Shut 'em Down!

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/11/01/Senate-Democrats-supported-rule-that-led-to-insurance-cancellations

For after you lolBreitbart

then you can search for yourself after although you'll prolly just change the subject

I notice as soon as Solyndra was brought up it hit a liberal nerve and they immediately retreated to their Bush Derangement Syndrome; foaming at the mouth spouting CHENEYBACHMANHALIBURTANPALINNNNNNNNN.
As I've said before liberals never admit guilt, they just share in it by pointing to something else and changing the subject. You'd rather not learn anything about Solyndra, the Obama billionaire donors that were the investors that secured the load, how their investments were protected but not the taxpayers', how Obama boasted it as a model of green energy, an example of how the stimulus worked. Instead, you know it's bad. You can't look. All you can do is shout Haliburton.

If the first analogy that comes to mind when you think of Obama is *** Cheney, then why do you like and defend Obama so much?

Oh he meanths well. He careths. He'ths a nithce man.

Only one person brought up Cheyney and it was to show there there isn't a parallel.

I haven't heard anyone champion Obama as some kind of green party liberator. He tightened the noose on Coal, which should have been done 30 years ago when the revelations about underground fires, water table contamination, black lung, CO/CO2 emissions, etc were actually new information.

Green party people say Obama is in bed with corporations the same way they said it about Bush and Clinton.

Long story short, when you're standing on the edges, everything toward the middle looks the same, and it's not. Obama is no more a tree hugger than he is anything else, he's luke warm, complacency with a smile and $5,000 suit.

Sounds like something struck your nerve. After all you are now trying to equate Solyndra with Haliburton.

I'm not sure why you quoted me while proceeding to drool over yourself in unintelligent garbage, but please refrain from doing so in the future.

They voted on a resolution that would prevent companies to give shitty plans, big *** deal. Grow the *** up and meet the 21st century.


Oh and to an earlier crack about it being a step to single-payer: you make it sound like a bad thing.

Single payer ftw, insurance companies are stupid anyway.

I really love how people who deny climate change and are young earth creationists try to say anything about the scientific community, or research and development.

It's like getting a bunch of old men to talk on women's reproductive rights...oh wait.

It's not just the "earth was created for our consumption" sentiment that bugs me, it's the way they think that they have some kind of given right to hold the entirety of humanity in the dark ages. And anyone who wants to move forward is "waging a war on Christianity".

That resolution went a lot further than that.

Anyone that supports single payer in a nation as large as the US is incapable of critical thinking.

While it's not as large as the USA, Brazil has ~210 million people and universal healthcare that works. The problem with a statement like that is that there are only 2 other countries in the world with the same or more people that america, and they are China and India. One could easily make the case that you phrased it specifically because of that. It's not that it wouldn't work as well or better in a larger nation, though I have my doubts, there just aren't any.

Considering the source that comment can be ignored.

Come back when you actually have a logical argument, instead of being a useless pessimist.

Coming from the genius that blabbed this ?logical? ?argument?


You totally made the case for single payer.

Fortunately he doesn't actually need to make a case for it, the systems in place beat ours in nearly every metric.

Except only one metric where it actually counts: Research and Development.

Of course, when the majority of the world's R&D come from America, then the single payer system works for those other than America.

Bring single payer into America, R&D goes down to the tubes. Why? Because all of the taxpayer's money will go towards healthcare and not towards anything else (unless we raise taxes to 110%+, like France is doing to pay for their single payer system...)

Except other than pharma, most of the R$D is already paid for by the government or private donors.

Also, MOST countries with single payer plans pay less taxes than we do. It's not hard to figure out how to pay for it, since we're already paying for it. Take the money you spend on insurance, copays, and deductibles and done. Healthcare is one place where the free market has failed to produce better quality or lower prices.

What?

The US in 2011 spent 2.7% of GDP on R&D. Roughly $400 billion out of over $1 trillion spent world wide. (This is both private and government R&D).

That's less than 40% of the worlds total R&D expenditure in research. If we removed defense, energy, etc and only looked at natural science I'm not sure the US would even be close to 40% of the worlds expenditure in medical research.

In 2010 the National institute of health (the US biomedical research facility) had a budget of $30 billion. The sequester cut 5% of the NIH budget this year.

This doesn't even get into the problems of doing stem cell research in the US because various religious politicians have created laws disallowing it or restricting it.

To be fair, the Christians we see voicing this opinion are usually members of the 'hardcore' Christian sects we could compare to death cults. Same reason they're so gung-ho about Israel prospering again because they can't wait for the Jews to be annihilated to fulfill prophecy. It's why I like to compare them to the Taliban because effectively they're equals, only restrained by our legal system that prevents them from following the barbarism of the OT or the madness of the NTs endgame.

You don't see unitarians or quakers on the airwaves demanding Biblical creationism or literalist readings because they've long fallen back from that ridiculous position and have been softened by centuries of deists/atheists/skeptics who have been critical towards the Bible. Even Catholics, the Galactic Empire of Christianity has embraced evolutionary theory and most Christians have come to embrace the apologetics of the OT killcounts.

Religion may not like it but on the free market of ideas, ridiculous nonsense gets called out for the nonsense it is. This is the reason why Islam is so violent towards any criticism, they know its ***.

It was directed at the "come the rapture" crowd, but you are correct, the vast majority of Christians aren't fanatics, but the vocal minority are always the target of ire. That could be said for the vocal minority in any population.

Our American problem is that the vocal minority wields alot of power while the vast majority coddle fanatics and refuse to shake off silly notions they'd apply to no other part of their lives.

Would anyone believe me if I said I rode a magic unicorn to work every day? Just have faith in my supernatural stallion my child, it only appears to me because I've been chosen.

Belief in angels is one such thing. Or miracles. Or God is behind you being able to find your car keys before work. Or that every animal on the planet was herded into a ship that weathered a global flood. Or that Jesus literally raised someone from the dead. Read literally, the whole thing is patently hilarious but figuratively you could at least draw some conclusions about human society.

At least the Greco-Roman pantheon was like a reality show full of Gods and Goddesses.

Real Housewives of Olympus.

Which was exactly my point... Believe whatever you want to believe, but don't force the rest of us to live in your bronze age fantasy world.

A majority of Americans give a passive mandate to extremists to do whatever they like and in turn those extremists are given the keys to the country. It's very similar to the problem moderate Islam has with their radical kin as they cannot completely reject the doctrines because it goes against the dogma so what you're left with is a very wishy-washy halfhearted attempt at distance. The book(s) say kill heretics, oppress women and wage war yet when someone follows the books instructions its time to go into a series of apologetics because we all know that ***is wrong.

Reasoned discourse or intellectual debate on the existence of any God is usually relegated to people who actually have interest on the topic. Mainstream sources are afraid to touch the subject because it's so steeped in emotion for many its not profitable to draw viewer's ire.

Your layman will form their own opinions around the most popular belief of the time (monotheism) and casually go about life unchallenged by their peers. You don't need to think critically if everyone agrees with you and its amazing how you can turn bronze age barbarity into 'Jesus loves everyone' 'God wrote the Constitution' and 'The Bible is pro-female' when you haven't bothered to read the source material.

ftfy :)

Don't let *** cheney see your unicorn!!!

ginormous minority

You wish it was a minority! Perhaps in your circle of friends there is that one guy that still goes to church and everyone mocks him... And it's easy to think it's a small minority of people... as long as you ignore math and statistics... But there are 250 million christians in the us alone, which is a hell of a lot of anything.

You couldn't get rid of that many ping pong balls. But I eagerly await your final solution to ridding us of this "vocal minority".

Have we got a position for you at evil enterprises if you can figure that one out.

omg the things I could get done with a 5000$ suit.....

I'm not talking about government only, but all US entities, which includes government but is not limited to government.

How much of the total medical R&D are done by the US government and pharma-companies and other medical companies located in the US? I'm pretty sure you will see my point.

How much of that R&D are funded by capitalist practices? Practically all of the funding.

How much of that funding will go away if we switch to a single-payer system which limits a whole lot of income to the medical community? A significant chunk.

Now I hope you understand my point, instead of looking at a limited portion of the entire picture...

Hate to do a Goodwin's Law....

Oh, you!

Seems you've misquoted me, as I said the vocal minority championing the death cult aspects of Christianity, not the number of Christians in total. There is a difference between the individual slumming it in every Sunday at church, the religious scholar and the individual actively beating down doors for Jesus to remind us the end times are any day now.

Your Christian Taliban types are the people to look out for and they most certainly are not in the majority even if their power says otherwise.

Not saying you're wrong or anything but what do you base that off of?

Uh... no, not really. I know that some people really enjoy using that kind of number because it lends their arguments weight, but it has virtually no basis in reality. At best, that might represent the number of people who blaspheme against the Christian deity when they stub a toe or get pulled over for speeding. The number of people actually engaged in their Christian religion, the ones contributing to their church and evangelizing as the Bible decrees, they're much lower. In the Catholic community, the usual term I've heard for part-time pseudo-believers is C&E's, in that they only show up in church for Christmas and Easter.

I know it's convenient for posturing arguments to say that over 80% of the US population are Christians, but it's about as meaningful as saying that a similar number are right-handed.

If we winnow out the non-believers who cling to the apostasy that was pounded into their heads while still soft, then we can start dealing with real numbers and "minority" is certainly the correct term to describe them. When we further remove all the liberals and conventionally sane Christians so as to single out the vocal fringe that is given inexplicable amounts of media and political clout, it really is a very small group.

On the other hand, that's true of pretty much every group. There's a small (single-digit percentage at most) core that exploits the credulity and ignorance of the remaining 90+% to do whatever they want. I've ceased trying to figure out why people opt to be in that latter group. It's apparently just an outgrowth of human nature to want to be led by the nose by someone who doesn't have your best interests at heart -- c.f. the Tea Party.