Originally Posted by MK Ultra (Post 20037739)

A CNN poll at the time the bill was rammed through congress showed that 57% of Americans opposed it.

As of a couple weeks ago the popularity of the law had gone up slightly, now it's only opposed by ................................ 57% of Americans :1orglaugh
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...care-edges-up/

The bill was a turkey that was passed over the objections of the majority because it was more important to have a political win for Obama and the Dems than it was to actually govern.

Just because you see a good outcome for yourself does not mean there will be a good outcome for everybody, or even for the majority.

I'm waiting for the insurance companies to announce the rates for 2015 in a couple months, if the increase is what some are predicting there will be blood on the walls down at the DNC come November.

Unless of course, the Administration bails them out.

Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 20037709)

I'm pretty sure you've claimed gas was more expensive under Obama than Bush.

You sure did say the following a lot:

"When Obama went into office, the average price of gas was $1.84"

But again, that's cherry picking. Of course the price of gas dropped by the time Bush left office - the entire fucking economy crashed.



You claimed the Congressional Report On Waco blamed the deaths on CS gas. But you never read the report, but instead read some summary written by a single person. The full report says:

"It is important to note, however, that there are no published studies which find that any human death has been caused by exposure to CS agent."

"While it cannot be concluded with certainty, it is unlikely that the CS riot control agent, in the quantities used by the FBI, reached lethal toxic levels."

You cherry picked something that backed up the point you were trying to make, claimed the Congressional Report said it was so, but being as you never read the report you had no clue it said the opposite.

Here's the post: https://gfy.com/showpost.php?p=19794873&postcount=123

Originally Posted by MK Ultra (Post 20037739)

A CNN poll at the time the bill was rammed through congress showed that 57% of Americans opposed it.

As of a couple weeks ago the popularity of the law had gone up slightly, now it's only opposed by ................................ 57% of Americans :1orglaugh
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...care-edges-up/

The bill was a turkey that was passed over the objections of the majority because it was more important to have a political win for Obama and the Dems than it was to actually govern.

Just because you see a good outcome for yourself does not mean there will be a good outcome for everybody, or even for the majority.

I'm waiting for the insurance companies to announce the rates for 2015 in a couple months, if the increase is what some are predicting there will be blood on the walls down at the DNC come November.

Unless of course, the Administration bails them out.

Originally Posted by Sly (Post 20037711)

I've had three different people tell me today that their prior insurance package was canceled. That's just people randomly telling me about it.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 20037788)

OK, what part of this do you think is wrong?

The Government's use of CS gas in the manner it did, that is, clearly designed to incapacitate men, women and children in a confined, unventilated space, after avenues of escape had been deliberately cut off, was unconscionable; as was the cursory manner in which the Government, and especially Attorney General Reno `bought into' the conclusory and simplistic analyses that the use of CS gas posed an `acceptable' level of risk.

The fact is, while experts may--and did--differ over the precise effects of CS gas on children, or how and in what ways the use of CS gas might act as a catalyst for a fire, no rational person can conclude that the use of CS gas under any circumstances against children, would do anything other than cause extreme physical problems and possibly death.

For the Government of this country to consciously use CS gas in the way it did on April 19, 1993 in Waco is utterly indefensible and should never be allowed to be repeated. I believe the deaths of dozens of men, women and children can be directly and indirectly attributable to the use of this gas in the way it was injected by the FBI.

I would go further than the report, and call for a prohibition on the use of CS gas in situations in which children or the elderly are present or are the targets.

Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 20037766)

kane, I keep seeing some people post that some states are "not cooperating". What does that mean? Which states? And how can they "not cooperate" (which sounds pretty "big brother" right there lol)

Are you saying that Republican Governors in some states are "not cooperating"?
How do they "cooperate" in the first place...and how do they have any affect on the law even if they don't like it?

Other than make speeches and/or pursue lawsuits...do the governors have ANY power in this at all?

Seems like the excuse of some states "not cooperating" might be another (of many) b.s. "blame everybody but Obama" ideas floated by the DNC to keep the heat off of them?

Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 20037869)

Yes. This happens all the time, but in the past people didn't discuss it. When I worked for the phone company and they changed our insurance company and we had to pick a new plan, I didn't go out and discuss it with people or change it.

I got a letter about my car insurance and how they changed my policy last week, but I didn't run out and discuss this with people either.

Some of these people were canceled for reasons that have nothing to do with the Healthcare law - some of these were plans that insurance carries decided to drop as the normal course of business. Other plans were dropped because of the new law, and yet other plans had to be dropped because they failed to meet the basic requirements according to the new law.

This is being harped on like it's a huge problem when it's not. The plan was canceled; People weren't dropped from their insurance companies. You pick another plan.

Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 20037875)

What part of that is wrong? It's wrong because it's not correct, didn't come from the Congressional Report on Waco, and instead came from some dumb whack job site.

And again more cut and paste. This is nothing more than a statement from whathappened.com -Here's the link. Once again you proved that you cannot think for yourself....

The Congressional report said the following:

It is important to note, however, that there are no published studies which find that any human death has been caused by exposure to CS agent.

And...

...it is unlikely that the CS riot control agent, in the quantities used by the FBI, reached lethal toxic levels.

On top of all of this, law enforcement using CS gas is a commonly used tactic here in the US and around the world - STILL.

You put up a link to a Congressional report, made false claims about what it said, and then when you try to defend yourself here you post up some nonsense form a conspiracy site called "What really happened".

Seriously, stop copying text from gun nut websites and conspiracy sites and accepting them as fact - they aren't fact, they are opinion.

Originally Posted by kane (Post 20037876)

Obamacare allows for the expansion of eligibility for Medicaid to include people of lower income. It allows for federal funds to go to states that expand their programs to include these people. Many red states are refusing to expand their Medicaid program, even though the cost will be covered by the federal government, because they don't like Obamacare and they don't want to be seen as going along with it.

Part of the republican lawsuits against Obamacare was to allow states to "opt out" of the medicare expansion it was granted by the supreme court.

Originally Posted by kane (Post 20037759)

The interesting thing is that when the polls ask people questions about the different parts of Obamacare without calling it that most people tend to agree with what it does. There are still some sticking points like the mandate, but overall many people like the idea of it. The problem was/is the execution. I think Obama assumed it would come out, 30 million people would sign up and it would be a huge victory for him. As it turns out, only a fraction of the uninsured have signed up (not fully his fault, many states are not cooperating), the process has sucked and they have not done a very good job of explaining how it works.

Obama's sad reality is that his promotion of it and the democrats rolling it out has paled in comparison to multi-million dollar anti-Obamacare ad campaign the republicans have rolled out.

Originally Posted by kane (Post 20037876)

Obamacare allows for the expansion of eligibility for Medicaid to include people of lower income. It allows for federal funds to go to states that expand their programs to include these people. Many red states are refusing to expand their Medicaid program, even though the cost will be covered by the federal government, because they don't like Obamacare and they don't want to be seen as going along with it.

Part of the republican lawsuits against Obamacare was to allow states to "opt out" of the medicare expansion it was granted by the supreme court.

Here is a map that shows which states expanded and which didn't. Do a side by side comparision with the 2012 electoral vote map and you will see that almost all of those states that have opted out are red states.

Originally Posted by Axeman (Post 20038120)

The other reason they opted out is the federal funds are only fully paid until 2017. Then the states are on the hook for a portion of the costs after that.

Originally Posted by Biggy (Post 20037892)

My health jnsurance policy was never cancelled before. The letter I got specifically referenced the affordable care act as the reason my plan was cancelled.

Really the argument you are making is hollow.

People's insurance plans are being cancelled due to obamacare, and the letters explicitly say so. Either the plans aren't "good enough" under the law, or the insurance companies now have uncertainty and don't want to offer it.

The new and are actually shittier and more expensive by a lot. I was supposed to be able to keep it since I liked it. It was supposed to be better and cheaper. Instead I lost it, and it got worst and more expensive.

No state in pretty sure is even offering PPO plans. PPO means you can pick your provider either innetwork or out of network. Now HMO is the only option. You must stay in network and if you go to a specialist it will be whatever one your doctors refers and that's it. Shouldn't I be able to do my research and pick my doctors? That is now gone, my monthly premium is up by double, my office visits and medicine coverage is worst, the only thing that's better is my deductible.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 20037909)

For the Government of this country to consciously use CS gas in the way it did on April 19, 1993 in Waco is utterly indefensible and should never be allowed to be repeated. I believe the deaths of dozens of men, women and children can be directly and indirectly attributable to the use of this gas in the way it was injected by the FBI.

This came from the
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquer...49&dbname=104& which is from the website congress.gov

Go ahead, look at the link and go to http://thomas.loc.gov

Congress.gov is the official source for federal legislative information. It replaces the nearly 20-year-old THOMAS.gov site with a system that includes platform mobility, comprehensive information retrieval and user-friendly presentation. It currently includes all data sets available on THOMAS.gov except nominations, treaties and communications. These data sets will be added throughout 2014. Until that time they are still accessible through THOMAS.gov via the link below. THOMAS.gov will be permanently retired by the end of 2014.

You think that's a gun nut website?

It was opinion, opinion on a congressional report
104TH CONGRESS 2ND SESSION
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
REPORT

INVESTIGATION INTO THE ACTIVITIES OF FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES TOWARD THE BRANCH DAVIDIANS

THIRTEENTH REPORT
by the
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT
prepared in conjunction with the
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
together with
ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS

But hey if you think they are gun nuts, I think I have proved a point here

Quit trying to prove you are nuts!

Originally Posted by TheSquealer (Post 20037264)

This again is the world through the filters of your own bias. All republicans are not one person nor are they the comments of one person and there is just as much stupidity on the democratic side which you ignore because again, you are biased towards democrats. In fact, you continually malign 1/2 of the population of the country, never once stopping to consider the magnitude of the math involved or pondering why its all so confusing to you, that you so easily conclude like so many that 1/2 a nation must be "crazy". This is an example of how you continue to press the same old point. "that team = bad".... "my team = good" (ironically, you aren't technically on either team)

Its all not that complicated.

Since you are a fan of science, i will attempt to explain a bit of well studied science for you.

We are all biased towards our views.

You can say "lets take bias out of it" but what you do not really understand or don't want to accept is that is absolutely 100% impossible. Bias is not a conscious filter. Its unconscious... meaning before you become consciously aware of anything at all, the information has ALREADY passed through all your mental filters and become distorted and perverted to suit your pre-determined narratives and beliefs. This is in part, what makes scientific study difficult and what makes removing bias from a study difficult. I would guess you at least understand that.

You don't have to dig too far to find countless studies of unconscious bias in psychology and neuroscience.... not to mention many many attempts to use them in court. Every single person here that says they are not biased against anything... say "black people",... including black people are lying. They are not intentionally lying... they just don't know. They don't have conscious access to that information. They only have the socially acceptable answers they give and the fabrications (confabulations) they use to defend those answers. And when measured and tested, the results are very very consistent across the board and across tests and across races and cultures.

So... you are biased to see things one way. I am biased to see things another. It's fine. It's exactly how human beings are designed. There is a reason you deny it. And that reason is one of the many which makes the most incredible living thing designed by nature (your brain) so advanced and downright incredible to see in action. It's actually one of the very reasons that true artificial intelligence has yet to be created and likely won't be in our lifetimes.... because our brain is not a computer. It is a million man, multi party legislative body, arguing furiously about every single choice and action and finding the winning argument of millions of arguments with every single decision or action.

You are in denial because it is actually how your brain itself is designed. And for your own survival and that of the tribe, its actually better this way. Much much better. Decisions are much much better. When you make decisions, you have no access to the actual decision making process. When someone offers you 1000.00 to take a cock in the ass on film... you're brain lights up with neural activity and literally millions of decision centers go into action weighing pro's and con's and battling it out. The only thing you are consciously aware of is the final 1 or 2 winning arguments... and with that, conscious thinking becomes the final arbiter. In terms of conscious thinking, you then falsely take credit for a winning argument that you had nothing to do with which simply popped into conscious awareness. Neuroscientist David Eagleman refers to the decision making processes of the brain as a "team of rivals". The best decisions are not made by full agreement on all sides. The best decisions are made by brutal battles where every single point is made and heard and the winning argument rises to the top. To argue.. you need arrogance and confidence in your argument no matter how lopsided or misguided and flat out wrong it may be.

This, no matter what anyone wants to believe, actually mirrors our political system.

You are not special.

You are not enlightened.

You are just ignorant of how the brain actually works and what drives peoples behaviors.

But its not your fault because you don't understand the mental processes involved... you simply react to stimuli like a rodent seeking cheese or escaping danger. And you should. That too, is by design. The brain is costly to run and though insanely efficient, your brain doesn't want to know a whole lot beyond matters directly pertaining to survival and reproduction. Conscious thinking is also slow, clunky and costly in terms of energy spent. It's more energy efficient to cling to a narrative and set of beliefs and dismiss anything which calls them into question.

So... like all, you are so sure of yourself and your own ideas and views as you ignore your own bias', give more weight to your own points and less weight to those against you, more weight to those on your team and less to those on the other.... as you lift your team up and put them on a pedestal and look at the other as the cause of every problem known to man.

That's what teams do. Teams "blind and bind". This again is the brilliance of our design and the human brain. Teams don't need to agree. They are not effective when they agree. When everyone in the tribe agrees that they will have peace for 1000 years... thats when they weaken their security and someone swoops in to destroy them. You need voices expressing all concerns and all sides of the argument with equal veracity. The more people agree, the more blind they become to the possibilities (and future genetic consequences) of being wrong.

You are nothing more than one voice in a sea of millions contributing to an argument with the same old self righteous "my team = good".. "your team = bad", "my team = right"... "your team = wrong" self assured, misguided and deluded arrogance that everyone else has on every. You are a tiny cog in a machine fulfilling your role, never realizing at all that you make no difference whatsoever and change no minds.

A wise person can step back and observe and appreciate the whole process for what it is. An ignorant person only has their own biased narrative and plays their own largely irrelevant role... for the greater good of the group "....a poor player, that struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and then is heard no more. It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 20038219)

The text that you are using is not from the Congressional Report, but instead is the opinion of one person. The Congressional Report says the direct opposite. You are using this opinion and saying it's official, when it's not. It's an opinion written by a nut case, that is being picked up by other kook sites with the title "what really happened".

You haven't proved a point here at all. This is someone's opinion, not part of the Congressional Report.

Originally Posted by ********** (Post 20038232)

Yikes thanks for all of that, but no no no you missed my point. Let me try again - remove DEM and GOP and everything else from the mix, and answer this question:

What / Which politician(s) do you trust?

Bonus question : On which subject? Example: Obamacare, Global Warming, etc..

Originally Posted by ********** (Post 20038232)

Yikes thanks for all of that, but no no no you missed my point. Let me try again - remove DEM and GOP and everything else from the mix, and answer this question:

What / Which politician(s) do you trust?

Bonus question : On which subject? Example: Obamacare, Global Warming, etc..

Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 20038385)

MK Ultra just hit it right on the head.

Originally Posted by ********** (Post 20038232)

Yikes thanks for all of that, but no no no you missed my point. Let me try again - remove DEM and GOP and everything else from the mix, and answer this question:

What / Which politician(s) do you trust?

Bonus question : On which subject? Example: Obamacare, Global Warming, etc..

Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 20038242)

I put up opinion that it written on the official site from CONGRESS, what part of that escapes you?

Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 20038633)

How do you not get this? It's a opinion written by a Congressman. It is not part of the Congressional report. The Congressional report says the direct opposite of this man's opinion.

His opinion is so far from the truth that it's being picked up by conspiracy sites, but still you accept it as fact. It's not.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 20038702)

here's some more from the OFFICIAL CONGRESSIONAL REPORT

ESCAPE

The report concludes that there was opportunity for the Davidians to escape. While obviously this is true--a handful did escape the maelstrom--I conclude there was no opportunity for the vast majority of the Davidians to have any hope of escape, because of the Government's tactics the morning of the 19th of April.

Essentially, the use of the armored vehicles, methodically smashing down portions of the building, cutting off avenues of escape (for example, smashing the walls down to cover the `escape' hatch to the tunnel out of the main building), intimidated the inhabitants into seeking `safety' in the one secure part of the structure (the concrete `bunker' in the center). With massive quantities of CS gas pumped into this area, it virtually guaranteed that most inhabitants would be incapacitated; which they were, and they died in the ensuing fire because of the incapacitating effects of the CS gas and the cutting off of escape routes.

So again, where does this leave your standings on this? Are you still routing for the assholes that blocked the escapes of those parents and children so they would sufficate from use of CS gas?

Originally Posted by baddog (Post 20038844)

That was propaganda; there are no death panels.

Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 20038754)

Vendzilla...he is trolling you man.

That's why I had to put him on "ignore". He even told me in person that he enjoys firing people up on GFY (or as it's more commonly known: trolling).

He just has fun saying outrageous stuff and watching other people get crazy over it.

I don't understand the "fun" of it...but then again I don't "get" people who are into being pissed on or who love to lick dirty feet either. lol

Who am I to judge?

But make no mistake, you are not in a "debate" with Rochard. He is doing it just for fun.

Instead of getting annoyed with him, just put his "Rochard" persona on "ignore" on GFY and enjoy the real Richard in person when you talk at shows.

It's much better on the nerves. lol

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20038261)

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

That's not your point at all.

You're so completely biased you can't see past the end of your nose or else you'd have never tried to claim that this is your point.

Many people have told you many times how biased you come across.

Originally Posted by MK Ultra (Post 20038268)

I can answer your question:

None of them, on any subject.

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20038398)

Actually, hitting that right on the head would be an answer along the lines of-

that's a stupid fucking question, governments and politicians are never to be trusted.

It's just more of **********'s USA finger-pointing from canada couched in a silly rhetorical question.

Originally Posted by TheSquealer (Post 20038591)

Your point was,... as you said a few times that you were going to remove bias from the conversation (which is not possible) and then as an example of starting fresh, you picked your favorite nut case from "the other team" and then used her name to malign 1/2 of the country.... as per your usual m.o. to bait people into a partisan based discussion.

The point of what I wrote, which not only answered your question but which you are seemingly incapable of understanding is that they are all the same. Just two sides of the same coin... and that is an evolutionary adaptation.. not a question of logic or reason or right and wrong.

:2 cents:

Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 20038385)

MK Ultra just hit it right on the head.

Originally Posted by baddog (Post 20038844)

That was propaganda; there are no death panels.

Originally Posted by directfiesta (Post 20039575)

I am Canadian .. so I do not give a fuck about your internal politics ( but still let me insert a thought ... :)).

That said, if 7 million signups is a success . well I really feel sorry for you guys :2 cents:

This Obamacare care is a FLOP , a grandiose failure , all the results of stupid compromises of keeping the private insurance companies in ...

This will never work .. it is doomed ...

Amazing how the USA can fuck up easy things in such a grandiose manner ...

Originally Posted by ********** (Post 20038875)

And no I don't agree that they are 2 sides to the same coin. I think it is easy to think that, but looking closer into things and people reveals interesting and important differences.

PEACE