]

How is Air America doing?

It does not exist, JAH, now, are you contending that popularity is truth? or are you saying that hatred is very profitable?

 

[canndo]

I hear poor people can't afford the $34 for a drug test that they get reimbursed for if they pass. How are they going to afford the $99 annual fee?

What drug test?

 

[Red1966]

First of all nontheist - try me. I will debate you on any issue, you will not find that I make more than a glancing reference to the "foolishness" of the right and I don't insult individuals in order to get my point across. So far as ID and poll taxes is concerned, you seem to jump to broad conclusions. No, ID is not, but requireing ID that in any way costs money and is required only in order to vote is indeed a poll tax, what would you call it if you have to pay money in order to vote? I see it as a sad state of affairs when the right in these sites complain or characterize the left as always insulting rather than debating, as never using facts or reason when that is generaly the first thig the right does, furthermore they seem to judge all others based only upon their own conclusions drawn from a set of facts, just as you do here. Finally when the right is caught insulting the left, acting exactly as they claim the left does - they default to "well it isn't an insult if it is true" or my particular favorite "you made me insult you". You want a real debate? bring it on, otherwise, please refrain from the general smears while demanding that I or others prove those insults incorrect.

You are the exception rather than the rule when it comes to the insults. The OP is the worst offender here. The habit of ignoring evidence contrary to a point of view makes debate here unfruitfull. The poor have ID to get welfare and other benefits, nearly all drive. Requiring ID to vote is not undue burden. Claiming it is, is silly. Claiming 1% control the outcome of an election is asinine. Not requiring ID is a open invitation to fraud. Those claiming "voter suppression" are generally the ones committing vote fraud. That Democrats tried to suppress the vote of active military personnel in the Gore-Bush election went unreported by the liberal media. Al Gore tried to steal an election, enriched himself promoting carbon credits and taking bribes from "green industries", yet is considered a great statesman by the left. When your leaders are scum-buckets like that, you can not be taken seriously.

 

[canndo]

You are the exception rather than the rule when it comes to the insults. The OP is the worst offender here. The habit of ignoring evidence contrary to a point of view makes debate here unfruitfull. The poor have ID to get welfare and other benefits, nearly all drive. Requiring ID to vote is not undue burden. Claiming it is, is silly. Claiming 1% control the outcome of an election is asinine. Not requiring ID is a open invitation to fraud. Those claiming "voter suppression" are generally the ones committing vote fraud. That Democrats tried to suppress the vote of active military personnel in the Gore-Bush election went unreported by the liberal media. Al Gore tried to steal an election, enriched himself promoting carbon credits and taking bribes from "green industries", yet is considered a great statesman by the left. When your leaders are scum-buckets like that, you can not be taken seriously.

I don't ignore evidence, do you? Now have you any evidence to sustain your assertions? Not all poor are on welfare and I stated in another post that anyone on any sort of assistance would probably have acceptable ID (if it was unacceptable, would you have a problem with that?)

Now I would like to see your stats for "most poor drive" but it isn't relevent really. You are saying repeating the same mantra without offering any more evidence than any one else here "Not requiring ID is an open invitation to fraud", it may well be but this country has not much required ID in the past and there is little evidence of the fraud you so fear. Show me the evidence of widespread voter fraud, it is a fairly simple request (oh, and denying evidence of large numbers of people without ID is NOT evidence of fraud).

Show me the evidence that says that those who claim voter supression (such as the Brennen center for justice) is guilty of voter fraud. Show me the evidence that Gore "tried to steal the election", where it is entirely possible that I can demonstrate that Bush did just that. What has carbon credits (a Heretage foundation construct by the way) to do with this discussion?

 

[nontheist]

I don't ignore evidence, do you? Now have you any evidence to sustain your assertions? Not all poor are on welfare and I stated in another post that anyone on any sort of assistance would probably have acceptable ID (if it was unacceptable, would you have a problem with that?)

Now I would like to see your stats for "most poor drive" but it isn't relevent really. You are saying repeating the same mantra without offering any more evidence than any one else here "Not requiring ID is an open invitation to fraud", it may well be but this country has not much required ID in the past and there is little evidence of the fraud you so fear. Show me the evidence of widespread voter fraud, it is a fairly simple request (oh, and denying evidence of large numbers of people without ID is NOT evidence of fraud).

Show me the evidence that says that those who claim voter supression (such as the Brennen center for justice) is guilty of voter fraud. Show me the evidence that Gore "tried to steal the election", where it is entirely possible that I can demonstrate that Bush did just that. What has carbon credits (a Heretage foundation construct by the way) to do with this discussion?

If the don't have ID they better now, because its required at the hospital and doctors office with your insurance card.

 

[canndo]

If the don't have ID they better now, because its required at the hospital and doctors office with your insurance card.

Excelent point, perhaps this entire argument is now moot.

 

[Red1966]

I don't ignore evidence, do you? Now have you any evidence to sustain your assertions? Not all poor are on welfare and I stated in another post that anyone on any sort of assistance would probably have acceptable ID (if it was unacceptable, would you have a problem with that?) Now I would like to see your stats for "most poor drive" but it isn't relevent really. You are saying repeating the same mantra without offering any more evidence than any one else here "Not requiring ID is an open invitation to fraud", it may well be but this country has not much required ID in the past and there is little evidence of the fraud you so fear. Show me the evidence of widespread voter fraud, it is a fairly simple request (oh, and denying evidence of large numbers of people without ID is NOT evidence of fraud). Show me the evidence that says that those who claim voter supression (such as the Brennen center for justice) is guilty of voter fraud. Show me the evidence that Gore "tried to steal the election", where it is entirely possible that I can demonstrate that Bush did just that. What has carbon credits (a Heretage foundation construct by the way) to do with this discussion?

Gore sent 1500 "observers" to polling places in Florida. They demanded that absentee ballots from overseas military bases that were not post marked by the US post office with the correct date be discarded. The military has their own mail system and letters are not post marked with a date. Some election officials refused to do so, but many did, and thousands of legitimate ballots were thrown away. Those "observers" confiscated those ballots and they were never seen again. You can't demonstrate Bush stole the election because that's just another Democrat lie. Actually, until recently, ID was require to vote. Until recently, there was no absentee voting to speak of, so vote fraud was less of a problem. Demanding evidence of widespread vote fraud is misdirection and dishonest. Vote fraud doesn't have to be widespread to change the outcome of an election and you know that. Using UncleShitBritches tactics of misdirection is not legitimate. Do you really want to emulate that troll? Picking one organization and demanding I prove they committed a criminal offense is lame. Can you give us the name and address of every poor person who doesn't have ID?

 

[JustAnotherHead]

It does not exist, JAH, now, are you contending that popularity is truth? or are you saying that hatred is very profitable?

No, I'm saying stupidity is unpopular. Thus, Air America no longer exists.

 

[Red1966]

I disagree about stupidity. It is VERY popular.

 

[canndo]

Gore sent 1500 "observers" to polling places in Florida. They demanded that absentee ballots from overseas military bases that were not post marked by the US post office with the correct date be discarded. The military has their own mail system and letters are not post marked with a date. Some election officials refused to do so, but many did, and thousands of legitimate ballots were thrown away. Those "observers" confiscated those ballots and they were never seen again. You can't demonstrate Bush stole the election because that's just another Democrat lie. Actually, until recently, ID was require to vote. Until recently, there was no absentee voting to speak of, so vote fraud was less of a problem. Demanding evidence of widespread vote fraud is misdirection and dishonest. Vote fraud doesn't have to be widespread to change the outcome of an election and you know that. Using UncleShitBritches tactics of misdirection is not legitimate. Do you really want to emulate that troll? Picking one organization and demanding I prove they committed a criminal offense is lame. Can you give us the name and address of every poor person who doesn't have ID?

"you can't demonstrate that Bush stole the election because that is just another Democrat lie" - there you go! You know little or nothing about their contention or the evidence they have but it must be a lie because it seems to conflict with your personal and collective narrative, so any evidence I have will be discounted by you without it even having been read. Ik told you that I could not prove one way or another but that I had evidence of malfesance but really, what is the point when you have made up your mind with some spoon fed ideology? Dems lie, Repubs don't is the ultimate end to any discussion we may have. I will take your word for the 1500 absentee ballots and military dating but I am curious as to how you can come up with numbers that the observers dealt with if those ballots were never seen again - or did the observers confess?

My demanding evidence of something that you folks alude to without such evidence is not dishonest, it is in fact quite natural. What you are saying is that we should enact laws that will inhibit legitimate voters from voting based upon nothing but conjecture. This it would appear is the dishonest action. I have posted links to valid studies, you have not. If even in your wildest fears, a significant percentage of people are commiting voter fraud, unless you can somehow prove that the number exceeds the number of legitimate voters denied, then you are the one being dishonest by knowing that you will prevent valid voters from casting votes above and beyond what your corrective measures would accomplish in the other direction.

In short, you contend that it is reasonable to keep 1000 voters from voting in order to prevent 1 case of voter fraud.

Now I've brought this comparison up before - are you unwilling to apply any corrective measures to the global warming issue until and unless difinitive proof is presented?

 

[canndo]

No, I'm saying stupidity is unpopular. Thus, Air America no longer exists.

Then, Fox is sucessful because they are not stupid? Agreed, no one ever said they were. That a message is popular has no bearing on the accuracy of that message.

 

[canndo]

I didn't say that at all, liar

then I read it wrong? it happens.