Author Topic: congress sucks  (Read 7079 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #60 on: October 05, 2013, 03:50:57 PM »
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24415556

So essentially; the Reps have blackmailed the Dems, because they don't agree with a part of the Dem mandate that got them elected? Is that really it? Is that how it works over there? If you don't agree with the elected government, the un-elected opposition can hijack the elected government if they don't agree with something? So you have a legislature that is designed to work on the principle of coalition? Is that it?

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #61 on: October 05, 2013, 04:03:16 PM »
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24415556

So essentially; the Reps have blackmailed the Dems, because they don't agree with a part of the Dem mandate that got them elected? Is that really it? Is that how it works over there? If you don't agree with the elected government, the un-elected opposition can hijack the elected government if they don't agree with something? So you have a legislature that is designed to work on the principle of coalition? Is that it?

pretty much as you say it.

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #62 on: October 05, 2013, 04:07:43 PM »
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24415556

So essentially; the Reps have blackmailed the Dems, because they don't agree with a part of the Dem mandate that got them elected? Is that really it? Is that how it works over there? If you don't agree with the elected government, the un-elected opposition can hijack the elected government if they don't agree with something? So you have a legislature that is designed to work on the principle of coalition? Is that it?



Yes and no.  That's how it works, but I isn't 'blackmail'.

It's divided government, just as the Founders it up.  The while idea of having a Constitution, a Bill of Rights, of having a Federal system (where the individual states hold power), of having checks and balances between the 3 branches of the Federal government is that change is slow, that rights are respected, that government power is contained.

Don't forget the Congress is elected too.  Not just Obama.  He doesn't get whatever he wants just because he was elected.  Yet that's how he operates.  Look at the language he uses:  'I won't negotiate with a gun to my head', etc. 

What arrogant horseshit - that I his job, to negotiate with the people that were elected to counter him.  His policies caused him to lose the House and the supermajority in the Senate.  But our petty little dictator doesn't want to work with them and pass compromise legislation.  For that attitude and commentary ALONE he should be removed.  One man rule is not what his country is about.  No President has ever been so brazen about this.  He is not one of us.


The Founders feared government and it's power to destroy and steal the liberty of the citizen.  They wanted that power to be limited and the central government to be weak.  They predicted that over time these checks and balances would not hold and that our government would grow into a tyranny over time.  And they were right about all of it. 

We had a good run, 200 years or so.  Now it's time to either roll enough of it back to reclaim what we had, or have the next revolution. 


Re: congress sucks
« Reply #63 on: October 05, 2013, 04:41:50 PM »
... the un-elected opposition can hijack the elected government if they don't agree with something?...



Just to reinforce this:  they were elected too.  Over here we aren't electing a party to run things, we are electing representatives by district (House) and by state (Senate)


The House was designed to be the closest to the people - each member represents a district smaller than a Senator - who represents an entire state, or a President - who represents the entire country.  And each member has only a 2 year term thus the need to be responsive to the people.  The office representing the smallest group and standing for election the most frequently has to be most responsive.

The Congress is mentioned First in the Constitution - in Article I.  The House is discussed in Article I Section 2 and the Senate in Article I Section 3.  The Presidency is in Article II, and the Judiciary in Section III.  They are in this order for a reason.  The Presidency was not ever meant to be kinglike.

The terms of office are important - 2 years for the House, 4 for the President, 6 for Senators and life for judges.  Going from most responsive to the people to those with longer terms taking the longer view of things.  If there was something the people didn't like, if was fixable at the next election within 2 years. 

That is what is supposed to happen, and that is what did happen in the case of Obama's policies.  That he was re-elected has more to do with the power of incumbency and a mix of too many takers, bureaucrats, true believers, and low information voters - along with a corrupt dishonest Media that lies about the candidates  and parties, and supports Big Government instead of simply reporting - than a desire for more of Obama's policies.  To be fair, the House election system has become corrupt as well, with the 'safe seats' due mostly to gerrymandering.  But they can't Gerrymander the whole country.

With the system of checks and balances, it often comes down to which branch is strongest - for example the President is Commander-in-chief but the Congress declares war and has the power of the purse.  So the decision to go to war is made by whoever is stronger at the time.  Same with budgets, or most of the rest of the issues of the day.
 


Re: congress sucks
« Reply #64 on: October 05, 2013, 06:08:43 PM »


Just to reinforce this:  they were elected too.  Over here we aren't electing a party to run things, we are electing representatives by district (House) and by state (Senate)


The House was designed to be the closest to the people - each member represents a district smaller than a Senator - who represents an entire state, or a President - who represents the entire country.  And each member has only a 2 year term thus the need to be responsive to the people.  The office representing the smallest group and standing for election the most frequently has to be most responsive.

The Congress is mentioned First in the Constitution - in Article I.  The House is discussed in Article I Section 2 and the Senate in Article I Section 3.  The Presidency is in Article II, and the Judiciary in Section III.  They are in this order for a reason.  The Presidency was not ever meant to be kinglike.

The terms of office are important - 2 years for the House, 4 for the President, 6 for Senators and life for judges.  Going from most responsive to the people to those with longer terms taking the longer view of things.  If there was something the people didn't like, if was fixable at the next election within 2 years. 

That is what is supposed to happen, and that is what did happen in the case of Obama's policies.  That he was re-elected has more to do with the power of incumbency and a mix of too many takers, bureaucrats, true believers, and low information voters - along with a corrupt dishonest Media that lies about the candidates  and parties, and supports Big Government instead of simply reporting - than a desire for more of Obama's policies.  To be fair, the House election system has become corrupt as well, with the 'safe seats' due mostly to gerrymandering.  But they can't Gerrymander the whole country.

With the system of checks and balances, it often comes down to which branch is strongest - for example the President is Commander-in-chief but the Congress declares war and has the power of the purse.  So the decision to go to war is made by whoever is stronger at the time.  Same with budgets, or most of the rest of the issues of the day.
Oh, goody!  Yet another officious civics lesson from Paper Boy!
Except you glossed over how a minority party (like the Republicans have become) can still hold tremendous sway courtesy of gerrymandering.  And yes, you have gerrymandered the whole country.

Oh, I give you cynics credit, you saw it coming and caught the lefties with their collective drawers dropped.  You capitalized on Clinton fatigue, won several state houses, waited for the Census, and pounced.  Even though nearly 3 million more people voted for Democrats for Congress in '12 you guys held the House (your Senate plan was a bust) because of the veritable Rorschack-test pattern-Congressional districts you Good Ole boys in the Grand Ole Party scissored out after '00 and '10. 

Really, you should have the decency to mention that as opposed to your incessant lecturing about the Constitution.  It's one of the reasons we need to reduce the influence of individual states over this whole nation.

The Senate's another.  Yorkie P, did you know a state like California with millions of people has the exact same power in the Senate as a state like Wyoming with a population of 576,000?  So all those good ole boy cattle ranchers and would-be fracker millionaires have equal power to the teeming millions in Cali because our Constitution was written over 200 years ago, before there was either a Wyoming or a California!
Sounds batshit crazy, doesn't it?  These two things are the only things keeping conservatism relevant (more like on life support) in this country.

You'll never hear Paper Boy mention this, either.

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #65 on: October 05, 2013, 06:29:31 PM »
We had a good run, 200 years or so.  Now it's time to either roll enough of it back to reclaim what we had, or have the next revolution.
Talk about "arrogant horseshit".  You tried this already in the 1860's.  You failed.  Your ideas of distorted inequality are arcane and archaic and have been defeated at the polls and on the battlefield. 
You tried this during the gilded age when even a Republican named Teddy Roosevelt couldn't take it anymore.
You tried this in the 1960's, too when "counterculturists" dared espouse civil rights and a war on poverty.  You hosed people down and lynched them, but you failed then, too.

Your revolution's last gasp was behind Reagan's pretty face and Peggy Noonan's myopic prose;  you suckered a lot of good people into voting against their own interests and look where we are now. At least things are finally changing.

So bring whatever you got left, it still isn't going to be enough.

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #66 on: October 05, 2013, 10:08:48 PM »
Thank you for your reminders of what the Left thinks of us. 







Re: congress sucks
« Reply #67 on: October 06, 2013, 05:02:36 PM »
I'll say this, Paperboy... You very clearly found Nowhere's above posts to be acidic and disrespectful.  I think the libs here feel much the same way upon reading a lot of the posts from those on the right.  I have long been calling for more civil discourse but am sure I sometimes tread forth like Lil Abner and his size-50 shoes at a barn dance. 

Some of us offer facts and statistics with links and reference sources (as opposed to those who spew unsubstantiated facts or the ever-popular, "Well, everybody knows that all -- fill in the blank -- are stupid/corrupt/immoral/braindead criminals" arguments). 

Of course, it seems to me that a majority of the time we have little or no respect for each other's sources.  To some, quoting from WorldNetDaily is akin to the written word of God; to others, the DailyKos is a respected news source.  Even when one uses a source one might think of as fairly objective (NPR, PBS, WSJ), there will always be a chorus of voices crying out that said source is pure bullshit.

And the sides end up ever more polarized, ever more distrustful. 

It's a hell of a country we live in now, eh?

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #68 on: October 06, 2013, 06:12:40 PM »
My posts tend to be more opinion based than bringing stats or something I recently read somewhere.  So not a lot of links or quotes.

They are mostly from my cumulative observations - but as you point out, much depends on which news sources one trusts.  And that depends on a person's worldview - but down the road we can often look back and see who was lying, or who was wrong.  Or looking into what has happened here or other places when certain policies have been tried before, and what that has led to.  So it's more than simply a matter of what we wish to believe.  My posts probably read as pro-Republican and anti-Democrat, but they are actually pro-originalist Constitutional government and anti-Hard malignant Left. 

The leaders of the Republicans suck too.  Boehner, McCain, McConnell, Chris Christie, all the Bushes, Cheney, Rove, Lindsey Graham, NYC Mayor Bloomberg - embarrassments all.  And that list is by no means complete.

I really do think most people in this country, regardless of how they vote, are better people than the politicians in DC and that we have more common ground with each other than with the politicians of either party in DC.  They are pretty much the ones dragging us down.

However.  The only group I see even trying to take the country in the right direction are the Tea Party Conservative types.  The people outside of DC that I see intentionally trying to drag us down are the Occupy types and their political allies - the Big City machine politicians. 

It's a big country - there are plenty of very well meaning people that self identify as Progressives, and plenty of shitty Tea Party people.


To me parties are only a means of carrying forward ideas and policies.  I could care less about the R's - I'm against their platform on any number of things, but right now - and for my adult life - they are currently and have been closer to what I think policy should be on the most important issues.

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #69 on: October 06, 2013, 06:21:35 PM »
My posts tend to be more opinion based than bringing stats or something I recently read somewhere.  They are mostly from my cumulative observations.  The posts probably read as pro-Republican and anti-Democrat, but they are actually pro-originalist Constitutional government and anti-Hard malignant Left. 

The leaders of the Republicans suck too.  Boehner, McCain, McConnell, Chris Christie, all the Bushes, Cheney, Rove, Lindsey Graham, NYC Mayor Bloomberg - embarrassments all.  And that list is by no means complete.

I really do think most people in this country, regardless of how they vote, are better people than the politicians in DC and that we have more common ground with each other than with the politicians of either party in DC.  They are pretty much the ones dragging us down.

However.  The only group I see even trying to take the country in the right direction are the Tea Party Conservative types.  The people outside of DC that I see intentionally trying to drag us down are the Occupy types and their political allies - the Big City machine politicians. 

It's a big country - there are plenty of very well meaning people that self identify as Progressives, and plenty of shitty Tea Party people.


To me parties are only a means of carrying forward ideas and policies.  I could care less about the R's - I'm against their platform on any number of things, but right now - and for my adult life - they are currently and have been closer to what I think policy should be on the most important issues.

I normally agree wholeheartedly with your posts, but seriously? Cruz..? Rubio? Mike Lee? These guys are screwballs. The only way for the GOP to survive is the Libertarian faction. Social conservatism is fucking DEAD as far as anyone under 35 is concerned. And until the old people who make up that very reliable bloc die off, the Republicans won't retake the White House until AT LEAST 2024. 2 terms of Hillary, and then MAYBE the Republicans will take it back.

I'm drunk, don't mind me.

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #70 on: October 06, 2013, 08:55:01 PM »
... Even when one uses a source one might think of as fairly objective (NPR, PBS, WSJ)...

There may be a slight problem here.  ;)

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #71 on: October 06, 2013, 10:12:13 PM »
When your answer is to insult the genuine beliefs and concerns of your fellow citizen, you become an asshole, with no legitimacy.

I suggest that that you, in fact, READ, The Federalist, and then, The Creation of The American Republic by Gordon S. Wood. You might then actually have a more comprehensive idea of what the Founders actually thought about when they organized Our Country, instead of getting it from MSNBC, and I can guarandamntee you it will surprise you, because from the sound of your vitriol, it is obvious that you are terribly misinformed.

I wonder how loudly you would cry if the Democrats did what you accuse the Republicans of doing (gerrymandering, as if the pious Democrats have never and will never do it), the underlying suggestion being that it is illegal, which, it is not. It may work against your whims, but there are many checks and balances in Our form of Constitutional Republic that are specifically intended to have that precise effect - so that we don't wind up with an oppressive despotic majority, or vindictive tyrannical leader, much like we are very near to experiencing, today.

We are specifically NOT supposed to be a country wherein a 'majority' gets to shit on the pursuits of happiness of a minority. That kind of Government is what you might find in Iran, Russia, or China. And save all your dredging up the mistakes we have made as a country and society, in the past, because many of US have fought very hard, and many have died, to correct those misdeeds, to the point of even being raped financially by hucksters for it.

We've ALWAYS tried to correct our wrongs, until very recently.

And I am impervious to Red Herring arguments, but you can call me names if it helps (see first sentence).

Oh, goody!  Yet another officious civics lesson from Paper Boy!
Except you glossed over how a minority party (like the Republicans have become) can still hold tremendous sway courtesy of gerrymandering.  And yes, you have gerrymandered the whole country.

Oh, I give you cynics credit, you saw it coming and caught the lefties with their collective drawers dropped.  You capitalized on Clinton fatigue, won several state houses, waited for the Census, and pounced.  Even though nearly 3 million more people voted for Democrats for Congress in '12 you guys held the House (your Senate plan was a bust) because of the veritable Rorschack-test pattern-Congressional districts you Good Ole boys in the Grand Ole Party scissored out after '00 and '10. 

Really, you should have the decency to mention that as opposed to your incessant lecturing about the Constitution.  It's one of the reasons we need to reduce the influence of individual states over this whole nation.

The Senate's another.  Yorkie P, did you know a state like California with millions of people has the exact same power in the Senate as a state like Wyoming with a population of 576,000?  So all those good ole boy cattle ranchers and would-be fracker millionaires have equal power to the teeming millions in Cali because our Constitution was written over 200 years ago, before there was either a Wyoming or a California!
Sounds batshit crazy, doesn't it?  These two things are the only things keeping conservatism relevant (more like on life support) in this country.

You'll never hear Paper Boy mention this, either.

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #72 on: October 06, 2013, 11:40:28 PM »
... Really, you should have the decency to mention that as opposed to your incessant lecturing about the Constitution.  It's one of the reasons we need to reduce the influence of individual states over this whole nation.

The Senate's another.  Yorkie P, did you know a state like California with millions of people has the exact same power in the Senate as a state like Wyoming with a population of 576,000?  So all those good ole boy cattle ranchers and would-be fracker millionaires have equal power to the teeming millions in Cali because our Constitution was written over 200 years ago, before there was either a Wyoming or a California!

Sounds batshit crazy, doesn't it?  These two things are the only things keeping conservatism relevant (more like on life support) in this country.

You'll never hear Paper Boy mention this, either.



I didn't realize you were unfamiliar with it, or I would have.

Originally, the 13 colonies each became independent entities.  They created the federal government to do specific things collectively - mutual defense, foreign diplomacy, to regulate trade between the former colonies (so they weren't charging tariffs on each other, etc), oversee a single currency, support a post office, and some other things. 

They needed an executive to run that, a legislature to make the rules, and a court system to arbitrate between the two.

It was not a democracy, and wasn't intended to be one.  The President was elected by the Electoral College.  He appointed the Judges.  Only the House was elected directly by the voters, and it represented them. 

The Senators were appointed directly by the states legislatures and were there to represent the interests of the states - to insure the Federal government did not infringe on the rights of the state governments.  So each state got 2 representatives in the Senate.

It wasn't until the 17th Amendment was ratified in 1913 that he Senators were elected directly by the voters.



The federal government was set up so that it did the things only a national government can do best, but to try to limit it to that.  The Founders saw government as a necessary evil, a taker of liberty, a potential tyranny, and were especially concerned about the potential power of a national government.

There were always those that saw the good government could do, and wanted to give it those powers.  By giving it more power, it is impossible to limit it to just the good works envisioned.  Those people, under President Woodrow Wilson, finally came into power in 1913.

Among the changes they were able to make were the 17th Amendment, eliminating the check by the states on federal power and thus making expansion of the Federal government at the expense of the states much easier - the Senators were now elected directly just like the House members.  The 16th Amendment (1913) created the permanent Income Tax - to fund all the new good things the government would be doing.  The Federal Reserve was founded (also 1913) to oversee the banks and the economy - it was to be owned and run by the largest banks.

The 18th Amendment was Prohibition.  Oh, the good they could do.



So that's the story of the Senate and why it's 2 votes per state and what happened.  It doesn't make as much sense now, since the original reason for being was changed.


California's 2 Senators - Feinstein and Boxer - are nearly indistinguishable from each other.  Two wealthy elderly very Liberal San Franciscans, they have grown considerably more wealthy during their time in the Senate.  They haven't been especially distinguished, other than for longevity.  May as well include SF's representative Nancy Pelosi.  All 3 are from the corrupt Burton political machine.  Based on what we see now, I'm not sure how giving California more Senators would be an improvement.
 

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #73 on: October 06, 2013, 11:42:25 PM »
When your answer is to insult the genuine beliefs and concerns of your fellow citizen, you become an asshole, with no legitimacy.

I suggest that that you, in fact, READ, The Federalist, and then, The Creation of The American Republic by Gordon S. Wood. You might then actually have a more comprehensive idea of what the Founders actually thought about when they organized Our Country, instead of getting it from MSNBC, and I can guarandamntee you it will surprise you, because from the sound of your vitriol, it is obvious that you are terribly misinformed.

I wonder how loudly you would cry if the Democrats did what you accuse the Republicans of doing (gerrymandering, as if the pious Democrats have never and will never do it), the underlying suggestion being that it is illegal, which, it is not. It may work against your whims, but there are many checks and balances in Our form of Constitutional Republic that are specifically intended to have that precise effect - so that we don't wind up with an oppressive despotic majority, or vindictive tyrannical leader, much like we are very near to experiencing, today.

We are specifically NOT supposed to be a country wherein a 'majority' gets to shit on the pursuits of happiness of a minority. That kind of Government is what you might find in Iran, Russia, or China. And save all your dredging up the mistakes we have made as a country and society, in the past, because many of US have fought very hard, and many have died, to correct those misdeeds, to the point of even being raped financially by hucksters for it.

We've ALWAYS tried to correct our wrongs, until very recently.

And I am impervious to Red Herring arguments, but you can call me names if it helps (see first sentence).
Spare me your sanctimonious condescention. I have read, and will continue to read, and continue to learn,  more about the founding of this nation but it will not change my beliefs.
Why is it only conservative posters have "legitimate" concerns? Why is it that I can always be derided as "Marxist" and that my views are somehow not mine but "found in China"?
Talk about red herring.
The founders also sure as hell didn't intend for a brutal and selfish minority to hold the nation hostage to save us from health care.

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #74 on: October 06, 2013, 11:53:43 PM »


I didn't realize you were unfamiliar with it, or I would have.

Originally, the 13 colonies each became independent entities.  They created the federal government to do specific things collectively - mutual defense, foreign diplomacy, to regulate trade between the former colonies (so they weren't charging tariffs on each other, etc), oversee a single currency, support a post office, and some other things. 

They needed an executive to run that, a legislature to make the rules, and a court system to arbitrate between the two.

It was not a democracy, and wasn't intended to be one.  The President was elected by the Electoral College.  He appointed the Judges.  Only the House was elected directly by the voters, and it represented them. 

The Senators were appointed directly by the states legislatures and were there to represent the interests of the states - to insure the Federal government did not infringe on the rights of the state governments.  So each state got 2 representatives in the Senate.

It wasn't until the 17th Amendment was ratified in 1913 that he Senators were elected directly by the voters.



The federal government was set up so that it did the things only a national government can do best, but to try to limit it to that.  The Founders saw government as a necessary evil, a taker of liberty, a potential tyranny, and were especially concerned about the potential power of a national government.

There were always those that saw the good government could do, and wanted to give it those powers.  By giving it more power, it is impossible to limit it to just the good works envisioned.  Those people, under President Woodrow Wilson, finally came into power in 1913.

Among the changes they were able to make were the 17th Amendment, eliminating the check by the states on federal power and thus making expansion of the Federal government at the expense of the states much easier - the Senators were now elected directly just like the House members.  The 16th Amendment (1913) created the permanent Income Tax - to fund all the new good things the government would be doing.  The Federal Reserve was founded (also 1913) to oversee the banks and the economy - it was to be owned and run by the largest banks.

The 18th Amendment was Prohibition.  Oh, the good they could do.



The shorter term consequences of these power grabs were US entry into WWI in 1917, and a Fed engineered Great Depression in the 1930's.  The Depression of the 1930's being exacerbated by the next politician that came along thinking government power was just the thing to solve problems (FDR).  And thanks to Wilson, it was much easier to expand that power.  Using the same Keynesian economic policies later used by Carter and now Obama, the Depression didn't end until the next President came in and ended those policies.


So that's the story of the Senate and why it's 2 votes per state and what happened.  It doesn't make as much sense now, since the original reason for being was changed.


I will say that California, with 2 greedy old ladies from San Francisco who have enriched themselves grossly during their time in the Senate (Feinstein and Boxer), along with San Francisco's House member Nancy Pelosi doing the same over the years - I'm not sure California having more Senators due to more population would be an improvement.  The Senators from the tiny western states have been much wiser than the Senators from California over at least the past half century or so.
 
thank you for making my point for me. The Constitution wasn't perfect at first crafting, has been amended, didn't account for new technology and changes in social attitudes,  and yet survives not as the final word but as a wonderful frame upon which to build. This nation has grown beyond white male propertied elites and our common starting point will be the Constitution,  but not to limit but to grow.

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #75 on: October 06, 2013, 11:59:32 PM »
... The founders also sure as hell didn't intend for a brutal and selfish minority to hold the nation hostage to save us from health care.



Did they intend for half of us to permanently live off the other half?  Or have bloated bureaucracies micromanaging us in as many areas as could be thought up?

Because I missed any reference to anything like that, other than warnings that government would grow and stifle us if it wasn't contained.



It's strange that it was the Wilson era 'Progressives' - the people that thought government could do so much good, and the ideological forbearers of the modern 'Progressive' movement - that created the Federal Reserve Bank in the first place.   

The institution they now rail against. 

The same people that gave us the Federal income tax, the modern IRS, and bloated government. 


And we are supposed to follow them now toward even more government.  We're supposed to hand over responsibility for our healthcare.

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #76 on: October 07, 2013, 12:01:32 AM »
thank you for making my point for me. The Constitution wasn't perfect at first crafting, has been amended, didn't account for new technology and changes in social attitudes,  and yet survives not as the final word but as a wonderful frame upon which to build. This nation has grown beyond white male propertied elites and our common starting point will be the Constitution,  but not to limit but to grow.



The point was, the changes the first 'Progressives' made were mostly mistakes, and the consequences were long term .  Just because it was amended doesn't mean it was improved.

You will notice this is the 100th anniversary of the 16th and 17th Amendments, the Fed, and the modern IRS.  You will also notice no one is celebrating.  Or even bringing them up as positive achievements.

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #77 on: October 07, 2013, 12:50:04 AM »
The Democrats don't seem to realize yet that the 2010 election gave a House majority to the Republicans as the Democrats ran amuck with  this health care thing that was largely written by lobbyists and run through largely by people that never read the bill. In reaction the voters responded by shifting control and the attitude a lot of the former congress people had when meeting with constituents led to their fall.
As long as American's stay bridled to two parties and stay with the divide and conquer paradigm that entails  we will get these malignant fools that continue to drain the treasury for military-industrial games or for the bread and circus populism of the welfare state. Either one is the road to ruin.

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #78 on: October 07, 2013, 01:28:42 AM »
The Affordable Care Act was written by Insurance Companies, which is why Nancy Pelosi said "You have to pass it before you can know what's in it" (she did NOT participate in writing it, and did NOT read it - I have a certified copy of the entire bill, to contest any intentional misrepresentation contained therein. 2000 plus pages!). Is it any surprise that the few who have been able to get a quote are in utter disbelief at the costs?

It was a scam from the get go, designed to fail, so that Anti-Americans can usher in the single-payer European model they have been wishing for since Woodrow Wilson...

What really baffles me is the people that think ANY form of health care is going to be "free". NOTHING in life is free - if you are getting something for nothing, someone else paid for it, but we have a large segment of our population that believes this is a perfectly legitimate way to exist, right up until the moment someone wants to take THEIR stuff.

In this case, EVERYONE, except for the Politicians and the rich, is going to pay way more than they can "afford", and Insurance companies and their tools in Washington are going to get even richer - yep, even the tools you voted for!

Why do you think The Congress exempted themselves from complying with "the law"? Why do you think Nancy played her 'get out of jail card" by saying you have to pass it to know what's in it? Because we are going to hear: "We didn't know what was in it but it's the law now and we have to live with it"... while, paradoxically, SHE and everyone else in Congress does NOT have to live with it.

Certainly I agree that Health Care costs in America are off the charts - going to an emergency room for a broken leg should NOT cost $15,000!!! What did it cost in the 1800's when people splinted THEIR OWN broken legs??? But making it even MORE expensive for the people that can't afford it, and exempting the people that can afford it, is NOT the answer. How anyone can not be completely outraged by this, is so far past astonishing that it can't be described.

I can guarandamntee you that if I voted for a scumbag that pulled that kind of shit, there is no way I would continue to defend the asshole, or the bill, just because I hated the opposing political party's philosophies. Pure absurdity.

Only a child would believe that any bill passed on a partisan vote has a chance in hell of a long life - and those same children would whine like you never heard, if someone did the same thing to them. Remember - prohibition was overturned, as will be this insane bill.


Re: congress sucks
« Reply #79 on: October 07, 2013, 01:45:47 AM »
Incredibly well said!

Panem et circenses!

Same shit by the same kind of people - different era. The problem is, 90% of The People today have no fucking clue what you're talking about or what it means, and they'll look it up on Wikipedia real quick like...

The Democrats don't seem to realize yet that the 2010 election gave a House majority to the Republicans as the Democrats ran amuck with  this health care thing that was largely written by lobbyists and run through largely by people that never read the bill. In reaction the voters responded by shifting control and the attitude a lot of the former congress people had when meeting with constituents led to their fall.
As long as American's stay bridled to two parties and stay with the divide and conquer paradigm that entails  we will get these malignant fools that continue to drain the treasury for military-industrial games or for the bread and circus populism of the welfare state. Either one is the road to ruin.

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #80 on: October 07, 2013, 02:24:37 AM »
Someone once said there was 4 ways for money to be spent.  These are general truisms, and anyone can find exceptions.  That isn't the point.


A person can spend their own money on themselves.   In that case cost and quality matter.

A person can spend their money on someone else.  The cost is important but not the quality.

A person can spend someone else's money on themselves.  Cost doesn't matter but quality does.

A person can spend someone else's money on a third party.  Neither cost nor quality matter.


When it's the government directing economic activity, they are spending other people's money on third parties.  Neither cost nor quality are priorities.  That's why the government schools are expensive but still suck.  It's why any of us dealing with a government agency generally finds it slow and cumbersome and often unsatisfactory.  It's why public transportation is generally undesirable.  It's why there is so much waste in government.  It's why FedEx and UPS outperform the post office. 


The reason the pre-ObamaCare system of health insurance provided by an employer as compensation is expensive and quality varies is because the person getting the service (the employee) wasn't the one writing the check for it (the employer does).  In a system where people buy insurance for themselves there would be quality products tailored to their needs at reasonable prices.  The way auto insurance and homeowners insurance work.


The reason health insurance got all tied up with employment in the first place is because there was a federal imposed wage freeze during WWII.  Unable to pay them more, in order to entice employees employers offered them more benefits.  Including free health insurance.  The whole system has been getting less market based and more out of whack ever since.

The people paying for it aren't using it.  The people using it aren't paying for it.  Doctors prescribe unnecessary and expensive tests, procedures and medicines, and overcharge the insurance companies and no one questions it.  People use it without thinking about he cost.



The answer is to move to a market based system, not towards a more bureaucratic one.


Re: congress sucks
« Reply #81 on: October 07, 2013, 10:09:03 AM »
I agree completely, but I hate to say that I have never seen nor heard of anyone actually documenting such plan - something I have been all over the Republicans for failing to do since 2008... Too many Establishment Republicans did nothing for too long, and left - actually held - the door open for this to happen.

If we had been represented more legitimately, by means of not forcing un-electable disconnected aristocrats like Romney and McCain on us, for starters, Obamacare would never had a chance in hell of being imposed on us.

We need new leadership in the Republican party that actually represents the will of their voters and that will fight as dirty as the Democrats do.

Fair is fair.

The answer is to move to a market based system, not towards a more bureaucratic one.

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #82 on: October 07, 2013, 12:22:31 PM »


Did they intend for half of us to permanently live off the other half?  Or have bloated bureaucracies micromanaging us in as many areas as could be thought up?

Because I missed any reference to anything like that, other than warnings that government would grow and stifle us if it wasn't contained.



It's strange that it was the Wilson era 'Progressives' - the people that thought government could do so much good, and the ideological forbearers of the modern 'Progressive' movement - that created the Federal Reserve Bank in the first place.   

The institution they now rail against. 

The same people that gave us the Federal income tax, the modern IRS, and bloated government. 


And we are supposed to follow them now toward even more government.  We're supposed to hand over responsibility for our healthcare.
This is what I don't understand; in what way did I state or imply that half of us were to live permanently off the other half?  It's this constant worst case scenario presumption which baffles me and causes me to call your position "extremist" because you always take the worst case scenario as a "done-deal" premise for your next treatise.
I want full, fair employment.  I want the next CEO who wants bonus to insist that the company devise a way to grow sales rather than "streamline" or "downsize".  Maybe its pollyanna but I've seen companies that address growth rather than share value in fact grow.
I want everyone working and everyone pulling their weight for their healthcare, but healthcare need not be so prohibitive in cost. I agree with consrvatives who say we need tort reform but not to such extreme deprivations as they seek.
I want our stock market to launch IPO's like ESRT and PBPB.  ESRT is slow to start but will have long term value and Potbelly shot out of the gate!
Why the hell can't conservative process the idea that liberals utilize the markets, too?  You always presume to put us in gray jammies eating rice and beans and not praying to God.  WTF?

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #83 on: October 07, 2013, 12:33:08 PM »
compensation is expensive and quality varies is because the person getting the service (the employee) wasn't the one writing the check for it (the employer does).  In a system where people buy insurance for themselves there would be quality products tailored to their needs at reasonable prices.  The way auto insurance and homeowners insurance work....

The people paying for it aren't using it.  The people using it aren't paying for it.  Doctors prescribe unnecessary and expensive tests, procedures and medicines, and overcharge the insurance companies and no one questions it.  People use it without thinking about he cost.

The answer is to move to a market based system, not towards a more bureaucratic one.
I'm sorry, in what universe are auto insurance prices fair?  My insurance has gone UP every year the past 6 years though I haven't had a claimed accident or motor vehicle violation of any kind since the last milennium!  Not only that, I drive a white 4 door Suzuki!  No.  Auto insurance prices aren't close to reasonable.

As to the people paying aren't using and the people not paying are its that second group Obamacare is trying to get to kick in and pay something, if even just the damn penalty. 

Your market based system had its chance and failed.  The market based system created this preposterous over-bid situation where medical centers way overbill a patient knowing full well the insurance company will negotiate down the payments.  The problem is that doctors played fair for a long time and were being undercut by insurance providers until they started saying enough and hyper-inflated prices throughout the 90's and ever since.  HMO's didn't work out well and with the influx of illegal immigrants from the 80's and 90's we had a strata of people who not only down-bid hourly wages but used emergency rooms as primary care centers causing overcrowding, long waits, and much higher costs, as most couldn't pay.

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #84 on: October 07, 2013, 12:46:04 PM »
No Market Based system has ever been tried. If you want to call the fraud we had prior to the Obamacare fraud, "market based", I suggest you haven't studied it well enough to understand it. Insurance Companies and Big Pharma have been lobbying (paying YOUR representatives off, and OUR representatives off), to keep the fraud going; whether in the case of the previous fraud, or the current fraud.

Anyone that believes their party is made up of Angels and their opponents party is made up of devils, lacks credibility.

The answer, on "your" side, and/or "our" side, is to vote for different representation. I only see one side doing that - thus the Tea Party Representatives that every liberal on the planet constantly accuses of being oppressive Neanderthals, in the face of zero evidence. They are standing for what The Constitution says, in all but the few extreme cases. Let us not forget there are extremists on the left too...

Lastly, this "Yours / Ours" bullshit sounds like schoolyard assholes fighting who has the better bicycle.

Your market based system had its chance and failed.  The market based system created this preposterous over-bid situation where medical centers way overbill a patient knowing full well the insurance company will negotiate down the payments.

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #85 on: October 07, 2013, 05:12:10 PM »
No Market Based system has ever been tried. If you want to call the fraud we had prior to the Obamacare fraud, "market based", I suggest you haven't studied it well enough to understand it. Insurance Companies and Big Pharma have been lobbying (paying YOUR representatives off, and OUR representatives off), to keep the fraud going; whether in the case of the previous fraud, or the current fraud.

Anyone that believes their party is made up of Angels and their opponents party is made up of devils, lacks credibility.

The answer, on "your" side, and/or "our" side, is to vote for different representation. I only see one side doing that - thus the Tea Party Representatives that every liberal on the planet constantly accuses of being oppressive Neanderthals, in the face of zero evidence. They are standing for what The Constitution says, in all but the few extreme cases. Let us not forget there are extremists on the left too...

Lastly, this "Yours / Ours" bullshit sounds like schoolyard assholes fighting who has the better bicycle.
Yeah, it does, because it is. 

No, I'm a Demon-crat by holding my nose and pretending I'm voting for FDR or JFK when I should know better.

If it means anything I am absolutely voting Republican in the next CT gubernatorial; Malloy gotta go (only state still in recession)!

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #86 on: October 07, 2013, 05:16:20 PM »
Yeah, it does, because it is. 

No, I'm a Demon-crat by holding my nose and pretending I'm voting for FDR or JFK when I should know better.

If it means anything I am absolutely voting Republican in the next CT gubernatorial; Malloy gotta go (only state still in recession)!

In all seriousness: why do you think that is?

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #87 on: October 07, 2013, 05:23:03 PM »
When people accuse me of being a racist Republican that wants to kill minorities and abandon the poor to fend for themselves in sewers and garbage dumps, without having the slightest clue as to my affiliation or voting record, I usually return the favor by calling them Democ-RATS...

That usually get them frothing real good like.

Sincere questions:

Have you actually read The Constitution, start to finish?
Have you read The Federalist, start to finish?
Have you read the Creation of the American Republic by Gordon S. Wood? (I wager that if you did you would change some of your opinions).

If not, no worries.

Yeah, it does, because it is. 

No, I'm a Demon-crat by holding my nose and pretending I'm voting for FDR or JFK when I should know better.

If it means anything I am absolutely voting Republican in the next CT gubernatorial; Malloy gotta go (only state still in recession)!

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #88 on: October 07, 2013, 05:33:44 PM »
When people accuse me of being a racist Republican that wants to kill minorities and abandon the poor to fend for themselves in sewers and garbage dumps, without having the slightest clue as to my affiliation or voting record, I usually return the favor by calling them Democ-RATS...

That usually get them frothing real good like.

Sincere questions:

Have you actually read The Constitution, start to finish?
Have you read The Federalist, start to finish?
Have you read the Creation of the American Republic by Gordon S. Wood? (I wager that if you did you would change some of your opinions).

If not, no worries.

I think you quoted the wrong person.

Re: congress sucks
« Reply #89 on: October 07, 2013, 05:52:16 PM »
How in the Fuck did THAT happen???

Your pizza roll comment when you phoned Art was perfectly timed and delivered!

Quote repaired! Thank you.

I think you quoted the wrong person.