House repubs vote again to screw working families

[Tijuana]

What are YOU on about???

...and the final step in the 5 step Tijuana program, when you get backed into a corner and have no response just say its was not even an interesting point worth discussing or some other excuse about not being worth your time.



Have you answered my question yet?

here let me ask again, which of the stats posted in the original post....are opinions and made up?

not a hard question. you are very verbose about this so it should not be hard to come up with a few.

Dude, the guy already gave you a list. He separated out half of them, and insisted all of those are fact based. The remainder are opinion based. Try to keep up, guy.

Just because you are posting with huge amounts of anger and a bold font, doesn't make your post interesting or thought compelling. Stop being a last word freak.

[Zan15]

Dude, the guy already gave you a list. He separated out half of them, and insisted all of those are fact based. The remainder are opinion based. Try to keep up, guy.

Just because you are posting with huge amounts of anger and a bold font, doesn't make your post interesting or thought compelling. Stop being a last word freak.

no one has give any list and you still have not given a single one that is fact based or opinion based...my god son it not a hard question for you to answer.


wait, did you just insult me after preaching about never insulting anyone?


so just answer the question already or go away its that simple.

These figures are laughably made up, and have no basis in any proposed legislation. I sort of can't believe so many would discuss what are entirely made up stats.

Which ones are made up?

Do you legit not understand my point? WOW

Ok, let me slow this down for you. The OP has a chart of all these things that OP is saying are bad. Except, there is a bunch of stuff on the list, that is not current law, and is not part of any proposed law. It's literally a chart full of straw men. If you read it, it's not even all data based. It's largely an opinion chart, denouncing things that are factually not being proposed.

Did you even read the chart???

Which ones are not data based and opinions? Which ones are not being proposed?


if you can't offer a simple answer for the very statements you made in this post then please do not bother to respond.

[Tijuana]

no one has give any list and you still have not given a single one that is fact based or opinion based...my god son it not a hard question for you to answer.


wait, did you just insult me after preaching about never insulting anyone?


so just answer the question already or go away its that simple.




Which ones are made up?






Which ones are not data based and opinions? Which ones are not being proposed?


if you can't offer a simple answer for the very statements you made in this post then please do not bother to respond.

This bores me. Find your shift key and get back to me.

(Infracted) ~ Trolling

[Zan15]

This bores me. Find your shift key and get back to me.

As expected, nothing but an impudent child, and no that is not an insult its fact based on this thread and the proof posted by you.

I asked you not to respond, can't you read?

Thank you for at least proving my point yet again. Have a wonderful night.

[Dontrike]

You have a habit of posting to just insult me. Can't refute my words or...what exactly?

I can't refute YOUR words? You never bother to show any evidence of your own claims, you're the one that's quite literally making it incredibly easy to refute what you say when you have nothing to back it up.

[Kujako]

Democrats outspent Repubs in the presidential race by a long shot.

and that has what to do with lobbying?

[Zan15]

I can't refute YOUR words? You never bother to show any evidence of your own claims, you're the one that's quite literally making it incredibly easy to refute what you say when you have nothing to back it up.

I guess maybe when he gets back from yet another ban he will answer us right? lol sometimes i even wonder why i bother with him

[Sunseeker]

We are one nation. And one State should help another State. But support is too strong a word. If a State fails, it is ultimately the responsibility for the residents of that State to fix it. The Federal Government should contain the fallout, and mitigate the negative outcomes to the degree possible. But it is not the job of the Federal Government to do what residents of the Failed State refuse to do.

That seems like a needless waste of resources. Why spend billions on emergency measures to limit the fallout when you could spend substantially less propping them up and keeping them from collapsing? I mean, your plan makes no sense, because the people of a "failed state" aren't going to just sit there and fix it, they're going to leave. See: Syria. And they're Americans. So unless you're going to add on that people from whatever you deem to be a failed state can't travel outside of it until they "fix it", basically making them non-citizens until they fix their shit, I'm not sure what your point is in this approach other than to be needlessly patriarchal in attempting to "punish" a state and its entire citizenry for like it's a misbehaving child. Even then it's stupid. You don't wait for your child to flush their life down the drain before you step in to help. You provide them a guiding hand.

We are a unified nation. Like a family all living together under one roof, we must guide and support failing family members, not lock them in their room with no supper until they either clean up or die.

That is outside the spirit of good governance and the constitution. It is their jobs to get the best bills passed in the interests of Massachusetts. Does that mean actively screwing Kanasas or Texas? No. But that means letting their senators look out for their interests, and our senators look out for ours. In the face of the Rest of the world, we are one time. But when its a room full of 50 states... not really. And that's a good thing. Competition breeds innovation.

And cooperation creates success. With 50 people in a room fractiously fighting to get to the finish line first yes one of them may make the finish line before everyone else. But some of them may not make the finish line at all. You have repeatedly asserted the idea that you don't give two flying fucks about people who aren't successful, so frankly I'm going to take any definition of "winning" or "innovation" or such things you offer up with a seriously large grain of salt. Your definitions are warped. They warp your viewpoints and thus your political positions are warped. You can't see it of course, but it's plainly obvious to the rest of us on the forum.

On the contrary. I'm describing a fundamentally different model.

Tow paragraphs ago you were arguing how your ideas were perfectly in line with the Founding Fathers and the Constitution. Which is? Are you in line with our noble ideals or are you suggesting we transition to a new model?

At least I'm honest when I'm suggesting that my bullshit is just my personal bullshit.

Yes, I want a significant - massive - Federal Tax cut (and a tax on consumption). But I equally desire an enormous, proportionate State Tax increase. I simply believe there is a finer degree of control and ultimately, democratic oversight of spending and policies, at the state level. The current arrangement is too slow, too homogenized and makes blaming "distant washington" for local failures far too easy.

Yes, you want a "punish the poor" and "enrich the wealthy" tax plan. I could have told you that from a casual glance at any one of your posts. Oh wait, I did. Personally I think the whole "states rights" is exactly the problem. People blame Washington because they think Washington is taking something away from them that they never actually had: independence. The states are zones of governance that exist at the whims of the Federal government in order to make national management easier. Too much "states rights" makes national management difficult not better. It only makes it better if you take a "fuck you I've got mine" NIMBY approach where you don't give two shits about other Americans.

Like your stance.

Why do people blame Washington? Why not blame their State Houses? The situation they find themselves in is largely due to the policies of State governments, not the federal one.

Because "people" as a group are morons and their elected leaders take advantage of that.

A few weeks ago I was in New York City. I actually wrote about this in a post. I was deeply saddened to see far more junkies and poor people laying about Manhattan. I asked my brother, a New York City ADA, about why that is. He said it is because DeBlasio stopped the practice of locking them up (which Bloomberg continued), but did not have the resources to get them the aid they need. That was deeply upsetting. Despite what you may think, I do not want my fellow man on the street or suffering.

Except you have just proposed a massive alteration of the functioning of our nation to enable exactly that. Some kind of drivel about personal responsibility and all that. If you don't want to see them living in the streets, you propose systems that counter that. Salt Lake City, for example, found it cheaper to house the homeless, provide rehabilitative and job counseling/placement services at NO CHARGE to the homeless. It was cheaper to do this than to imprison or any of the other things they were doing. Why should this system be limited to Utah only? I don't give two fucks if New York or Alabama doesn't like the system. It is more efficient, more effective and cheaper. They can pout and moan and cry all they want about their "states rights" or "personal responsibility" the system works and that is the ONLY thing that matters.

But looking to Washington for a solution, where we you have to get 435 Representatives, 100 Senators and a President to come to some sort of majority consensus, is an easy way to kill innovative approaches to problem solving. Not just things like healthcare. But education. Homelessness. Elderly neglect.

The fun fact about this completely pointless point is that NOTHING would change. I'm not proposing states not be allowed to implement their own policies. I'm proposing that the Federal level do its fucking job and find what does work (likely things implemented by an individual state already) and implement them across the board.

Like Marijuana. All the states that have legalized Marijuana have seen MASSIVE reductions in crime, MASSIVE increases in tax income, MASSIVE increases in new business growth. There is NO POINT for any state to have illegal marijuana. The Fed needs to find it's fucking balls and do it's damn job, which again: is to UNIFY the country.

Distributed approaches have proven their soundeness time and time again, and yet here you are arguing for an all-national approach. Oh sure, you'll get a nationally homogeneous approach, after 25 years of arguing about it. Or you can experiment at the state level.. fine tune, adjust, and gradually expand and save lives or improve people's lives, in far shorter time scales.

Again, this is a non-point. I'm not suggesting states wouldn't be allowed to make their own rules. I'm suggesting states wouldn't be allowed to be fucking morons. You're suggesting they should be. If a state tries a program and it succeeds, the Fed can pick it up and address national implementation. If a state tries a program and it fails, then the Fed can step in and tell them to knock that shit off. That's the job of the Federal government. Unifying the nation, keeping the ducks in a row, herding cats, pick a turn of phrase I don't care.

The problems in Washington? They're a symptom of this "states rights" garbage you promote. We don't have 585 American representatives. We have 585 special snowflakes who each think their own little slice of the country is God's gift to the nation and put its interests above those as America as a whole. ANYONE who does this is a traitor to our nation. Politicians. Businesses. Individuals. People who put themselves before America are traitors, plain and simple.

MassHealth was a far better healthcare system than Obamacare. Obamacare, which absorb it, has lead to worse and more expensive healthcare in this state. Not to mention far more complex to sign up for.

And you know why that is? Because a bunch of whiny "states rights" morons think they're special and that their state needs to be special and because of that we got RomneyCare-lite.

You say "states rights". I say "the people living in a State must be accountable for what their states do".

You can call the sky green and the sea pink for all I care.
Your plan is about punitive punishment of Americans, destructive to the concept of a Union of States and frankly: insane. You would risk dead states, like an open wound in the country to prove a goddamed point.

I'm not really that interested in your arguments beyond this point. Almost every single one of your paragraphs makes the same point but with different words. You could write substantially less and get across the same point of: I'm wealthy and don't truly care for the well-being of America.

And people who don't care for the well-being of America as a whole, of every state, of every citizen, are quite frankly: not Americans.