Yeah, I know, you’re completely unshocked. You’re probably like “hey, Teach, why don’t you tell us when Dems aren’t completely unhinged.” of course, that’s not quite as fun. Via Human Events
The Democrats are up in arms over the repeal of their beloved health care legislation. They claim that repealing ObamaCare will result in people dying unnecessarily and the budget deficit increasing.
“People will die as we proceed in this untimely and ludicrous process,†said Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Tex.)
“We can choose to provide valuable benefits to millions of Americans while paying down our national deficit . . . or we can choose to end valuable health care protections for millions and add $230 billion to the nation’s deficit,” said the ranking Democrat on the Rules Committee, Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.)
“I haven’t had a single constituent — and I know you haven’t — [who has] begged you to bring back these abuses! Is that what they want?,†Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) screamed on the floor.
You ever notice that dealing with liberals is like dealing with your girlfriend back in your high school days? Hormones raging, everything’s overblown and overwrought, the emotions are flying. And you know you can’t deal with an emotional woman using facts and logic (come on, ladies, you know I’m right). Same with Dems. Except, they are supposedly adults.
Shocker! Dems Go All Moonbatty Over Heath Destruction Repral
Okay…. who switched the “r” and the “e” keys while Teash was typing this?
‘Fess up!
Logic doesn’t work on women? Why was I not informed 57 years ago?
I am beginning to think that the best solution is to divide the country. It is obvious that a significant number of people can not live with the demands of those represented by the Dem party. This is nothing new and the resulting instability is resulting in a loss of our economy and wealth. So the best solution is to part ways.
To the author: Hormones raging? The most reasoned part of that article was the quote from the Democrats. Since when was making fun of someone a valid argument? If you have something specific you would like to address, maybe you should do so, instead of simply making fun.
They have every right to be up in arms about something they believe in, just like the Republicans have every right to be up in arms about what they believe in.
I’m so sick of seeing people moan about legislation that has passed. It isn’t personal, it’s just lawmaking. There is screaming on both sides. Think outside what your party tells you to believe and see what happens.
George Washington warned about the dangers of a two party system. This is a perfect example of why. It creates camps of people that want nothing more than to fight with each other. It doesn’t even matter if you agree with the other side anymore. When you divide people into groups they compete and take sides. Whereas, if you didn’t associate with a party and you had a republican and democrat discuss their beliefs, without knowing party affiliation, the discussion is usually much less severe. Points are conceded, conversations become more productive. It is no longer about my team vs. yours, it is about my opinion vs. yours, which is an entirely more useful thing to argue about.
We can agree with each other, but not when we take sides.
Finally, Teach, why not tell us something useful. Anyone who pays attention knows that there is screaming and crying on both sides. What’s your point?
I’m really sick of stupid people, on both sides. (Yes, that was an insult and I think it was justified.)
GOP goes all moon batty, tries to change the law when they do not have the political power to do so. Fall on sword in a symbolic gesture.
What you talking about, GT? Nothing wrong with the headline :)
Yeah, doing a post using iPhone can do funny things.
Sorry, ck, we thought you were at the meeting.
We could just move the Libs do all those areas were they have already caused the whole systems to fail, like Detroit.
Well, if they believe in it, Kevin, then perhaps they should attempt to defend it in a rational, reasonable, fact based, adult manner, rather than stooping to their typical feelings based childish tantrums/scare-a-thons.
But, see, you think this health care thing is super. Yet, the majority of Americans think otherwise, and would prefer solutions that actually make sense in the real world, rather than in a college bull session.
And, face it, people have sides. They have different beliefs. Such is life.
And, yeah, John, we are trying to change a law that is vastly unpopular, intrusive in our lives, and will not only fail miserably, but decrease health care and increase costs.
Wow Kevin. I can’t remember the last time that I saw such a screed that had no logical thinking to it.
Let’s address your points one by one, shall we?
Hormones raging?
Ever hear of a simile Kevin? Perhaps your reading comprehension is a bit off, but the comparison was made between the way the Democrats act, and the teen-aged girlfriend raging on hormones. Perhaps you didn’t have a girlfriend in high school so maybe you aren’t familiar with they way they can and do act.
The most reasoned part of that article was the quote from the Democrats.
That is your opinion. I would disagree with it. How is it that you feel that it is right to say that a person must express their opinion in a way that is acceptable to you?
However, you don’t think that screaming is a little over the top? You don’t think that making a statement such as “people will die” is overblown? Why is it that you believe these statements (made without foundation) are “reasoned,” but then demand that the author support his claims?
I’m so sick of seeing people moan about legislation that has passed.
Right. God forbid that ever happened in our history. Tea tax. Prohibition. Intolerable Acts. Jim Crow laws. I guess those skipped your mind, didn’t they?
It isn’t personal, it’s just lawmaking.
Laws are personal Keven. When a law affects you, it is personal. It is not an abstract idea.
George Washington warned about the dangers of a two party system.
No, he did not. Washington argued against “parties” – not a “two party system.” I realize that the distinction may be lost on you, but it is an important distinction nonetheless.
(And as an aside, your false assertion damages any point you wish to make based upon that false assertion.)
Think outside what your party tells you to believe and see what happens.
I want to thank you for the feeling that in this entire world, only you see the true light. Only you have the courage to think in an independent manner.
Answer me this, Kevin, ….. what happens when you agree with the stance of a political party? Do you immediately run away from that stance?
If you do not, and arrive at your stance because that is what you honestly believe, why do you think that the rest of the world blindly follows whatever a party says? Do you really think that you are so superior to the rest of us to think that we are only mindless sheep?
Do you really think that only you can come to a conclusion independently?
Lord, save us from such hubris.
What’s your point?
The point is that Teach wrote a piece that stated his opinion. It is his blog and he has the right to do that.
I’m really sick of stupid people, on both sides. (Yes, that was an insult and I think it was justified.)
And I am tired of pseudo historians who hypocritically demand that others not insult people and then insult others feeling “justified.” I am sick and tired of people who believe that if only the world were as great and thoughtful as they are, it would be a better place. I am sick and tired of lily livered, condescending twits such as you.
And you don’t have to guess whether it is an insult.
It is.
“We could just move the Libs do all those areas were they have already caused the whole systems to fail, like Detroit.”
You can’t blame everything on one party. It’s convenient, but usually not true.
“Well, if they believe in it, Kevin, then perhaps they should attempt to defend it in a rational, reasonable, fact based, adult manner, rather than stooping to their typical feelings based childish tantrums/scare-a-thons.”
Republicans do the same thing, that is my point. The sky is always falling.
“But, see, you think this health care thing is super. Yet, the majority of Americans think otherwise, and would prefer solutions that actually make sense in the real world, rather than in a college bull session.”
I don’t know where you get your statistics from. I guess it depends on what poll you are using. Also, I never said that the health care thing is super. Personally, I think it still sucks.
“And, face it, people have sides. They have different beliefs. Such is life.”
Yes, they do, but they aren’t as radically opposite as the dems and repubs would have you believe.
“…said the ranking Democrat on the Rules Committee, Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.)”
She should totally marry that House guy from TV. Get it? You know how democrat women have trouble ditching their old name and choose to hyphenate it instead?
It would be too funny. Slaughter-House. Hah!
Fun.
I know what a simile is, than againn, I also know what an insult is.
You’re right, it was my opinion. You also make a good point, I don’t expect anyone to cater to me. I do expect them to try and be honest though. This isn’t an honest statement, as it leaves out the numerous freak outs that the republicans have had. It’s a stupid point and I was mad that I wasted my time reading it. I don’t really care if you agree with me, but again, you offer insults instead of reason. No, I don’t expect every post he makes to be reasonable, after all, it is his blog. He can say what he wants.
absolutely, and here is some more screaming: http://newsfeed.time.com/2010/09/09/watch-this-councilman-has-seen-too-many-movies/
Now you are being condescending.
)
You need to read his Farewell Address. I’m not a historian, but I can read. I assume you can too, so maybe it is time you revisit his Farewell Address.
It’s not that simple and you know it. My point is that you can get your point across without being a jackass.
I agree with the party.
No, I’m not that obnoxious.
Let me know if he saves you from such hubris.
Dear God, I had to read through all of this to get to your point. I was beginning to think this was just a bunch of BS. Yes, he does. And, since comments are allowed, I have a right to say what I said.
Okay, then I will make it easy for you. I am not a historian, or a pseudo historian. I’m a person with an opinion that differed from the author. I stated my opinion, and you showed me the error of my ways. I will keep silent from now on, and ensure that I never object to anything that anybody says ever again. You assume too much, and you fill your space with insults. You could have cut my time in half if you got to your point more directly.
Who is being condescending now. I will concede one point, I shouldn’t have called anyone stupid. In my annoyance I made a stupid comment myself. However, I still think that his comments were still out of line.
Don’t misunderstand, I agree with you more often than not. I also completely agree with them defending it in a rational, reasonable, fact based, adult manner. My point is more in line with how this is a fairly common occurrence on both sides and it isn’t really worthy of note. Unless you are going to talk about the issue as relating to both sides. In that case, your argument starts to make sense.
I don’t think the health care thing is super. (I think that is the first time I have ever used that word in a sentence.) It has some major, MAJOR, issues with it. People with pre-existing conditions still can’t get insurance because even though pre-existing conditions no longer bar you from getting insurance, the cost does. Maybe this will get better when the program is in full swing, but that is in 2014.
People have sides, yes, but they aren’t generally black and white. I believe there are truly evil things, and I believe there are truly good things, but I think there is also a middle ground. It is only when we are in groups that we begin to take sides. My objection with the two party system is that it eliminates alternatives that might work well.
If it wasn’t for the disparaging comparison you made I wouldn’t have an objection. I just don’t go in for low humor, and usually, you don’t either. I still enjoy reading your posts, for whatever that is worth.
I actually have a legitimate question. How can you ignore that the Congressional Budget Office, which is non-partisan, states that the repeal of the health care bill will drive up the deficit by 230 billion dollars?
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/01/07/1961500/10-year-cost-to-repeal-health.html
This isn’t a trap, I just don’t understand where the argument is with that.
And those of us who deal with realities know that that is complete bunk. Perhaps you also missed that repealing ObamaCare would reduce net spending $540 billion over 10 years, says the CBO: http://spectator.org/blog/2011/01/07/breaking-cbo-says-repealing-ob
I see why your last name is Teach.
I know what a simile is, than againn, I also know what an insult is.
Apparently not.
I don’t really care if you agree with me, but again, you offer insults instead of reason.
Isn’t it amazing that you offered insults and now say that they bad?
Now you are being condescending.
Yet you still don’t answer or focus on the fact that Americans (and people across the world) complain about laws and regulations that are passed.
You need to read his Farewell Address. I’m not a historian, but I can read. I assume you can too, so maybe it is time you revisit his Farewell Address.
I keep the address in a frame over my desk, Kevin. Washington never delivered the address in a verbal form. He makes several references to “parties” not “two parties.” He specifically refers to geographical and political parties. In that there were numerous geographical parties at the time, and at least 3 political parties, where and why would you say he is warning against the “two party system?”
As I said, the distinction of “parties” and “two parties” appears to be lost on you.
No, I’m not that obnoxious.
Then why would you assume that people only arrive at positions that a party tells them?
And, since comments are allowed, I have a right to say what I said.
No, you don’t. Your comment, as is mine and everyone’s here, is allowed by the owner. It is not a right. There is a difference between a “right” and a “privilege.”
I will concede one point, I shouldn’t have called anyone stupid.
Fair enough. I hope you understand that my response that contained an insult was meant only to demonstrate the hypocrisy of what you were saying. Now that you have backed away from that, I will as well.
Have a great day.
I’ll admit, I wasn’t in a clear mind when I wrote any of that. I digress.