Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

The end of Obamacare?

Page 7 of 24 [ 370 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 24  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

DarthMetaKnight
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,105
Location: The Infodome

02 Feb 2011, 10:06 pm

Vexcalibur wrote:
And thus per Godwin's law, you lose.

Image


_________________
Synthetic carbo-polymers got em through man. They got em through mouse. They got through, and we're gonna get out.
-Roostre

READ THIS -> https://represent.us/


Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Arizona

02 Feb 2011, 10:15 pm

Vexcalibur wrote:
And thus per Godwin's law, you lose.


more like godlose's law amirite



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

02 Feb 2011, 10:17 pm

aghogday wrote:
Quote:
Obama is a product of that style of politics, so he actually knows how to play dirty.


What your suggesting here has no basis in fact. The implication you are making in regard to the livelyhood of the justices, doesn't seem sarcastic, and is a rather serious one since you are involving the president in the implication. Are you being sarcastic or are you really implying that this could happen?


If you notice I said a few posts back that he probably wouldn't out of fear of getting caught. Anyways, he is trying to wait the justices out cause a few of them are getting up there in age.



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

02 Feb 2011, 10:29 pm

Jacoby wrote:
Naw, I think I'll keep using it.


Would a single-payer system, or public insurance option be "Fascist" as well. I think you know damn well that the reason for the mandate is that it was the only thing the insurance companies would possibly agree to. They would not allow a universal government health insurance program that threatens the existence of the health insurance industry as we know it today.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Arizona

02 Feb 2011, 10:36 pm

marshall wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
Naw, I think I'll keep using it.


Would a single-payer system, or public insurance option be "Fascist" as well. I think you know damn well that the reason for the mandate is that it was the only thing the insurance companies would possibly agree to. They would not allow a universal government health insurance program that threatens the existence of the health insurance industry as we know it today.


no that would be socialist *ducks*

I know the reasoning behind the individual mandate, it was a bribe to to the insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions and keep kids on people's insurance until they're 27. It's corporatism which is fascism.

I'll say this, between socialism and fascism; I'll choose socialism. We got the worst of the worst with this bill.



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

02 Feb 2011, 10:53 pm

Jacoby wrote:
marshall wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
Naw, I think I'll keep using it.


Would a single-payer system, or public insurance option be "Fascist" as well. I think you know damn well that the reason for the mandate is that it was the only thing the insurance companies would possibly agree to. They would not allow a universal government health insurance program that threatens the existence of the health insurance industry as we know it today.


no that would be socialist *ducks*

Well, isn't the fact that we require hospitals to treat patients who can't possibly afford the bill already socialism? The true capitalistic free-market solution is to refuse treatment to those who can't pay on site. Survival of the fittest (cough, richest).

Quote:
I know the reasoning behind the individual mandate, it was a bribe to to the insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions and keep kids on people's insurance until they're 27. It's corporatism which is fascism.

I'll say this, between socialism and fascism; I'll choose socialism. We got the worst of the worst with this bill.

Actually corporatism isn't fascism. Why can't any conservatives discuss issues in a logical way. All you guys ever do is play language games and appeal to absurd slippery-slope fallacies.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Arizona

02 Feb 2011, 11:02 pm

marshall wrote:
Actually corporatism isn't fascism. Why can't any conservatives discuss issues in a logical way. All you guys ever do is play language games and appeal to absurd slippery-slope fallacies.


Tell that to Mussolini, he's the one that said that.



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

02 Feb 2011, 11:16 pm

Jacoby wrote:
marshall wrote:
Actually corporatism isn't fascism. Why can't any conservatives discuss issues in a logical way. All you guys ever do is play language games and appeal to absurd slippery-slope fallacies.


Tell that to Mussolini, he's the one that said that.


Despite what liberals say, Socialism and Facism are on the same end of the political spectrum.



Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

02 Feb 2011, 11:22 pm

Quote:
Despite what liberals say, Socialism and Facism are on the same end of the political spectrum.

Image


Jacoby wrote:
Vexcalibur wrote:
And thus per Godwin's law, you lose.


more like godlose's law amirite
The internet has failed you.


_________________
.


Last edited by Vexcalibur on 02 Feb 2011, 11:29 pm, edited 3 times in total.

simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

02 Feb 2011, 11:24 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Despite what liberals say, Socialism and Facism are on the same end of the political spectrum.


You just insisted that Glenn Beck didnt say that and now it's a core tenet of your beliefs? You are a comedian, Ill give you that. 20 seconds of google and you've got your new rightwad talking points.



Last edited by simon_says on 02 Feb 2011, 11:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

02 Feb 2011, 11:24 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
marshall wrote:
Actually corporatism isn't fascism. Why can't any conservatives discuss issues in a logical way. All you guys ever do is play language games and appeal to absurd slippery-slope fallacies.


Tell that to Mussolini, he's the one that said that.


Despite what liberals say, Socialism and Facism are on the same end of the political spectrum.

^ And this guy claims to have a minor in history.

Fascism was defined in large part by its opposition to socialism.

Fascism is an extremely nationalistic ideology, while socialism is internationalistic in ideology- in fact, socialists advocate the end of the nation-state as an institution. Socialists generally advocate for a democratic system controlled primarily by the working class (the "dictatorship of the Proletariat") while Fascists stress the need for a strong individual leader. Socialists typically want a decentralized system, while fascists want a highly centralized system. Fascists uphold notions of tradition, the importance of the nation's unique culture, and a relatively more Puritan moral code, while Socialists oppose all of those things.

Why do I even bother explaining these things? It's not as though you are even capable of comprehending the above paragraph anyways. I would have more success trying to teach differential equations to my cat.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

02 Feb 2011, 11:25 pm

Relevant:
http://goo.gl/MGZKa


_________________
.


Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

02 Feb 2011, 11:28 pm

Vexcalibur wrote:
Relevant:
http://goo.gl/MGZKa


Not even remotely similar, a situation like an asteroid heading towards the planet (if it were that big I'm not sure even a bunker would necessarily survive that kind of impact), falls under provide for the common defense.

If Obama did propose bunkers and we had time to build them, we would have time to construct and launch rockets to alter the asteroid's course so it wouldn't even hit Earth (and that would be far less expensive).



Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

02 Feb 2011, 11:31 pm

Quote:
Not even remotely similar

Not meant to.


_________________
.


Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Arizona

02 Feb 2011, 11:36 pm

Jacoby wrote:
marshall wrote:
Actually corporatism isn't fascism. Why can't any conservatives discuss issues in a logical way. All you guys ever do is play language games and appeal to absurd slippery-slope fallacies.


Tell that to Mussolini, he's the one that said that.


btw, I'm not trying to be an ass here. The quote “Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power” is indeed attributed to Mussolini.



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

02 Feb 2011, 11:56 pm

Orwell wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
marshall wrote:
Actually corporatism isn't fascism. Why can't any conservatives discuss issues in a logical way. All you guys ever do is play language games and appeal to absurd slippery-slope fallacies.


Tell that to Mussolini, he's the one that said that.


Despite what liberals say, Socialism and Facism are on the same end of the political spectrum.

^ And this guy claims to have a minor in history.

Fascism was defined in large part by its opposition to socialism.


Depends on how you define the political spectrum, and I actually didn't get this from Beck. The idea that Facism and Socialism are on the same end of the political spectrum has to do with the fact that both involve government controlling the economy and attempting to regulate everything in people's lives. They just go about it differently, however both involve big government.

Orwell wrote:
Fascism is an extremely nationalistic ideology, while socialism is internationalistic in ideology- in fact, socialists advocate the end of the nation-state as an institution. Socialists generally advocate for a democratic system controlled primarily by the working class (the "dictatorship of the Proletariat") while Fascists stress the need for a strong individual leader. Socialists typically want a decentralized system, while fascists want a highly centralized system. Fascists uphold notions of tradition, the importance of the nation's unique culture, and a relatively more Puritan moral code, while Socialists oppose all of those things.


They just approach it from different angles but have similar goals. It is about power and control, the different methods they use are just means to an end. Which is really why you can't truely define political ideology as something that is linear. I know this is counter to what many political science majors and historians would state, however when you think about it, there is some sense in the argument that political ideology can't be thought of as a straight line.

Orwell wrote:
Why do I even bother explaining these things? It's not as though you are even capable of comprehending the above paragraph anyways. I would have more success trying to teach differential equations to my cat.


:roll:

Did they ever teach you how to think things through when you were going to whatever school you brag about? Instead of immediately dismissing something, how about you ask for clarrification first.