U.S. ranks 25th in life expectancy while we pay the MOST for health care

[ceo]

How the fuck would they be saints? I didnt say they were anything close to perfect. Your reading into my comment and seeing something else.
You effectively Re-worded it in your mind.
Saints???!!
you picked 1 line out pf the post and twisted it into some crazy shit! Wtf?

You didn't say they were perfect, but you implied it. Did I twist it? Was it really a stretch? Let's see...

I'm amazed to learn that there are NO rich/wealthy Democrats.

There are. But they are the guilty rich people (the ones that feel guilty that they are rich and want to make it batter for others.)

You said there are rich/wealthy Dems. You said they are "the guilty rich", like they are [paraphrasing now] just so tormented that they somehow got rich through their misfortune and they feel so horrible that they are rich and not everyone else is too. That sounds pretty saintly to me bor.

If these rich dems are so tormented by their riches and want to make everyone else rich too...why aren't they giving away every penny over $100,000 (so that they can still live decently) to the poor? They aren't feeling that guilty bro. Don't tell me you actually believe any of this bullshit you are trying to get others to swallow? LOL! I think you're just trolling now.

 

[Mr. dB]

The damage that Obama and his rhetoric have done to our underlying tax base is massive.

It's disturbing that people actually believe and regurgitate this garbage.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/06/opinion/brooks-the-wonky-liberal.html?src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB

 

[brownbrown]

You didn't say they were perfect, but you implied it. Did I twist it? Was it really a stretch? Let's see...
You said there are rich/wealthy Dems. You said they are "the guilty rich", like they are [paraphrasing now] just so tormented that they somehow got rich through their misfortune and they feel so horrible that they are rich and not everyone else is too. That sounds pretty saintly to me bor.
If these rich dems are so tormented by their riches and want to make everyone else rich too...why aren't they giving away every penny over $100,000 (so that they can still live decently) to the poor? They aren't feeling that guilty bro. Don't tell me you actually believe any of this bullshit you are trying to get others to swallow? LOL! I think you're just trolling now.

There are. But they are the guilty rich people (the ones that feel guilty that they are rich and want to make it batter for others.)
then there are the Rich GOp members. (they feel that they are the only ones that should EVER be rich, and that others should never be rich)
Then there are the ones from both parties that arent neither and want to do whats good for AMERICA.

You can guess who's incharge at the moment.

Paraphrasing destroys my whole post.
I can not possibly speak for the heart of 200+ Democratic politicians. But I can look at voting records and see who has the well being of the Majority in mind.

Being "guilty"(not meant to be 100% litteral). How about I use the word Compassion?
Why don't they give away every penny over $100K? Is that rethorical or litteral? And I'm trolling CEO?
Having compassion for others less fortunate dosen't justify giving away ones wealth because of not being a cold hearted Dickhole.

 

[ceo]

Paraphrasing destroys my whole post.
I can not possibly speak for the heart of 200+ Democratic politicians. But I can look at voting records and see who has the well being of the Majority in mind.

Being "guilty"(not meant to be 100% litteral). How about I use the word Compassion?
Why don't they give away every penny over $100K? Is that rethorical or litteral? And I'm trolling CEO?
Having compassion for others less fortunate dosen't justify giving away ones wealth because of not being a cold hearted Dickhole.

You're the one who said the rich dems were the ones who felt guilty about being rich and want to make it better for others (assuming "others" means others who aren't rich). Yes, it was meant literally. If they feel soooooo guilty, let them give away most of their fortune now, not when they're dead (like any of them would do that anyway). They don't need all that money.

LOL again @ politicians having compassion for the poor and middle class. You're killing me with this bro! Yes, why should these guilty, rich politicians give away their wealth when they can legislate that to others?

Voting records don't mean shit to me. They vote party lines and know the outcomes before the votes are ever cast. Votes are bought and paid for anyway. Politicians by and large have become a bunch of lazy, greedy, entitlement-minded, selfish, evil pricks over the last hundred or so years. Both parties. The system is fucked. There will never be anything good to come out of it for the poor and middle class (a lifetime of handouts is not something I consider good).

Fuck dems and fuck repubs. They all need to be fired. Term limits need to be set, and politicians should be part time, no benefits, and have to have real jobs to support their families. These assholes are so out of touch with reality it's sick. Open your eyes bro.

 

[mrplunkey]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/06/opinion/brooks-the-wonky-liberal.html?src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB

That opinion piece is completely filled with innacuracies. Let me pick one out:

"There are two large lessons here. First, Republican candidates can say they will deregulate and, in some areas, that would be a good thing. But it will not produce a short-term economic rebound because regulations are not a big factor in our short-term problems."

When FDA switches from a Republican administration to a Democratic one, we feel the effect within ~30 days. In many cases, we feel the direct impact before the official head of the agency is even put into place.

So would you consider 30 days "short term" or was he thinking of 1-2 week timespan?

Here's another:

"Second, it is easy to be cynical about politics and to say that Washington is a polarized cesspool. And it’s true that the interest groups and the fund-raisers make every disagreement seem like a life-or-death struggle. But, in reality, most people in government are trying to find a balance between difficult trade-offs. Whether it’s antiterrorism policy or regulatory policy, most substantive disagreements are within the 40 yard lines."

That's completely untrue as well. Look at the new rule the NLRB jammed through last week. They want to force union elections into a 15-21 day process because it favors unions. Who on this planet would consider that "within the 40 yard lines"? Let's get this straight: A union election at a person's place of work will have a vastly greater impact on someone's life than a presidential election. So for this huge decision, we'll only give them 15-21 days to do their research yet the presidential selection process takes almost two years. And again I'll ask -- how is that "within the 40 yard lines."?

 

[Spartacus]

most people like 98% didn't read all that
like a jerk around
yawn