The open political discussion thread. Read the first post!

[2+2]

Originally Posted by mo_feezy

lol. you are a lost cause. beck specifically showed a video of a dancing troupe from kansas city. claimed they were a part of obamas secret negro army. Using HP as a source is ok, because they link to videos from outside sources. All I wanted people to look at was the videos.

as for the size of becks gathering. it's been called out already as a blatant lie. michelle malkin got busted for showing photoshopped pictures that "enhanced" the size. they were even using pictures from Obama's inauguration as pictures of becks gathering. which is completely ridiculous to compare the two in size.

secondly, you left out the parts about what his supporters in those photos support: racism, being completely misinformed/stupid (especially the "birthers").

Agreed.

Kal-El - I don't mean to sound disrespectful but you sound young. You don't know what a fascist is and yet you rail against them and socialists and liberals and, and, and. Why regurgitate what you've heard on the radio? It isn't really that much harder to think for yourself.

To start with, how many countries around the world are 100% socialist or 100% capitalist? You know life isn't that black and white, don't you? It's just never that simple. Most countries have elements of each system, even China.

In the health care debate, I've heard there are 1300 different insurance companies with 1300 different forms for doctors to have to figure out. You think that's efficient? I think we should go all the way <gasp> to a single payer government run system that streamlines all that paperwork. What do YOU think? No, I'm not asking you what Rush or Sean or Glenn thinks. What do you think? What's the capitalist answer to that little problem?

[Kal-El]

Originally Posted by 2+2

Agreed.

Kal-El - I don't mean to sound disrespectful but you sound young. You don't know what a fascist is and yet you rail against them and socialists and liberals and, and, and. Why regurgitate what you've heard on the radio? It isn't really that much harder to think for yourself.

To start with, how many countries around the world are 100% socialist or 100% capitalist? You know life isn't that black and white, don't you? It's just never that simple. Most countries have elements of each system, even China.

In the health care debate, I've heard there are 1300 different insurance companies with 1300 different forms for doctors to have to figure out. You think that's efficient? I think we should go all the way <gasp> to a single payer government run system that streamlines all that paperwork. What do YOU think? No, I'm not asking you what Rush or Sean or Glenn thinks. What do you think? What's the capitalist answer to that little problem?

For the record, I'm 30. I was a liberal up until last year then I woke up.

When was the last time government streamlined something, reduced costs, and reduced paperwork??? LOL!! Government does the exact opposite in every chance they've gotten. They are notorious for complicating everything into 1000+ page bills and spent us into $100 trillion in obligations. And you think they are going to fix health care??? That's freakin' hilarious.

And I only think for myself, thank you.

[2+2]

Originally Posted by Kal-El

For the record, I'm 30. I was a liberal up until last year then I woke up.

When was the last time government streamlined something, reduced costs, and reduced paperwork??? LOL!! Government does the exact opposite in every chance they've gotten. They are notorious for complicating everything into 1000+ page bills and spent us into $100 trillion in obligations. And you think they are going to fix health care??? That's freakin' hilarious.

And I only think for myself, thank you.

Good answer and I find it interesting that you were a liberal until last year.

I hear ya on your skepticism about the government's ability to do anything right. What's the alternative? Is there a non-socialist way to reduce the number of insurance companies or at least force them to all use the same paperwork etc? Even Obama's plan to force insurance companies to not drop people for serious or preexisting illnesses has some problems I think. The "experts" are all saying health care is going to bankrupt the country if we don't fix it. So what's the answer?


Edit: lol cross post. There's too many people ganging up on you Kal-El! lol I'm backing off. You're fighting a good fight though!

[Kal-El]

Originally Posted by 2+2

Good answer and I find it interesting that you were a liberal until last year.

I hear ya on your skepticism about the government's ability to do anything right. What's the alternative? Is there a non-socialist way to reduce the number of insurance companies or at least force them to all use the same paperwork etc? Even Obama's plan to force insurance companies to not drop people for serious or preexisting illnesses has some problems I think. The "experts" are all saying health care is going to bankrupt the country if we don't fix it. So what's the answer?


Edit: lol cross post. There's too many people ganging up on you Kal-El! lol I'm backing off. You're fighting a good fight though!

Good questions.

As everyone reinforces, health care is pretty much the most complicated thing out there. Reform of any kind will not be easy.

Conservatives call for...

-Tort reform - stop or cap the frivolous law suits that skyrocket doctor costs.

-having existing insurance companies compete and operate in most states rather than just one or a few. That way customers really have many choices among the 1300 existing companies. Most states are dominated by only a couple of companies.

-regulations that make it illegal for companies to refuse people because of pre-existing conditions (both sides agree here).

-illegal to drop customers of refuse coverage for needed procedures

Just these things alone would make a HUGE difference.
No need to overhaul the whole system and introduce a government plan that will kill off the private sector.

[Kal-El]

Originally Posted by mo_feezy

as for the size of becks gathering. it's been called out already as a blatant lie. michelle malkin got busted for showing photoshopped pictures that "enhanced" the size. they were even using pictures from Obama's inauguration as pictures of becks gathering. which is completely ridiculous to compare the two in size.

secondly, you left out the parts about what his supporters in those photos support: racism, being completely misinformed/stupid (especially the "birthers").

Here you go since you're so in denial....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VMXz6xGeqc

Yup, a blatant lie. It was all made up.

[Kal-El]

BTW, only 20% of Americans claim to be liberals. I think they are all on here!

So I don't expect to get anywhere with my posts. Nevertheless, I'll try to open some eyes.

I do realize I'm on a fuel efficient car forum = liberals galore. But I thought that there were more of a variety of people that bought the Yaris for economical reasons or just because they liked the car. Seems like we have a lot of people here that apparently believe global warming is real (even though it's been cooling for the last 10 years) and feel that they needed to do their part with a gas sipper. Just an observation because all of the other forums I'm on are more split politically.

Flame on...

[RedRide]

Originally Posted by Kal-El

BTW, only 20% of Americans claim to be liberals. I think they are all on here!

So I don't expect to get anywhere with my posts. Nevertheless, I'll try to open some eyes.

I do realize I'm on a fuel efficient car forum = liberals galore. But I thought that there were more of a variety of people that bought the Yaris for economical reasons or just because they liked the car. Seems like we have a lot of people here that apparently believe global warming is real (even though it's been cooling for the last 10 years) and feel that they needed to do their part with a gas sipper. Just an observation because all of the other forums I'm on are more split politically.

Flame on...

Just for the record, I am not a "liberal"

Perhaps you can tell us exactly why you call people who wish to seek the tuth "liberal"?

[Kal-El]

Originally Posted by RedRide

Just for the record, I am not a "liberal"

Perhaps you can tell us exactly why you call people who wish to seek the tuth "liberal"?

There's generally 3 categories in America. Liberal, conservative, moderate (independent perhaps).

I guess it means you're an independent?

Doesn't matter really but one can easily guess based on the ideals of a persons posts.

And it seems clear that the left on here does everything to avoid the truth by denying video proof and published works of the things that are said by these people in Washington.

[Bob Dog]

You sure got that right!

[Bob Dog]

Your point of view is dyadic , dividing the world into conservative and liberal as absolute things and not as adjectives. A dyadic perception of the world is inherently unreasoning. This is not a football game or some silly good guy/bad guy shoot em’ up. Political thinking is a spectrum , (actually much more multidimensional than that.) There are a few whose opinions are based on reaction, emotion and lack any regard for others who have different wants and needs in a pluralistic society. These individuals are so narcissistic and self centered that they think their singular point of view should be imposed on all of society. They may quite rightly called Radical Extremist, be they mad bombers or far to the right talk show hosts. Those who respond to political situations emotionally as children would, rather than in a reasoned adult manner are Reactionaries. Hence the title Radical Reactionary Extremist is completely accurate and for these few persons fits exactly.

[Bob Dog]

Again the dyadic, divisive nonsense. We are not a country divided in two, we are a pluralistic society with many religions, ethnicities, and genetic heritages. We are a multitude of political opinions, united to form a nation, not a simplistic demarcation of liberal and conservative. You are choosing to define us so that you can define yourself. This is intolerable, and we will not allow you do it.

[Bob Dog]

"Hmm, I suggest you read up on the reichstag fire and its striking similarities to 9/11 and the events following. You could do a find and replace of hitler with bush, reichstag with 9/11, and communist with al qaeda, and the plot line would still make perfecct sense.
Also, as someone pointed out, people are calling obama a socialist, not a fascist/dictator, so the whole obama/hitler thing doesn't even make sense. "

I figured I wasn't alone in seeing that the similarity between9/11 and the Reichstag fire. I don't believe it 100%, but the similarity of events is astounding. Its like some very clever men with evil intent tried to recreate a historical event. It also did away with a large number of the most important players in world trade and created an opportunity for a power grab by those who were already prepared to do so. It is important to remember also that Al Queda was at one time largely funded by the CIA, daddy Bush's old organisation. The Bushes and middle eastern oil have had their hands in each other's pants for at least 3 generations. Another important and closely related fact is the majority (14)of the 9/11 hijackerswere not Iraqi, but rather Saudi. If it was a conspiracy it accomplished in large part what it set out to do.

[tk-421]

This thread is in the process on being converted to a members-only social group. Please read the following announcement and PM the mods if you have any questions:

http://www.yarisworld.com/forums/ann...nt.php?f=&a=10

Thanks guys!

[tk-421]

I have just sent an invitation to everyone that participated in this thread that isn't banned and hasn't joined the group yet. Hope to see you there!

[2+2]

Seeing as how this is the political thread...

Today Google news is showing a Washington Post article entitled "President Is Expected to Take Firmer Positions". You mean to say that the president is growing some nads? That would be a nice change for any democrat, let alone the president.

I can't imagine a worse president than W but at least he had/has nads. Reagan, omg if I could change a single thing in history it would be to eliminate Reagan from the presidency, but at least Reagan had nads.

Our current president (and the House and the Senate) needs to grow some nads. Same old, same old ain't going to cut it. Big business and their lobbyists are calling the shots and everyone knows it. The way they're controlling the public discourse on health care is a fine example. Getting the average working joe to declare that securing health care for working families is socialism is so manipulative it's amazing. I'd sit back and enjoy watching the testosterone filled dumb fecks being manipulated that way but I'm afraid it will be another 20 years before health care stands a chance again.