Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
For 2pid: how discussion works
You *almost* had it for a minute there, champ! Almost!
See, I asked you a question and you actually answered it! Then you asked me a question and I answered you back! But then you dropped the discussion ball, 2pid, and turned it back into one of your 'discussions'. Let's see what happened here! On Sep 8, 9:46 pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Sep 8, 7:32 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Sep 8, 9:11 pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Sep 8, 7:03 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Sep 8, 8:40 pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Sep 8, 6:05 pm, vinyl anachronist wrote: On Sep 8, 1:44 pm, ScottW2 wrote: On Sep 8, 11:24 am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Sep 8, 11:42 am, ScottW2 wrote: On Sep 7, 7:55 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Sep 7, 10:32 am, ScottW2 wrote: It's too degrading of military service to acknowledge there was a time when someone as ideologically unstable as the likes of you could be considered. How exactly can somebody be "ideologically unstable"? When they are politically bipolar, like you. Define what you mean. I mean your having claimed to once be a republican and now in just a few years becoming an ardent socialist is a symptom of extreme political bipolarism. No one will ever accuse you of being stable. Many conservatives are dsillusioned by the Republican Party and the latter's shift away from core principles. The fact that you pretend this isn't true LoL. It's barfs of nonsense like tis which reveal the depth of your fruadulence. While many conservatives, myself included, oppose many republican initiatives, particularly under bush, virtually none of them became socialist sheep. Is it really so hard or simply too depressing to just be yourself? Define "socialist". 1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods (or services) 2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state 3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done I added (or services). Perfect! Now apply those definitions to me. You oppose the government option for Obamacare? Yes or No. (i.e. See how you stamped your little paws here and *demanded* an answer? Even considering that you weren't very polite, I answered.) No. (i.e. Now, as is wont to happen in a discussion, I asked you some questions back. Why did you run and hide, my brave little doggy? LoL.) Do you agree that 45 million uninsured is a problem that has to be addressed? Yes or no. Do you 'think' we're getting our money's worth spending over 16% of the world's largest economy on healthcare? (I already know that 2pid will answer "yes", so I won't ask. Smart people know the correct answer including some republicans even. LoL.) Do you believe that our spending over 16% of our GDP on healthcare puts us at a competitive disadvantage vis a vis those nations spending 10% or less? Yes or no. (i.e. I demanded an answer too, but you ran and hid like the petrified little mutt you are. LoL.) Do you oppose gov't ownership of GM? Yes or No. Yes. Uh-oh! It doesn't work! Now what? See above. Indeed, see above. Words have meanings, 2pid (a concept that you'll never get). There are, and alwys will be aspects of the US that lean socialist. Even if one supports those aspect with their entire being they aren't "socialists". What a ****ing numbskull. (i.e. Silent assent noted.) BTW, how do you like the US gov't building a car plant in China? Is the labor there cheaper? LoL. (i.e. Yet another unanswered question, 2pid. LoL.) |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
For 2pid: how discussion works
On Sep 10, 2:57*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote: Do you agree that 45 million uninsured is a problem that has to be addressed? Yes or no. Not for "ALL" of them. Only for some of them. exclusions being illegal residents/immigrants/workers and fairly well off stupid people who wish to self insure |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
For 2pid: how discussion works
On Sep 10, 9:24*am, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Sep 10, 2:57*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: Do you agree that 45 million uninsured is a problem that has to be addressed? Yes or no. Not for "ALL" of them. Only for some of them. exclusions being illegal residents/immigrants/workers and fairly well off stupid people who wish to self insure How would you feel about a law that denied medical treatment for those here illegally? |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
For 2pid: how discussion works
On Sep 10, 11:26*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote: On Sep 10, 9:24*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Sep 10, 2:57*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: Do you agree that 45 million uninsured is a problem that has to be addressed? Yes or no. Not for "ALL" of them. Only for some of them. exclusions being illegal residents/immigrants/workers and fairly well off stupid people who wish to self insure How would you feel about a law that denied medical treatment for those here illegally? we are talking about the government footing their bill they can always go back home country where they belong, and their own countries can take care of them. How about a bill requiring their home countries to foot the bill for their own citizens who came here illegally? |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
For 2pid: how discussion works
On Sep 10, 10:38*am, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Sep 10, 11:26*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Sep 10, 9:24*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Sep 10, 2:57*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: Do you agree that 45 million uninsured is a problem that has to be addressed? Yes or no. Not for "ALL" of them. Only for some of them. exclusions being illegal residents/immigrants/workers and fairly well off stupid people who wish to self insure How would you feel about a law that denied medical treatment for those here illegally? we are talking about the government footing their bill they can always go back home country where they belong, and their own countries can take care of them. That doesn't answer the question. How about a bill requiring their home countries to foot the bill for their own citizens who came here illegally? Fine. How would you propose to collect if they didn't pay? I'm not sure we can legislate fiscal policy for other nations. So should we provide the medical care in the hope the nation the person is a citizen of pays? |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
For 2pid: how discussion works
On Sep 10, 12:31*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote: On Sep 10, 10:38*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Sep 10, 11:26*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Sep 10, 9:24*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Sep 10, 2:57*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: Do you agree that 45 million uninsured is a problem that has to be addressed? Yes or no. Not for "ALL" of them. Only for some of them. exclusions being illegal residents/immigrants/workers and fairly well off stupid people who wish to self insure How would you feel about a law that denied medical treatment for those here illegally? we are talking about the government footing their bill they can always go back home country where they belong, and their own countries can take care of them. That doesn't answer the question. How about a bill requiring their home countries to foot the bill for their own citizens who came here illegally? Fine. How would you propose to collect if they didn't pay? I'm not sure we can legislate fiscal policy for other nations. So should we provide the medical care in the hope the nation the person is a citizen of pays?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - We send them tons of foreign aid. We can stop doing that until thay pay the bill for their citizens as to your second pat od the question, that would be solved through a "compact" with oither nations. we would service their citizens, as their governements have agreed to the terms of the compact |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
For 2pid: how discussion works
On Sep 10, 10:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote:
On Sep 10, 12:31*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Sep 10, 10:38*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Sep 10, 11:26*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Sep 10, 9:24*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Sep 10, 2:57*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: Do you agree that 45 million uninsured is a problem that has to be addressed? Yes or no. Not for "ALL" of them. Only for some of them. exclusions being illegal residents/immigrants/workers and fairly well off stupid people who wish to self insure How would you feel about a law that denied medical treatment for those here illegally? we are talking about the government footing their bill they can always go back home country where they belong, and their own countries can take care of them. That doesn't answer the question. How about a bill requiring their home countries to foot the bill for their own citizens who came here illegally? Fine. How would you propose to collect if they didn't pay? I'm not sure we can legislate fiscal policy for other nations. So should we provide the medical care in the hope the nation the person is a citizen of pays? We send them tons of foreign aid. We probably already do. We can stop doing that until thay pay the bill for their citizens as to your second pat od the question, that would be solved through a "compact" with oither nations. we would service their citizens, as their governements have agreed *to the terms of the compact And if they don't agree to the compact? |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
For 2pid: how discussion works
On Sep 10, 1:46*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Sep 10, 8:26*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Sep 10, 9:24*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Sep 10, 2:57*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: Do you agree that 45 million uninsured is a problem that has to be addressed? Yes or no. Not for "ALL" of them. Only for some of them. exclusions being illegal residents/immigrants/workers and fairly well off stupid people who wish to self insure How would you feel about a law that denied medical treatment for those here illegally? * *No problem. * We're all going to be denied really decent health care in an effort to hold down costs as the gov't taxes the "cadillac" plans. It's always about you, isn't it 2pid. Reread the question. Then try to answer it. LoL. *Does the VA deny you any coverage? *I think you claim no. I don't use the VA, so you're wrong. *So the feds will declare that a cadiallac plan and penalize them for it. Says who? You're not bright enbough (nor unbiased enough) to pass any judgements. LoL. On another topic (to pull a 2pid here and veer off topic) is the guy from SC a "hero" to you for shouting out "You lie!" to Obama? I think yes. |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
For 2pid: how discussion works
Shhhh! said: On another topic (to pull a 2pid here and veer off topic) is the guy from SC a "hero" to you for shouting out "You lie!" to Obama? I think yes. On the news, one of the networks waved a microphone at some people in SC who voted for Wilson. Turns out many of those fine citizens agree with their esteemed redneck representative -- i.e., Obama was "lying" about health care for illegals. Most people realize that the entire dispute hinges on the lack of an enforcement clause in the House's (draft) legislation. That bill was not authored by Obama. Neither was the Senate's version, which does include a requirement to prove citizenship. Maybe Witless can 'explain' how Obama "lied" when he said that his proposals do not allow health care services to be provided to illegals. Scottie, if you're not too inflamed with anger, how about it? |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
For 2pid: how discussion works
On 12 Set, 01:29, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote: On Sep 10, 10:35*pm, Clyde Slick wrote: On Sep 10, 12:31*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Sep 10, 10:38*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Sep 10, 11:26*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: On Sep 10, 9:24*am, Clyde Slick wrote: On Sep 10, 2:57*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote: Do you agree that 45 million uninsured is a problem that has to be addressed? Yes or no. Not for "ALL" of them. Only for some of them. exclusions being illegal residents/immigrants/workers and fairly well off stupid people who wish to self insure How would you feel about a law that denied medical treatment for those here illegally? we are talking about the government footing their bill they can always go back home country where they belong, and their own countries can take care of them. That doesn't answer the question. How about a bill requiring their home countries to foot the bill for their own citizens who came here illegally? Fine. How would you propose to collect if they didn't pay? I'm not sure we can legislate fiscal policy for other nations. So should we provide the medical care in the hope the nation the person is a citizen of pays? We send them tons of foreign aid. We probably already do. We can stop doing that until thay pay the bill for their citizens as to your second pat od the question, that would be solved through a "compact" with oither nations. we would service their citizens, as their governements have agreed *to the terms of the compact And if they don't agree to the compact?- Itago ang tekstong may panipi - -Ipakita ang tekstong may panipi- cut foreign aid |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
For 2pid: how discussion works
On 12 Set, 02:10, George M. Middius wrote:
Shhhh! said: On another topic (to pull a 2pid here and veer off topic) is the guy from SC a "hero" to you for shouting out "You lie!" to Obama? I think yes. On the news, one of the networks waved a microphone at some people in SC who voted for Wilson. Turns out many of those fine citizens agree with their esteemed redneck representative -- i.e., Obama was "lying" about health care for illegals. Most people realize that the entire dispute hinges on the lack of an enforcement clause in the House's (draft) legislation. That bill was not authored by Obama. Neither was the Senate's version, which does include a requirement to prove citizenship. Maybe Witless can 'explain' how Obama "lied" when he said that his proposals do not allow health care services to be provided to illegals. Scottie, if you're not too inflamed with anger, how about it? It allows it, becasue it does not allow for checking documentation of those who might be illegals Duh!!! |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
For 2pid: how discussion works
duh-Sacky shows why the ****uplican brain trust can't get anything right. On another topic (to pull a 2pid here and veer off topic) is the guy from SC a "hero" to you for shouting out "You lie!" to Obama? I think yes. On the news, one of the networks waved a microphone at some people in SC who voted for Wilson. Turns out many of those fine citizens agree with their esteemed redneck representative -- i.e., Obama was "lying" about health care for illegals. Most people realize that the entire dispute hinges on the lack of an enforcement clause in the House's (draft) legislation. That bill was not authored by Obama. Neither was the Senate's version, which does include a requirement to prove citizenship. Maybe Witless can 'explain' how Obama "lied" when he said that his proposals do not allow health care services to be provided to illegals. Scottie, if you're not too inflamed with anger, how about it? It allows it, becasue it does not allow for checking documentation of those who might be illegals Duh!!! I agree with the last sentiment, but only as regards your "answer" to my question. Your "answer" is wholly irrelevant and nonresponsive. I think you've spent too much time hanging around Witlessmongrel. |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
For 2pid: how discussion works
In article ,
George M. Middius wrote: duh-Sacky shows why the ****uplican brain trust can't get anything right. On another topic (to pull a 2pid here and veer off topic) is the guy from SC a "hero" to you for shouting out "You lie!" to Obama? I think yes. On the news, one of the networks waved a microphone at some people in SC who voted for Wilson. Turns out many of those fine citizens agree with their esteemed redneck representative -- i.e., Obama was "lying" about health care for illegals. Most people realize that the entire dispute hinges on the lack of an enforcement clause in the House's (draft) legislation. That bill was not authored by Obama. Neither was the Senate's version, which does include a requirement to prove citizenship. Maybe Witless can 'explain' how Obama "lied" when he said that his proposals do not allow health care services to be provided to illegals. Scottie, if you're not too inflamed with anger, how about it? It allows it, becasue it does not allow for checking documentation of those who might be illegals Duh!!! I agree with the last sentiment, but only as regards your "answer" to my question. Your "answer" is wholly irrelevant and nonresponsive. I think you've spent too much time hanging around Witlessmongrel. Why should illegals be forbidden to buy health insurance or health services? Stephen |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
For 2pid: how discussion works
On 12 Set, 10:50, MiNe 109 wrote:
In article , *George M. Middius wrote: duh-Sacky shows why the ****uplican brain trust can't get anything right. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
How diplomacy works (take note, 2pid) | Audio Opinions | |||
Video of 2pid having a 'discussion' | Audio Opinions | |||
DISCUSSION TOPIC: Advertising Car Audio Products - What Works? | Car Audio | |||
More Box Discussion | Car Audio | |||
Where did our amp discussion go? | Car Audio |