Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(US Supreme Court) NewsFlash Supreme Court rules that Obamacare is constitutional. The bland mask that is Mitt Romney's face twitches with something called "emotion"   (supremecourt.gov ) divider line
    More: NewsFlash, obamacare, supreme courts, Mitt Romney, supreme court ruling  
•       •       •

14940 clicks; posted to Politics » on 28 Jun 2012 at 10:27 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

3329 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | » | Newest

 
2012-06-28 03:05:40 PM  

chiefsfaninkc: ciberido: The_Sponge: Gwendolyn: I never saw the difference between the federal government saying I must have health care and Maryland requiring me to have car insurance. I'm sure it is in some way but we get told we have to do things all the time.


Here's the difference:

You don't have to drive a car.

You pretty much do in America, actually.

Tell that to people that live in NY actually.


There's a major difference. Maryland requires you to buy car insurance if you drive a car. The federal government doesn't require you to buy a damn thing, it just gives you a tax break if you do. Just like if you have a kid, buy a house, invest in retirement, start a small business, or any other of a myriad of things.
 
2012-06-28 03:05:50 PM  

TsukasaK: Lernaeus: /looking forward to more "suck it" kindness and compassion from the left today

Considering the amount of derp in play from the right, I say the "suck it" in this case is well deserved.

I never claimed to be kind or compassionate to idiots.


You must really enjoy self flagellation then.
 
2012-06-28 03:06:21 PM  

Frosty_Icehole: Mrtraveler01: I don't know but maybe people can explain this to me.

How is this a huge tax for someone like me because I have insurance because I'm not a huge idiot who takes big risks on his health?

Because you'd have to pay for the "must be living like kings" tax bracket who, while they usually work, don't make enough money (or are too young/ignorant/stupid) to buy health insurance and make too much to qualify for government assistance.

You know, the lower vertebrae of the backbone of America the "why do I have to pay for the freeloaders' insurance" crowd apparently hates. At least that's my take on it.


Yeah, that's a good point.
 
2012-06-28 03:06:23 PM  

The Irresponsible Captain: Taxes, hunh. Republicans never raise taxes.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 150x125]


Bush Sr. signed a bill written by Democrats that raised taxes. He did it in the name of compromise and bipartisanship. Democrats used it against him. Republicans learned that hard lesson and now, usually, know exactly what to expect from the other side when they start braying for cooperation.

When barking for popular support, Obama did back flips to assure everyone that the public mandate was not a tax. Once it passed, he somersaulted the other way and argued it was a tax all along. So tax it is. He gets to live with the political consequences. Much like Bush Sr.
 
2012-06-28 03:06:29 PM  

Hot Carl To Go: HeartBurnKid: Sid_the_sadist: I'm going to quit my job and go on welfare now. fark you guys, you pay for my shiat from now on. Including my healthcare.

If that's what you want, go right ahead. I think you'll find that it's not the wine and roses you think.

Sure it is. It's just the wine comes in a box and the roses are in little glass tubes.


You can't buy wine with EBT.
But you can get a lot of Nyquil..
 
2012-06-28 03:06:30 PM  

chiefsfaninkc: Fluorescent Testicle: chiefsfaninkc: Then your faith is misguided. Freedom died today. Congress can now make you buy anything they want and "Tax" you if you do not.

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 316x400]

/I'm sure this has been posted already.
//Can't be posted enough.

Sorry I am a libertarian not a conservative. Freedom is the only thing that means anything everything else is a byproduct of freedom. Again freedom died today people that are celebrating its death are idiots.


Ah ok, a libertarian, AKA a selfish hypocrite.
 
2012-06-28 03:06:38 PM  

penetrating_virga: Obama: You insurance companies must now offer X.
Insurance CEO: Raise all premiums to pay for X (and add an extra margin for my bonus!)


What a splendid healthcare "fix." A true victory for all!


Government: Ok now you must send all that extra money back to the people who bought your insurance policies because it's not being used to provide healthcare services:

Consumers to get $1B in health insurance rebates


NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Health insurers will dole out a total of $1 billion in rebates to 12.8 million Americans this summer -- an average of $151 per family --as a result of the 2010 health care reform law, the government said Thursday.
...
The rule mandated that, beginning in 2011, insurance companies would have to spend 80% to 85% of the premiums they collect on medical care instead of toward their own profits and overhead costs.
 
2012-06-28 03:06:54 PM  
As a healthy person who can afford my own insurance i dont care either way abotu this ruling. However, for the people that are going to be required to have it, i feel bad for you. Give it 10 years and you will be looking at certain criteria you have to meet in order to be on a health care plan the government requires you to have. Acohol consumption? Smoking? High risk activities? Burger king? Gambling? Not sure what it will be like, but shiat in your personal life is not going to be the same. For better or for worse, people on required gov't healthcare have lost a chunk of personal freedom. Americans could use big brother taking away their double stacker with double cheese since they can't put it down on their own
 
2012-06-28 03:08:04 PM  

chiefsfaninkc: ciberido: The_Sponge: Gwendolyn: I never saw the difference between the federal government saying I must have health care and Maryland requiring me to have car insurance. I'm sure it is in some way but we get told we have to do things all the time.


Here's the difference:

You don't have to drive a car.

You pretty much do in America, actually.

Tell that to people that live in NY actually.


Well of course not. Nobody drives in New York, there's too much traffic.
 
2012-06-28 03:08:15 PM  

The_Sponge: Rwa2play: I like how you and your brethren keep trying to push this as a talking point when, in fact, it's not.

But do keep farking that chicken.

You guys can't even admit that he broke that promise. At least keep it real by admitting that he did, but you don't mind because you like the end result.


So what you're saying, we have to agree with what you're saying because if we don't your narrative can't keep going?

Guess what, I don't agree with it. Therefore, your narrative is crap.
 
2012-06-28 03:08:28 PM  

chiefsfaninkc: Fluorescent Testicle: chiefsfaninkc: Then your faith is misguided. Freedom died today. Congress can now make you buy anything they want and "Tax" you if you do not.

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 316x400]

/I'm sure this has been posted already.
//Can't be posted enough.

Sorry I am a libertarian not a conservative. Freedom is the only thing that means anything everything else is a byproduct of freedom. Again freedom died today people that are celebrating its death are idiots.


I know tons of self-labeled libertarians. Why is economic freedom so much more important that social freedom? My libertarian friends talk about how they vote Republican because the Republicans want "freedom" - but what they mean is "economic freedom". The Republican Party doesn't want freedom of reproductive choice, freedom of religious choice, or freedom of marriage. If you vote for a Republican, you are implicitly saying that money-related "freedom" is more important than your freedom to do as you please with your own body or in your own bedroom. That's fine if you believe that, but own up to it.
 
2012-06-28 03:08:30 PM  
This may already have been posted, but if y'all haven't seen this yet:

GOP lawmakers announce Obamacare repeal on Twitter, then delete posts

My schadenfreude...let me show you it. ;^)
 
2012-06-28 03:08:49 PM  

netweavr: Weaver95: I see the GOP is already taking up the mantra of 'taxes/deception' as their rapid response propaganda reply to this decision on obamacare.

/shrug

Worked for Clinton in 1992.


Clinton also said he wasn't going to raise taxes, then raised taxes, and got re-elected in 1996.

*head asplode*
 
2012-06-28 03:09:00 PM  

Polly Ester: So tax it is. He gets to live with the political consequences.


Then so does Mitt.
 
2012-06-28 03:09:02 PM  

IBreakdance2NIN: [fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net image 530x300]


not that this has anything at all to do with the actual topic but..

.....you really dont get how change like that progresses do you....?
 
2012-06-28 03:09:13 PM  
I haven't seen this question asked / answered yet...but I may have missed it.

People are making a point of saying "now all those morans who get free care from the ER are going to have to pay for it (in the form of this mandatory healthcare thingy)
", but those people who abuse the ER are also pretty much guaranteed to be part of the 40% of the country that doesn't pay federal income taxes...so how will this tax fit into that? Will it be the only one that they pay? Won't they just continue to pay no taxes?
 
2012-06-28 03:09:27 PM  

Itstoearly: unlikely: This is a surprise. I honestly expected the 6-3 conservative court to rule more in favor of "fark the poors because they smell"

You have no idea how the supreme court works. Their job is to judge if something is constitutional, regardless of how awesome or terrible an idea is. They do not judge value.


Youre naive.
 
2012-06-28 03:09:33 PM  
blog.tmcnet.com
PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS!
 
2012-06-28 03:09:35 PM  

SlothB77: i need a drink. this is a horrible, awful day for this country. This country is being destroyed.


:: Nelson HA HA ::
 
2012-06-28 03:09:40 PM  

Smelly McUgly: My mother-in-law got all up in arms about "COMMUNISTS!" the other day. I asked her to define what "Communism" was. She said it was a dictatorship where no one has any rights. I told her that if we only looked at the nations of central Asia and Africa "Democracy" would mean the same thing. She didn't understand.

People conflate communism and totalitarianism all the time, which is a damn shame. I think a completely communist economic system is about as much pie-in-the-sky fairytale bullshiat as a completely laissez-faire economic system, but lots of Marx's theories (base/superstructure or worker alienation from their own product) are prescient, and the actual economics MIGHT make sense in certain contexts.

Did you tell your mother-in-law that actually, true communism is bent on there being no government at all. In a sense, Marx was a libertarian! I bet that would have blown her mind!



why is it a damn shame? do me a favor and tell me about all those communist systems that were not totalitarian. you can't. because you can't implement it without totalitarianism. it's good that the average idiot inflates the two, because they are inseparable to a large degree.
 
2012-06-28 03:09:41 PM  

ForTheSakeOfArgument: I am wondering how adding millions of payers into the system will drive up premiums? Maybe someone covered this but it's getting hard to sort through the trolls and football spiking. If insurance is now mandated can the govt. put controls on how much an insurance company can charge? Say, a premium cannot exceed x% of an individuals annual income?


AFAIK, the ACA doesn't put any controls on how much insurance companies can charge - it just says they can't discriminate against anyone with pre-existing conditions (a good thing). If the cost of an insurance policy exceeds 8% of a person's income, the fed. gov't. will subsidize part of it. (I haven't parsed through all of the actual ACA text, so the % might be off...)

Unfortunately, the devil is in the details with this law.

Illegal aliens, indigent & very low-income people won't have to pay the 'no insurance' penalty, but will still receive emergency services/won't be turned away from the ER. This is same as what we have now, and the law still does nothing to address how hospitals will pay for this.

People living on the borderline of poverty may opt to pay the penalty tax instead if insurance is still too costly. However, should a person pay the penalty but still wind up having to go to the ER, we're left with the same situation as mentioned above. (Blood from a stone & all that...) Eventually, the costs will be passed along to those who *can* pay for an insurance policy.

Per the ACA, people under age 26 will be covered under their parents' policies. While this may help younger adults keep health costs down, it effectively just moves the burden to their parents. People age 65 and older can get coverage under Medicare, but with a growing number joining the system (with their expensive health care costs, esp. end-of-life care), there's no way the remaining population can support the costs of aging Baby Boomers without someone's premiums going up.

The tl;dr version: If you're age 26 to 64 and have any income whatsoever, congratulations - you're SOL & can expect to be paying for everyone else...just like you are already.
 
2012-06-28 03:09:47 PM  

NeoCortex42: Of course, this assumes medical charges don't just skyrocket to compensate and keep costs high.


Um, The ACA addresses that - The Affordable Care Act creates a Rate Review program in your state to help protect individuals and small businesses from unreasonable health insurance rate increases.
 
2012-06-28 03:09:49 PM  
My question is- If this is such a great thing, why did Obama exempt the unions? Wouldn't he want them to get in on this great deal too?
 
2012-06-28 03:09:55 PM  

Gdalescrboz: As a healthy person who can afford my own insurance i dont care either way abotu this ruling. However, for the people that are going to be required to have it, i feel bad for you. Give it 10 years and you will be looking at certain criteria you have to meet in order to be on a health care plan the government requires you to have. Acohol consumption? Smoking? High risk activities? Burger king? Gambling? Not sure what it will be like, but shiat in your personal life is not going to be the same. For better or for worse, people on required gov't healthcare have lost a chunk of personal freedom. Americans could use big brother taking away their double stacker with double cheese since they can't put it down on their own


Then why don't those rules exist in countries that have had these laws for decades already?

You men government might come in and say things like "You can't have abortions anymore"? That would be horrible!!! Oh wait they already do that!
 
2012-06-28 03:09:57 PM  

chiefsfaninkc: Sorry I am a libertarian not a conservative.


A libertarian is just a Republican that likes to smoke weed.
 
2012-06-28 03:10:22 PM  

Corvus: The rule mandated that, beginning in 2011, insurance companies would have to spend 80% to 85% of the premiums they collect on medical care instead of toward their own profits and overhead costs.


But that does NOTHING to control costs!
 
2012-06-28 03:10:40 PM  

inner ted: /hint for you sherlock: most middle class will refuse it


Most "middle class" are GAINFULLY EMPLOYED, and more likely than not covered by their employer.

Farking MCDONALDS offers healthcare, for crying out loud.
 
2012-06-28 03:10:50 PM  

chiefsfaninkc: Again freedom died today...


Because... it died because there is, effectively, a new tax?

Is that the extent of freedom's death?
 
2012-06-28 03:11:38 PM  

Cinaed: chiefsfaninkc: Again freedom died today...

Because... it died because there is, effectively, a new tax?

Is that the extent of freedom's death?


Freedom is a pussy if it can die from things like this.

/Just sayin'
 
2012-06-28 03:11:45 PM  

Lord Dimwit: chiefsfaninkc: Fluorescent Testicle: chiefsfaninkc: Then your faith is misguided. Freedom died today. Congress can now make you buy anything they want and "Tax" you if you do not.

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 316x400]

/I'm sure this has been posted already.
//Can't be posted enough.

Sorry I am a libertarian not a conservative. Freedom is the only thing that means anything everything else is a byproduct of freedom. Again freedom died today people that are celebrating its death are idiots.

I know tons of self-labeled libertarians. Why is economic freedom so much more important that social freedom? My libertarian friends talk about how they vote Republican because the Republicans want "freedom" - but what they mean is "economic freedom". The Republican Party doesn't want freedom of reproductive choice, freedom of religious choice, or freedom of marriage. If you vote for a Republican, you are implicitly saying that money-related "freedom" is more important than your freedom to do as you please with your own body or in your own bedroom. That's fine if you believe that, but own up to it.


Hey what ever you want to do in your private life is fine with me want to suck a "D" go ahead I don't care. Want to abort a child go ahead I may not like it but it is not my body. Do what ever the hell you want as long as you don't force me to do it. However you need to stay the hell out of my wallet and give me the courtesy to let me do what I want also. Which includes not using the governments monopoly on force to take from me in order to buy votes.
 
2012-06-28 03:11:48 PM  

Mrtraveler01: muck4doo: Mrtraveler01: muck4doo: SlothB77: i need a drink. this is a horrible, awful day for this country. This country is being destroyed.

You'll get over it

/From a fellow conservative

I know, I've heard people on facebook talk about leaving America over this and also talks of a revolution over this. Of course these people support RON PAUL too so maybe I shouldn't be surprised at how unhinged they're taking this.

It's times like this I really wonder how stupid Americans can be.

Actually, i shouldn't discourage the tears. They are funny to drink. Come on Conservatives. Man up! We lost this one, so what? Don't sit there and cry about it.

Needs a picture to go with that post:

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 240x180]


Mrtraveler01: muck4doo: Mrtraveler01: muck4doo: SlothB77: i need a drink. this is a horrible, awful day for this country. This country is being destroyed.

You'll get over it

/From a fellow conservative

I know, I've heard people on facebook talk about leaving America over this and also talks of a revolution over this. Of course these people support RON PAUL too so maybe I shouldn't be surprised at how unhinged they're taking this.

It's times like this I really wonder how stupid Americans can be.

Actually, i shouldn't discourage the tears. They are funny to drink. Come on Conservatives. Man up! We lost this one, so what? Don't sit there and cry about it.

Needs a picture to go with that post:

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 240x180]


I hope everything goes well. Iv'e said it before, and I'll say it again. This country needs both conservatives and liberals. One to push new ideas forward, the other to control that all new ideas aren't necessarily good. It's a great balance. Now that this is going forward, let's hope for the best.
 
2012-06-28 03:12:12 PM  
So, taking the tax hit, for me, would be $800 (1% of income), if I chose to go that route. Hmm, I'd say that's a damn small price to pay for the benefits. Of course, I have health insurance that isn't going to change, so...I'm not paying anything more. That's even better.

Quit whining about the "tax", you know you don't make enough for it to really matter. If you made enough for the "tax" to matter, you would have health insurance already.
 
2012-06-28 03:12:25 PM  

Lord Dimwit: The Republican Party doesn't want freedom of reproductive choice, freedom of religious choice, or freedom of marriage. If you vote for a Republican, you are implicitly saying that money-related "freedom" is more important than your freedom to do as you please with your own body or in your own bedroom.


Is this what it's really come down to? A Brave New World standoff between people who would trade all their economic freedom to kill their babies and sodomize their boyfriends and people who want the freedom to spend the money they've earned & run their business the way they choose?
 
2012-06-28 03:12:51 PM  

StoneColdAtheist: This may already have been posted, but if y'all haven't seen this yet:

GOP lawmakers announce Obamacare repeal on Twitter, then delete posts

My schadenfreude...let me show you it. ;^)


This is what happens when you invite Thomas and Scalia to the Koch parties and don't invite Roberts. People not all on the same page.
 
2012-06-28 03:12:52 PM  
Democrats: Dragging the Regressive-Republicans into the modern era for over 60 years.
 
2012-06-28 03:13:01 PM  

Dinki: stvdallas: . Only, Obamacare means that something we can't afford right now is just going to cost even more...and continue to run our country into even more debt.

You know that isn't true, right?

CBO and JCT estimate that enacting both pieces of legislation-H.R. 3590
and the reconciliation proposal-would produce a net reduction in federal
deficits of $143 billion over the 2010-2019 period as result of changes in
direct spending and revenues


Counting Up ObamaCare's Health Cost Inflation

Buying votes from DOLTS.
 
2012-06-28 03:13:07 PM  

I should be in the kitchen: ModernPrimitive01: Let me tell a story about why this is a good thing: 15 years ago my mother got cancer. She fought hard and won. Complete remission/surgery to remove lumps. Immediately after her surgery she was dropped from her insurance. Following her cancer, she continued to work (ran her own restaurant) but was not able to purchase health insurance. She tried everywhere, was willing to pay huge sums of money, but not a single insurer would give her a plan due to "preexisting conditions." 3 years ago she started to recognize the signs that something was wrong. She went for a blood test and boom, she had cancer again, but couldn't get it treated. Her only option was disability, something she had avoided last time because she wanted to continue to work. It took 2 years for her to get disability by that time her previously treatable cancer had become stage 4 terminal cancer. She is continuing to fight, about to start her 4th round of chemo/radiation. If she was able to get insurance before this happened not only would there be a good chance they could have cured it, but it would have been less expensive for the entire health care system. I'm telling that story to every idiot that says something stupid about the ruling today.

Thank you for sharing and I'm sorry to hear about your mother. My family went through a similar situation with my sister, who had the *gall* to get non-Hodgkins lymphoma at the age of 22. She passed away this past winter from a different condition (cerebral hemorrhage, out of the blue), but I have to wonder if she hadn't been denied coverage all those years, if she'd still be alive... If there were underlying issues that she could have taken care of... She always had a job, from the age of 16 until she died at 37, but her employer didn't provide insurance coverage and private insurers either considered her uninsurable or put her in the high-risk pool which there was no farkin' way she could afford.


My wife was diagnosed with thyroid cancer when she was 22. Long story short, she had to go on Kaiser HMO, who damn near killed her, the cancer came back 10 years later. She finally got on a good plan after a number of years and is in complete remission now, but that was really close. She's on all sorts of meds to keep her alive right now, but at least she won't have to worry about pre-ex and outright denial when she changes jobs.
 
2012-06-28 03:13:37 PM  
www.girlpants.org
MEDICAL BANKRUPTCY!
 
2012-06-28 03:13:55 PM  

Lord Dimwit: I know tons of self-labeled libertarians. Why is economic freedom so much more important that social freedom? My libertarian friends talk about how they vote Republican because the Republicans want "freedom" - but what they mean is "economic freedom". The Republican Party doesn't want freedom of reproductive choice, freedom of religious choice, or freedom of marriage. If you vote for a Republican, you are implicitly saying that money-related "freedom" is more important than your freedom to do as you please with your own body or in your own bedroom. That's fine if you believe that, but own up to it.


And what's ironic is the Constitution actually lays out that the federal government can regulate business. It doesn't say that about your morality laws and in fact even has rights to protect you from that.
 
2012-06-28 03:14:04 PM  

Corvus: Gdalescrboz: As a healthy person who can afford my own insurance i dont care either way abotu this ruling. However, for the people that are going to be required to have it, i feel bad for you. Give it 10 years and you will be looking at certain criteria you have to meet in order to be on a health care plan the government requires you to have. Acohol consumption? Smoking? High risk activities? Burger king? Gambling? Not sure what it will be like, but shiat in your personal life is not going to be the same. For better or for worse, people on required gov't healthcare have lost a chunk of personal freedom. Americans could use big brother taking away their double stacker with double cheese since they can't put it down on their own

Then why don't those rules exist in countries that have had these laws for decades already?

You men government might come in and say things like "You can't have abortions anymore"? That would be horrible!!! Oh wait they already do that!


Havent you heard, England and Canada dont have alcohol and tobacco.

THIS IS WHAT REPUBLICANS ACTUALLY BELIEVE!
 
2012-06-28 03:14:22 PM  

Gdalescrboz: As a healthy person who can afford my own insurance i dont care either way abotu this ruling. However, for the people that are going to be required to have it, i feel bad for you. Give it 10 years and you will be looking at certain criteria you have to meet in order to be on a health care plan the government requires you to have. Acohol consumption? Smoking? High risk activities? Burger king? Gambling? Not sure what it will be like, but shiat in your personal life is not going to be the same. For better or for worse, people on required gov't healthcare have lost a chunk of personal freedom. Americans could use big brother taking away their double stacker with double cheese since they can't put it down on their own


Except the mandate isn't mandatory.

You can opt out, pay your tax and still have time to swing by the gas station for a pack of smokes and something deliciously artery clogging.

To be serious for my last sentance, if this sticks long term it will be very interesting to see what develops. There are already some very intrusive things going on out there and these are initiatives by insurance companies and insurers... government not even involved. In fact, the new big brother seems to be a corporation with a hall pass from the government.I fear my government much less than I do those crazy all-for-profit bastards.

Either way, I dont know about double stackers but if someone tries to get between me and my biannual Whopper w/ cheese, they got another thing coming.
 
2012-06-28 03:14:39 PM  

Dinki: NeoCortex42: Of course, this assumes medical charges don't just skyrocket to compensate and keep costs high.

Um, The ACA addresses that - The Affordable Care Act creates a Rate Review program in your state to help protect individuals and small businesses from unreasonable health insurance rate increases.


Oh, I get that the insurance rate increase is capped to meet the needs of paying for healthcare services. My projected problem is not insurance companies, but the hospitals increasing the "cost" of certain procedures since more people would be insured.

What I'm concerned about is something similar to college tuition: As it becomes easier for more people to get student loans, colleges just raise tuition since more people can afford it.

I admit I'm not an expert on this and honestly find healthcare and it's related economy way too complicated.
 
2012-06-28 03:15:12 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: penetrating_virga: Obama: You insurance companies must now offer X.
Insurance CEO: Raise all premiums to pay for X (and add an extra margin for my bonus!)


What a splendid healthcare "fix." A true victory for all!

Problem: 80% of revenue must be used for healthcare.


Sounds like quite an encouragement to keep healthcare costs low... right?
 
2012-06-28 03:15:17 PM  

chiefsfaninkc: Lord Dimwit: chiefsfaninkc: Fluorescent Testicle: chiefsfaninkc: Then your faith is misguided. Freedom died today. Congress can now make you buy anything they want and "Tax" you if you do not.

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 316x400]

/I'm sure this has been posted already.
//Can't be posted enough.

Sorry I am a libertarian not a conservative. Freedom is the only thing that means anything everything else is a byproduct of freedom. Again freedom died today people that are celebrating its death are idiots.

I know tons of self-labeled libertarians. Why is economic freedom so much more important that social freedom? My libertarian friends talk about how they vote Republican because the Republicans want "freedom" - but what they mean is "economic freedom". The Republican Party doesn't want freedom of reproductive choice, freedom of religious choice, or freedom of marriage. If you vote for a Republican, you are implicitly saying that money-related "freedom" is more important than your freedom to do as you please with your own body or in your own bedroom. That's fine if you believe that, but own up to it.

Hey what ever you want to do in your private life is fine with me want to suck a "D" go ahead I don't care. Want to abort a child go ahead I may not like it but it is not my body. Do what ever the hell you want as long as you don't force me to do it. However you need to stay the hell out of my wallet and give me the courtesy to let me do what I want also. Which includes not using the governments monopoly on force to take from me in order to buy votes.


So, Lord Dimwit, he effectively agreed with your second paragraph. Libertarian my ass.
 
2012-06-28 03:15:41 PM  

The_Sponge: Rwa2play: I like how you and your brethren keep trying to push this as a talking point when, in fact, it's not.

But do keep farking that chicken.

You guys can't even admit that he broke that promise. At least keep it real by admitting that he did, but you don't mind because you like the end result.


If I promise my wife I'm not going to buy a blue car and I come home with a red car, and two years later my kid dumps a can of blue paint on the car and my wife screams, "BUT YOU PROMISED ME THAT YOU WOULD NOT BUY A BLUE CAR!" would I be allowed to punch her in the face like you deserve to be?
 
2012-06-28 03:15:59 PM  

MurphyMurphy: Gdalescrboz: As a healthy person who can afford my own insurance i dont care either way abotu this ruling. However, for the people that are going to be required to have it, i feel bad for you. Give it 10 years and you will be looking at certain criteria you have to meet in order to be on a health care plan the government requires you to have. Acohol consumption? Smoking? High risk activities? Burger king? Gambling? Not sure what it will be like, but shiat in your personal life is not going to be the same. For better or for worse, people on required gov't healthcare have lost a chunk of personal freedom. Americans could use big brother taking away their double stacker with double cheese since they can't put it down on their own

Except the mandate isn't mandatory.

You can opt out, pay your tax and still have time to swing by the gas station for a pack of smokes and something deliciously artery clogging.

To be serious for my last sentance, if this sticks long term it will be very interesting to see what develops. There are already some very intrusive things going on out there and these are initiatives by insurance companies and insurers... government not even involved. In fact, the new big brother seems to be a corporation with a hall pass from the government.I fear my government much less than I do those crazy all-for-profit bastards.

Either way, I dont know about double stackers but if someone tries to get between me and my biannual Whopper w/ cheese, they got another thing coming.


That should have said insurance companies and employers.
 
2012-06-28 03:16:15 PM  

NateGrey: Democrats: Dragging the Regressive-Republicans into the modern era for over 60 years.



the democrats were the party of the KKK 100 years ago

funny how that works out
 
2012-06-28 03:16:47 PM  
i208.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-28 03:17:14 PM  

relcec: Smelly McUgly: My mother-in-law got all up in arms about "COMMUNISTS!" the other day. I asked her to define what "Communism" was. She said it was a dictatorship where no one has any rights. I told her that if we only looked at the nations of central Asia and Africa "Democracy" would mean the same thing. She didn't understand.

People conflate communism and totalitarianism all the time, which is a damn shame. I think a completely communist economic system is about as much pie-in-the-sky fairytale bullshiat as a completely laissez-faire economic system, but lots of Marx's theories (base/superstructure or worker alienation from their own product) are prescient, and the actual economics MIGHT make sense in certain contexts.

Did you tell your mother-in-law that actually, true communism is bent on there being no government at all. In a sense, Marx was a libertarian! I bet that would have blown her mind!


why is it a damn shame? do me a favor and tell me about all those communist systems that were not totalitarian. you can't. because you can't implement it without totalitarianism. it's good that the average idiot inflates the two, because they are inseparable to a large degree.


Well, since the world has not yet seen a true communist society (at least on a modern scale), we don't know what it takes to implement it.

Only a moron would think that Soviet Russia was a communist society. Or totalitarian (and very laissez-faire capitalist) China, for that matter.
 
2012-06-28 03:17:21 PM  

chiefsfaninkc: Lord Dimwit: chiefsfaninkc: Fluorescent Testicle: chiefsfaninkc: Then your faith is misguided. Freedom died today. Congress can now make you buy anything they want and "Tax" you if you do not.

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 316x400]

/I'm sure this has been posted already.
//Can't be posted enough.

Sorry I am a libertarian not a conservative. Freedom is the only thing that means anything everything else is a byproduct of freedom. Again freedom died today people that are celebrating its death are idiots.

I know tons of self-labeled libertarians. Why is economic freedom so much more important that social freedom? My libertarian friends talk about how they vote Republican because the Republicans want "freedom" - but what they mean is "economic freedom". The Republican Party doesn't want freedom of reproductive choice, freedom of religious choice, or freedom of marriage. If you vote for a Republican, you are implicitly saying that money-related "freedom" is more important than your freedom to do as you please with your own body or in your own bedroom. That's fine if you believe that, but own up to it.

Hey what ever you want to do in your private life is fine with me want to suck a "D" go ahead I don't care. Want to abort a child go ahead I may not like it but it is not my body. Do what ever the hell you want as long as you don't force me to do it. However you need to stay the hell out of my wallet and give me the courtesy to let me do what I want also. Which includes not using the governments monopoly on force to take from me in order to buy votes.


...except that by voting Republican, you're saying that "what you do in your private life is fine with me, but I'm going to vote for people who think otherwise and will do everything in their power to mess with your rights, because it's my wallet's freedom which is more important than your freedom."

I think you missed my point - why is economic freedom more important than social freedom? And is the Democratic Party's infringement on economic freedom (if you choose to look at it that way) graver than the Republican Party's infringement on economic freedom? Why or why not?
 
Displayed 50 of 3329 comments


Oldest | « | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | » | Newest


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report