|
Paging McMagic The most conservative Senate Democrat wants to “explore” single-payer quote:Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) told Bloomberg that he was open to exploring a single-payer health insurance program.
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2017 02:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 09:18 |
|
|
"Don't worry the dream of single payer isn't dead! ACA is merely the first step!" "Okay now that we have ACA can we talk about single payer?" "Single payer? Are you mad? We can't abandon the ACA!"
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2017 10:01
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:failing to recognize the humanity of their children because enslaving them netted him a four cent profit on nail production should be a hard pass on celebrating Ugh yet another purity test from the "tolerant" left.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2017 11:59
|
|
|
Condiv posted:here's a slate article backing this up further: Did he stab them in the back, or did he do them a favor by voting against the public option to cover them so they didn't have to.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
Xae posted:Bernie turned down joining the party for 30+ years. He then joined the party, ran for leadership on a platform of making GBS threads on the party, lost then left the party. lmbo imagine believing this. "What do we want?" "A ruling elite that stifles debate and awards leadership positions for seniority and personal loyalty over ability and vision!" "When do we want it?" "Don't question us, questions sound like criticism which must be banned from our insulted bubble where our warmed-over 90s corporatism maintains its illusion of sensibility and wonkishness!" *Loses every level of government to a tangerine pussy grabbing rapist*
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2017 14:32
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:How is that robber baron logic? I think climate change and environmental degradation is literally the most important issue we face as a country and a species Didn't you vote against the Paris Agreement because of Her Emails?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
e: eh nvm
VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 06:25 on Sep 17, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2017 06:10
|
|
|
ITT guy who loves the F-35 and the military-industrial complex warns that we mustn't help the homeless if even the possibility of corruption and waste exists in a government program
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2017 12:02
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:i'm not really a true pragmatist so much as i'm not going far enough in saying we should reestablish a political majority by murdering all police and redistributing the land or whatever is most fashionable right now in terms of unrealistic bluster I too am skeptical of the "murder all police officers" section of the Medicare For All bill, sounds needlessly divisive. What was Bernie thinking.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
Leftist decoder ring: Healthcare -> kill every single cop Education -> murder all whites Tax the rich -> send everyone with a net worth over $10,000 to Siberia Break up too-big-too-fail banks -> Holocaust Part 2 Hitler Boogaloo Thanks noted serious interlocutor "Popular Thug Drink" for providing us with these essential insights into the leftist plot to destroy Real America
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Look, just be honest. We both know that your desire to be contrarian on topics like this has nothing to do with logic or reason or whatever; it's just because you're annoyed by the handful of more obnoxious leftist posters on this forum and elsewhere. I used to be the same way towards radical left-wing people back when I was in college; I saw some dumb-seeming people from a campus socialist organization of some sort, and it made me feel the need to take a contrarian position against them. Leftists have also been portrayed as crazy and rabid anti-American fanatics in the media and popular culture basically since Vietnam, so there's all that programming to contend with too, as decades of corporate and MIC propaganda have instilled bloodlust and war lust into the population. This has been very successful in making the left into a scary boogeyman trying to destroy America by siding with foreign enemies (and by extension criticizing all-American capitalism). Look at what happened to anyone circa 2003 who even suggested that maybe invading a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 was a dumb or wrong thing to do, let alone what happened to the very few who dared question whether sending the army into the Graveyard of Empires forever was a good idea. Hell look at the raging and gnashing of teeth that happens on this very left-of-center board if someone suggests that maybe Curtis LeMay was right and incinerating thousands of Japanese schoolchildren was unnecessary and wrong to do.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2017 07:46
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:i dont think you understand who curtis lemay was and what he was all about. turns out he was completely in favor of incinerating civilians See case in point.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2017 08:14
|
|
|
Condiv posted:Since we seem to have a lot of people who identify as centrist, what is with the centrist fascination with tax credits? Have you ever heard of a little theory called Trickle-Down Economics?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2017 12:31
|
|
|
7c Nickel posted:Because I feel like you're misallocating blame and by doing so, making future decisions based on bad information. She absolutely could have done things differently and those things absolutely could have swung the election. A good example of this is all the people who smugly go "She lost to DONALD TRUMP!" are making the exact same mistake she did, assuming that how lovely the republican candidate is actually an important factor. She ran too much on pointing out how poo poo he was and not enough on boosting her own turnout. So Hillary Clinton didn't lose because she had a bad strategy, no no, see she just had a bad strategy.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 03:02
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:The OPCW's hands were tied all along, because the regime and Russia never made the agreement with the intention of actually allowing Assad's CW capability to be undermined. That was extremely clear right from the get go. The OPCW themselves said as much several times, so don't sit there and act like you're defending their honor when what you're actually defending is a lovely political deal with the devil that gave nothing to the people of Syria, or to establish that using WMD's on your own people won't be tolerated by the international community. You supported a toothless deal that did nothing to stop Khan Sheikoun, or any other CW attack in Syria past or present, from happening. Just own it. I'm sorry about your priapism, if only Obama had murdered enough Arabs to allow you to finally ejaculate, hey better luck these next 4 years
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 03:16
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:This is an extremely uninformed opinion rooted in partisan ideology, not fact. It didn't limit the scope of Assad's capabilities any more than he allowed it to. You ever see a Syrian, you put your head down in shame, because you cared more about political points than you did their lives. Hey buck up champ, maybe Trump will slaughter a bunch of North Koreans. I know they're not Arab or Persian, but hey they're still scary and foreign so it should be just as nice for your dick.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 03:42
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:If you're going to be dumb and childish, and contribute nothing to the thread, could you at least try to be funny? Hey I sympathize, I'd be in a bad mood too if I hadn't been able to orgasm since Bush signed SOFA
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 03:49
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:Do you have any real arguments or... ? There's no point, it's Volkerball. I engaged him in good faith exactly once, about the Iran deal, and all he did was endlessly regurgitate what Sean Hannity told him about Obummer shipping pallets of hundreds of billions of dollars to the mullahs to fund radical Islamic terrorism. All Volkerball's neocon brain cares about is getting a dopamine rush from American bombs falling on foreign children and he will say anything he thinks will edge that closer to happening, the only thing to do when he starts going on about how bombing schools and hospitals would solve the world's problems is to mock his ghoulish murder fetish until he gets mad and goes away.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 04:09
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:Whatever the problems with Volkerball's arguments (and there are many), I would say that claiming that he lusts for the the deaths of foreign children is pretty much beyond the pale. It's really not consistent with his posting or arguments so far. Ultimately we'd all be pro-interventionist if it could in fact somehow shorten conflicts or protect civilians in the ME. The fact that it almost never does is the big blind spot for people like Vb. lmao yes of course, slaughtering Syrian children is well within the bounds of polite discussion, but don't hurt warmongers with your high explosive words Vitalsigns that's just beyond the pale of civilized behavior. Volkerball posted:Syrian refugees: Bush & Cheney publicized Iraqi refugees who had been abused by Saddam's odious government who argued that Iraqis just couldn't wait to be bombed too, how did that turn out.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 04:28
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:He's saying you're beating up a straw man, child. No what I said about you is accurate, all you care about is American bombs falling on foreign children, your Fox news quality arguments attest to that. Volkerball posted:I'd enjoy watching you whitesplain this to Hassan, who clearly knows less about what happened in his neighboring country than you, who read an article one time. If you could not make weird references to his dick while you did it tho, I'm sure everyone on Earth would appreciate it. Sure let me get on that right after you explain to 150,000+ Iraqis how actually it's good they're dead because see Bush found one Iraqi in 2002 who assured him they wanted America to tear their country apart with war, please try to keep the gleeful expression off your face when you talk about their dead families. You're almost as good at finding a foreigner to hide behind while you justify slaughtering hundreds of thousands of them as Bush was!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 05:08
|
|
|
Domestic Amuse posted:So Roy Moore just won the nomination for Jeff Sessions' old U.S. Senate seat. Moore might even be better because Strange agrees with Moore on every single hideous evil Republican policy, but based on his comments about GCHJ Moore sounds like a Rand Paul style loon who will oppose some stuff for insane reasons that it's not conservative enough whereas Strange is a yes-man for the GOP agenda. Or maybe the Democrat will win and it's not the worst timeline.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 05:12
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:It's telling that you have such an Amero-centric view on the middle east that the position I'm coming at you from isn't even on your radar, so you just lump it in with FOX News. I don't support the Iraq war, and I can't recall any people like Hassan I've spoken to who do either. Rather, they have the full context of the debate, and you only have a piece. They know what Trump and some of the more hateful neocons stand for, and they know it's bad. But unlike you, they have to suffer under the dictatorships you nonchalantly ignore. They feel the pain you can simply handwave away. For them it's not that easy. They have to fight, and they need allies, so they have no choice but to work for something better. They're stuck between a rock and a hard place. But from your vantage point, all you see is a rock, no pun intended. I served in Iraq and met the people who lived under Saddam. I understand that desperation and oppression can make anything, even an invasion by a colonial power and the looting of the country by international capital seem has to be better than what's happening now. That doesn't mean it is. Syrians aren't a hivemind, this guy doesn't speak for every single Syrian and even if he did that still doesn't make him automatically right about what the consequences will be. Hide behind him all you want to put a fake humanitarian gloss on your war fantasies, what you're doing is no different from white conservatives claiming that Sheriff Clark proves that black people just love getting murdered by cops. Yall neocons trotted out these exact arguments 15 years ago: "Iraqis love being bombed just listen to my Iraqi friend here" (and bullshit on you never supporting the Iraq War, I don't believe that for a hot second lol when every other post of yours might as well be McCain's Bomb Iran song). I called your arguments against the Iran deal Fox News quality because that's exactly what they were, regurgitated Hannity blather about Obama funding his terrorism, which you did not get from your imaginary Syrian friends and which no one who knows anything about the region would say but to be fair to you I think you knew you were lying.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 06:24
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Moore's problem is he literally doesn't believe in the rule of law, like he's explicitly said so, he believes the bible is a greater authority than the Constitution and that the Bible is the supreme law of the land over everything. And by that he means his personal interpretation of the bible. Wait I thought Republicans abolished blue slips now that they're in charge and have the opportunity to stack the courts with all the vacancies they've kept open since 2014. Fake edit: okay no they haven't yet, but McConnell has suggested it. Democrats probably would unilaterally honor them when they're in charge tho, just like they want to restore the Supreme Court filibuster so it will only ever be used against them.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 06:39
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:Yeah, that's not the argument I'm making. More like... VB takes crappy positions on intervention for reasons that are probably more relatable than we all care to admit. Okay well engage with the neocon if you want to. I'm too old to believe that blithering warmongers have anything worthwhile to say or will ever argue in good faith, or to take part in this ridiculous game of "let's pretend" that we Americans play with discourse where advocating for endless atrocities is just polite cigar room conversation, but frankly saying outright that atrocities are what they are is just so rude gosh.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 11:36
|
|
|
Why would anyone even want copper plans, the primary complaint with bronze plans is how expensive it is to use them because of how much cost they push onto the consumer. No one who buys a copper plan will ever be able to afford to use it, you're just forcing the poor to throw money into a burning dumpster every month while insurance companies rake it in knowing they'll never have to pay out because the deductible keeps the sick away from the doctor...oh now I see why corporate dems love it. E: Notice also that "I'll pull CSR funding, believe me" was always an empty threat and there was no reason to offer to make the ACA worse in response to it unless you wanted to do that anyway and needed an excuse.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 11:49
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:You have 0 issue with atrocities if it's not Americans committing them. You only see Iraq, whereas I see Iraq and Rwanda. That's the difference between you and I, and why you don't have any moral qualms sentencing people to death by turning your back on them while simultaneously thinking of yourself as Gandhi. Certainly you didn't have much issue with the Assad regimes bombing campaign that made it impossible for IDP's to find shelter anywhere inside the country, that could've easily been prevented through a no fly zone. But those people's lives are less valuable because they can't be held up as a political prop to rant about Amerikkka. Maybe when you get a little older you'll understand that morality doesn't just conveniently align itself with whatever forums poster vitalsigns thinks is right at any given time. And hell, maybe you'll even get over dick jokes. Ah there it is "you don't want to bomb more countries, you loooooove Saddam" I could play neocon bingo. So was it a good day for you sexually when Manning leaked that collateral murder video? Or can you only get off when the videos of dying Iraqis are coming to you live on CNN. I assume the latter since you're always hungry for a new war but maybe you just like variety? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 12:49
|
|
|
Chilichimp posted:You could just type "There is no such thing as a just war". It's a poo poo take, but that's the argument you're trying to make. Ah yes, if I don't want to bomb the middle east forever, I must want to disband the military, the hottest of takes. There might be just wars, idk, but whatever the criteria might be our imperial adventures in the Middle East don't qualify my brother.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 13:20
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:Do you see no possible situation under which US military intervention is justified? My post literally said the opposite. If you want to make the case for how bombing Syria will save lives and sprout Jeffersonian democracy from spent ordnance and child corpses, be my guest. But don't do this bullshit where you make up some theoretical good war by a theoretical USA in a theoretical universe and claim I'm opposing that too if I'm not riding a JDAM down to Damascus.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 13:51
|
|
|
You don't want to add an invasion of Syria to the list of our forever-wars? Well what about anarchist Catalonia, how could they defend themselves from Franco without war, hey got ya there, hippy.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 13:57
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:No, it's the idea that perhaps all interventions (like all foreign policy, like all domestic policy, like all policy affecting any large group of people with diverse interests) are going to be flawed. What's the tolerance for when the benefits outweigh the risks? I mean, are you seriously going with "killing people is always bad" argument? In which case, you would be right, but the next question is... what happens when violence is already underway? Sure I agree that if we imagined a situation where the benefits outweighed the risks then the benefits would outweigh the risks. If you want to make the case that bombing or invading Syria meets that standard go right ahead. Trying to get me to say "sometimes war is necessary" is not some magic spell that will cause my heart to shrink three sizes that day as I get up onstage to sing "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb Iran (bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran!)"
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 14:17
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:I'm not in support of bombing Iran. I just think that making arguments about whether the benefits would outweigh the risks is pretty much the only thing we can do with regard to foreign policy. It's not a gotcha, it's just the idea that nothing is ever going to be as clear or moral as we'd like it to be. Everything is terrible, but some things can be slightly less terrible. Well go right ahead and make that argument my man. If all you're saying is "well war might be justified somewhere sometime" then that doesn't contradict anything I've said and I don't know why you're arguing with me.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 14:30
|
|
|
axeil posted:That said, it doesn't mean I automatically think that anything America does is bad because America is bad. That's a juvenile philosophy. No one has said this. Telling ghoulish neocons like volkerball to shut up about their dead Arab fetish and go away forever does not mean I hate Amerikkka or whatever, though big surprise that third-way democrats bash left to defend Dick Cheney's sycophants. The best way to show love for America is to tell sick warmongers to stop making GBS threads up America and the world we live in.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 16:27
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:Nation building requires Marshall Plan level of planning and resource usage. This is correct, and if someone were seriously proposing drafting 4 million men and women into the US military, instituting rationing and raising the top tax rate to 90% in order to fund and supply and massive Marshall-plan level effort to rebuild the Middle East then that might be an interesting and worthwhile discussion. Instead it's just the same old half-rear end bullshit from the same idiots who just want to bomb the children to save the children, and oops it didn't work again, well that just goes to show we didn't bomb hard enough, hippies. But realistically that discussion would only be hot air, because no one in American politics would ever seriously propose something like that. Neocons would never do it because all they care about is turning the Middle East into ash and corpses so they can loot the wealth. The far right would never do it because they think foreigners (and most Americans) are all subhuman anyway so why spend money on them. Democrats would never do it because it would be bad for short-term corporate profits plus they'd wither under attacks from Republicans that they're sending all our money to bad scary others. The far left isn't interested even if leftists getting control of the US government weren't a pipe dream. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 03:19 on Sep 28, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
If yall want to turn Dead Reckoning against the police, just make the cops responsible for vaccinating children.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2017 01:30
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:LOL that we need lawyers in Congress to write and understand laws, when the laws are written by corporations anyway (although they're written by the legal team, I'll give you that). And our representatives by and large do not read them before voting. I am reasonably certain that the Venn Diagram of "congresspeople who got elected on a platform of not knowing how to write and understand laws" and "congresspeople who let corporations write the laws that they don't read nor understand before voting" looks like a total solar eclipse. E: this is not to say that we should keep electing corporate lawyers and prosecutors in their bubble of white-collar professional superiority. Just that we need people with legal experience in fields that give them perspective: public defenders, environmental activism, the ACLU, social work, etc VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 06:16 on Sep 30, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2017 06:14
|
|
|
*rushes to the scene of the bloodiest mass shooting in history* "Oh God so much pain and hurt, I must comfort the victims" *cradles the arsenal that did this* "Shhhh shhhh, don't cry don't cry. Did the liberals' mean words hurt you, shhhh, I'll never let anything hurt you again, that's right my sweet precious guns. Everything will be okay. "The most important thing now is to find these orphaned automatic weapons a good home!" VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 00:20 on Oct 3, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2017 23:56
|
|
|
Conservative jurists aren't stupid; they're evil. They know exactly what they're doing. "Well if I give a politician a million dollars and then say 'hey I really hope you see your way to deregulating my industry' and then he does it, or if the Majority Leader passes out checks from the tobacco industry to his party right on the House floor right before he calls a vote on legislation regarding that industry, how can we ever really know why the law got passed, coincidences happen you know", they don't really believe any of that poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2017 03:15
|
|
|
Every disaffected misanthrope or terrorist sympathizer has the God-given democratic right to decide for himself whether it's in the public interest to end dozens of innocent people at a nearby concert. What do you call it when a country doesn't have a mass shooting at least once a day on average? That's right: a tragedy of monopoly power!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2017 04:47
|
|
|
*an image of laughing, happy schoolchildren on their school playground, carefree without a threat in sight* *LeJackal sits bolt upright in bed, screaming, his body covered in a cold sweat. He reaches out for his AK-47, clutches her, cradles her* "What's wrong honey," asks the gun with loving concern in her voice, "What's happened?" "It was h-horrible all these children, happy, playing. Adults walking by, and not a single one shooting up the place, they were like automatons, some kind of non-spree-killing hivemind!" "Not one?" "No! No one even taking a few potshots at those kids, that beautiful target-rich environment! Like they were all programmed by some corporate state-capitalist monopoly on violence! They didn't even want to democratize murder!" "Shhhh shhhh" the gun coos, "it was just a bad dream darling. The people aren't programmed, they just forgot how to think for themselves! That's where you and I come in, one day we'll teach them, we'll show them, together....." VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 06:07 on Oct 3, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2017 06:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 09:18 |
|
|
Mercrom posted:If not for moral reasons, at least for practical reasons maybe you should have the decency to refrain from dehumanizing all your political opponents as monsters incapable of empathy. I used to think this. I grew up in a Republican family and even after I realized conservatism is a bullshit intellectually bankrupt ideology that doesn't work, but for complex and difficult reasons that are easily papered over by simplistic common-sense-sounding salesmanship and folksy aw shucks "people like us" propaganda, I still thought Republican voters were basically good and decent people who just had some different opinions and some mistaken ideas and on many subjects were just confused by relentless corporate propaganda. But then the Republican party dropped every pretense of empathy and became openly delightfully deliriously monstrous and all those people didn't just stick with it but even more exuberantly celebrated Republicanism for finally embracing their true values, and I realized that no nearly every Republican voter is just driven by spite and fear and unwavering hatred. I didn't figure out that conservatism was a lie because of some special genius on my part, it's not because I was smarter than 47% of America or anything, the theory or workability was never of any interest to them, conservatism promised to make other people's families suffer and that's all they care about and that's why they're Republican. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 08:15 on Oct 3, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2017 08:13
|
|