Skip to main content

INSANITY


1. TEA PARTIES

1. TEA PARTIES
AT THE TEA PARTIES THEY ARE:
* AGAINST THE BAIL OUT - 2008 BUSH ADMIN
* AGAINST AIG BAIL OUT - 2008 BUSH ADMIN
* AGAIST TARP - 20008 BUSH ADMIN
* AGAINST LOAN FOR AUTOMAKERS - BEGAN BY 2008 BUSH ADMIN.
* AGAINST THE STIMULUS PACKAGE - OBAMA 2009 (WHICH INCLUDES THE LARGEST MIDDLE CLASS TAX CUTS IN HISTORY. SAY WHAT? )
* AGAINST THE LARGE DEFICITES - DEFICITES WHICH ORIGINATED FROM WAGING AN UNNESSESARY WAR IN IRAQ WHILE ALREADY INVOLVED IN CONFLICT IN AFGANISTAN - BUSH ADMIN. AND YET, WHEN MEASURES ARE PROPOSED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE LARGE DEFICITES SUCH AS LETTING TAX CUTS GO BACK TO WHERE THE WERE BEFORE 2004 THEY ARE AGAINST THAT TOO.

WHAT ARE THEY FOR? APPARENTLY WEARING TEA BAGS ON THEY’RE HATS , DUMPING TEA IN TEMPID WATER, BURNING BOOKS (ALL THE BRAINWASHING BOOKS) AND ENCOURAGING PEOPLE NOT TO ATTEND COLLEGE.

BY THE WAY THE ORIGINAL TEA PARTY WAS ABOUT TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION AND HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ACTUAL PRACTICE OF PAYING TAXES IN GENERAL.


2. HEALTHCARE REFORM

* NANA AND PAPA WILL HAVE TO FACE DEATH PANELS! OF COURSE THEY WOULD WHAT BETTER WAY TO KEEP THE YOUTH OF THIS COUNTRY VOTING DEMOCTRATE IN THE FUTURE THEN BY UTHINIZING THEIR PARENTS AND GRANDPARENTS. SOUNDS KIND OF UNPRODUCTIVE AND NUTS TO ME.

* YOUR VOTERS REGISTRATION CARDS WILL BE DOCUMENTED TO ENSURE THAT REPUIBLICANS WILL BE PREVENTED FROM GETTING MEDICAL CARE. SURE…WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT ALL DOCTORS AND HOSPITALS THROUGHOUT THE USA KNOW THAT IF YOU TREAT A REPUBLICAN YOU WON’T GET PAID.

* CARE WILL BE RATIONED. SURE BECAUSE MORE PEOPLE WILL BE GETTING SICK IF EVERYONE HAS HEALTH CARE OR PERHAPES SOME PEOPLE DON’T DESERVE TO GET MEDICAL CARE WHEN THEY ARE SICK. UNFORTUNATLY, LIKE IT OR NOT THEY WILL AND DO GET TREATMENT RIGHT NOW. ITS JUST THAT YOU AND I PAY FOR THEM NOW INSTEAD OF THEM PAYING FOR THEIRSELVES.


3. TOWNHALL MEETINGS

* CARRYING GUNS TO A TOWNHALL MEETING. WHATS WRONG WITH THAT? EVERYONE HAS A RIGHT TO BARE ARMS AND THEIR JUST EXERCISING THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. IN FACT, WE SHOULD ALL START PACKING HEAT EVERYWHERE WE GO. LETS TAKE GUNS TO SCHOOL, TO WORK AND TO CHURCH FROM NOW ON. THAT WAY, WE CAN INTIMIDATE OUR STUDENTS, TEACHERS, COWORKERS, BOSSES AND PREACHERS. ITS COMPLETELY SANE AND RATIONAL TO TAKE A GUN TO A TOWN HALL MEETING. ESPECIALLY IF THE PRESIDENT IS THERE. HEY….IF YOU DON’T HAVE A GUN YOU CAN ALWAYS BITE OFF THE FINGER OF SOMEONE WHO DISAGEES WITH YOU. AT LEAST THIS WOULD PREVENT A LOT OF FINGER POINTING.

* HARRASSING AND HECKLEING PEOPLE IN WHEELCHAIRS BECAUSE THEY ARE TRYING TO VOICE THEIR OPINIONS. AFTER ALL….WHO THE HELL DO THESE INVALIDES THINK THEY ARE ANYWAYS? EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ALL YOU GOOD CHURCH GOING, GOD FEARING, CONSERVATIVES HAVE MORE RIGHTS THAN ANYONE IN A WHEEL CHAIR. YOUR ALL SUCH GOOD CHRISTIANS. AFTER ALL WHAT WOULD JESUS DO?

* WHAT ABOUT THE POOR INSURANCE COMPANIES? THEY WOULD GO OUT OF BUSINESS IF WE OFFERED A PUBLIC OPTION? SO….IN OTHER WORDS….IF THERE WAS A PUBLIC “OPTION” OFFERED TO THE PEOPLE, THE PEOPLE WOULD MOST LIKELY “CHOOSE” THE OPTION THAT WOULD OFFER THEM THE BEST COVERAGE AT THE BEST RATES. SURELY, IT WOULD BE THE PUBLIC OPTION EVERYONE WOULD CHOOSE. GIVING PEOPLE AN OPTION….THAT’S CRAZY.

* EMPLOYERS WOULD DROP COVERAGE IN FAVOR OF A PUBLIC OPTION. UMM….EMPLOYERS ARE “NOT REQUIRED’ TO OFFER ANY COVERAGE TO EMPLOYEES WHATSOEVER, AT THE MOMENT. AND YET THEY DO, BECAUSE OFFERING A GOOD INSURANCE POLICY ENSURES THAT THEY WILL GET THE BEST AND BRIGHTEST EMPLOYEES. THEREFORE IF A PRIVATE INSURANCE PLAN WAS MORE ATTRACTIVE THAN A PUBLIC PLAN IT GOES TO REASON THEY WOULD OFFER THE BETTER PLAN.


4. OBAMA ADDRESSING THE CHILDREN AT SCHOOL. GOD HELP US….HE WILL USE HIS POWERS OF MIND CONTROL TO ENCOURAGE OUR CHILDREN TO STUDY HARD AND SHOOT FOR THEIR DREAMS. HOW DARE HE TRY TO SPEAD HIS SOCIALIST AGENDA?


5. DEMOCRATES ARE SOCIALIST AND COMMUNIST. MEDICARE IS SOCIALIST. I’M STILL WAITING FOR ONE OF YOU, ANY OF YOU, TO DROP YOUR MEDICARE & SOCIAL SECURITY IN PROTEST OF SOCIALISM IN THE USA? IT SEEMS SOME SOCIALISM IS AND HAS BEEN ACCEPTIBLE AND IN FACT A DEEPLY DESIRED, AND DEPENDED UPON PART OF THE UNITED STATES FOR QUITE A WHILE….AS LONG AS NO ONE CALLS IT WHAT IT IS….SOCIALIST.


6. SECESSION.
THE GOVERNOR OF TEXAS HAS THREATENED SECESSION FROM THE USA. THEY’D BE BETTER OFF ON THEIR OWN. THAT’S A VERY SANE IDEA.
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

all of your talking points from MoveOn, cause they are all pretty much BS.

You really need to keep telling yourself that this is GWB fault, cause next year when your tax bills start coming due, it is going to make it much easier to wake up each morning and think you made the right decision by electing this clown.
The "greatest middle tax cuts" in history??? Were you on medication when you typed that?? We are looking at record unemployment rates, with no real end in site, due to the tax burdens about to be placed on businesses (particularly small businesses). Add that to the proposed cap and trade plans, and mandated insurance plans, we are likely to see unemployment rates near 15-20%. Try blaming that on the previous administration.
Some of you people really need to think about the situation we are in, and recognize that one way we got here was the fact that a large number of people, rich and middle class alike, take abosultely NO personal responsibility. They thin the government can and should bail them out of every situation they get into. They do not realize the money has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is the tax payer.

My social security? I know I will never see it. I try to save a little extra, and I know by the time I get to retirement, the fact that I have saved a dime will hurt me (means testing is the next step). If they decide not to just take my 401K?IRA anyways and give it to some clown who had rather smoke crack than work, I guess I should just stop trying to save for my old age, there is no incentive to do more.
"CARE WILL BE RATIONED. SURE BECAUSE MORE PEOPLE WILL BE GETTING SICK IF EVERYONE HAS HEALTH CARE OR PERHAPES SOME PEOPLE DON’T DESERVE TO GET MEDICAL CARE WHEN THEY ARE SICK. UNFORTUNATLY, LIKE IT OR NOT THEY WILL AND DO GET TREATMENT RIGHT NOW. ITS JUST THAT YOU AND I PAY FOR THEM NOW INSTEAD OF THEM PAYING FOR THEIRSELVES."

This is a most illogical statement! Why, would universal healthcare, cause more people to be ill? Is there some strain of virus carried by the enactment of healthcare? And, if so, isn’t this a good argument against it. Now, as to the three misspelled words….
“DEMOCRATES (sic) ARE SOCIALIST AND COMMUNIST. MEDICARE IS SOCIALIST. I’M STILL WAITING FOR ONE OF YOU, ANY OF YOU, TO DROP YOUR MEDICARE & SOCIAL SECURITY IN PROTEST OF SOCIALISM IN THE USA? IT SEEMS SOME SOCIALISM IS AND HAS BEEN ACCEPTIBLE (sic) AND IN FACT A DEEPLY DESIRED, AND DEPENDED UPON PART OF THE UNITED STATES FOR QUITE A WHILE….AS LONG AS NO ONE CALLS IT WHAT IT IS….SOCIALIST.”

She really picked two bad examples to call socialist.

Social security is an excellent example of a scam, a Ponzi scheme and a looting of the public purse by Congress.

Social security deductions are invested in special government securities. The payout to contributors is about 2 percent. If, contributions used to buy regular US Treasury notes for 10, 20 and 30-year bonds the yield would be 3 to 4 percent. Contributors would see a payout of 150 to 200 percent more than they receive under the present system.

At present, Congress places the excess funds in the general fund, the same as taxes and uses the excess to meet operating expenses. Thus, the special securities are kept off the books and not part of the public debt.

Social security could go in the red in as soon as two years – resulting in reduced payments to contributors and a need for increased revenue to meet operating expense.

For medicare, it’s much the same, except that the system will go in the red about 2017.
quote:
5. DEMOCRATES ARE SOCIALIST AND COMMUNIST. MEDICARE IS SOCIALIST. I’M STILL WAITING FOR ONE OF YOU, ANY OF YOU, TO DROP YOUR MEDICARE & SOCIAL SECURITY IN PROTEST OF SOCIALISM IN THE USA? IT SEEMS SOME SOCIALISM IS AND HAS BEEN ACCEPTIBLE AND IN FACT A DEEPLY DESIRED, AND DEPENDED UPON PART OF THE UNITED STATES FOR QUITE A WHILE….AS LONG AS NO ONE CALLS IT WHAT IT IS….SOCIALIST.


I guess you are admitting that democrats are socialists and communists, which I can believe. But one little bit of history that no one seems to appreciate is that state run pensions were a right-wing invention. You can't get more right-wing than Otto von Bismarck.

quote:
Under the first government retirement pension program, instituted by Chancellor Otto von Bismarck for imperial Germany in 1889, the retirement age was 70.
http://www.aei.org/outlook/24940
quote:
Originally posted by Flatus the Ancient:
quote:
5. DEMOCRATES ARE SOCIALIST AND COMMUNIST. MEDICARE IS SOCIALIST. I’M STILL WAITING FOR ONE OF YOU, ANY OF YOU, TO DROP YOUR MEDICARE & SOCIAL SECURITY IN PROTEST OF SOCIALISM IN THE USA? IT SEEMS SOME SOCIALISM IS AND HAS BEEN ACCEPTIBLE AND IN FACT A DEEPLY DESIRED, AND DEPENDED UPON PART OF THE UNITED STATES FOR QUITE A WHILE….AS LONG AS NO ONE CALLS IT WHAT IT IS….SOCIALIST.


I guess you are admitting that democrats are socialists and communists, which I can believe. But one little bit of history that no one seems to appreciate is that state run pensions were a right-wing invention. You can't get more right-wing than Otto von Bismarck.

quote:
Under the first government retirement pension program, instituted by Chancellor Otto von Bismarck for imperial Germany in 1889, the retirement age was 70.
http://www.aei.org/outlook/24940


Socialist programs have been implemented by both the right and the left. Yet neither party fits that description, nor does the USA.

Throwing around slanderous statements like this is just more fear mongering BS.
quote:
Originally posted by True-Blue:
quote:
Originally posted by Flatus the Ancient:
quote:
5. DEMOCRATES ARE SOCIALIST AND COMMUNIST. MEDICARE IS SOCIALIST. I’M STILL WAITING FOR ONE OF YOU, ANY OF YOU, TO DROP YOUR MEDICARE & SOCIAL SECURITY IN PROTEST OF SOCIALISM IN THE USA? IT SEEMS SOME SOCIALISM IS AND HAS BEEN ACCEPTIBLE AND IN FACT A DEEPLY DESIRED, AND DEPENDED UPON PART OF THE UNITED STATES FOR QUITE A WHILE….AS LONG AS NO ONE CALLS IT WHAT IT IS….SOCIALIST.


I guess you are admitting that democrats are socialists and communists, which I can believe. But one little bit of history that no one seems to appreciate is that state run pensions were a right-wing invention. You can't get more right-wing than Otto von Bismarck.

quote:
Under the first government retirement pension program, instituted by Chancellor Otto von Bismarck for imperial Germany in 1889, the retirement age was 70.
http://www.aei.org/outlook/24940


Socialist programs have been implemented by both the right and the left. Yet neither party fits that description, nor does the USA.

Throwing around slanderous statements like this is just more fear mongering BS.


If they are slanderous then sue!
quote:
Socialist programs have been implemented by both the right and the left. Yet neither party fits that description, nor does the USA.


Nope it was not about the state seizing ownership of the means of production and properties, it was about creating a happy and contented workforce and therefore, a productive workforce. The concept is called "Welfare Capitalism" with welfare meaning the needs of the worker are met; not free money to freeloaders. True-blue, you really need to spend some time with dictionaries and encyclopedias.

quote:
The German firm of Siemens and Halske introduced many enterprising features of
what later came to be known as welfare capitalism in the mid 19th century. Profit
sharing, annual bonuses, a pension fund, a reduction in work hours, and an annual
party were all means to ensure a productive, trouble-free workforce. We investigate the
reasons why Siemens and Halske introduced a pension fund in 1872, more than a decade
before the nation-wide social security system was implemented in Germany. We find
that the pension fund increased labor productivity, and in addition discouraged workers
from striking. Our main finding is that the annual cost of running the pension fund
was roughly equal to the profit that would have been lost in that year if Siemens had to
face a strike of average duration. This suggests that (i) the introduction of a pension
fund is not inconsistent with simple profit maximizing behavior on the firm’s side and
(ii) increased labor unionization induced firms to introduce subjective components of
workers’ remuneration packages.
Siemens & Halske, the company known today simply as Siemens AG, introduced a pension
http://www.stanford.edu/~jkastl/siemens.pdf

quote:
Welfare capitalism refers either to the combination of a capitalist economic system with a welfare state or, in a strictly American context, to the practice of businesses providing welfare-like services to employees. Welfare capitalism in this second sense was centered in industries that employed skilled labour and peaked in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Many companies started offering higher pay and non-monetary compensation such as health care, housing, and pensions, as well as employment bureaus, in-house training, sports teams and social clubs. Pioneered by George F. Johnson and Henry B. Endicott with high wages and subsidized housing, the concept of welfare capitalism coincided with state laws of the Progressive Era that outlawed child labour, imposed minimum wages and maximum hours, and gave women special protections and restrictions.

Two important goals, articulated by Henry Ford with his $5 dollar daily pay rate, were to reduce turnover and build a long-term loyal labour force that would have higher productivity. The combination of high pay, high efficiency and cheap consumer goods was known as Fordism, and was widely discussed throughout the world
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_capitalism

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×