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.

(Huffington Post)   Why is the Romney campaign so offended by Joe Biden's remark about chains? Because then they don't have to pretend to be offended by Joe Biden's remark about financial regulation   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 74
    More: Obvious, Joe Biden, obama, Dana Milbank, common misconceptions, financial regulations, out-of-pocket expenses, free market economy  
•       •       •

1009 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Aug 2012 at 2:28 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-20 01:07:52 PM  
It is only in a Republican's mind that a clear refutation of some policy objective is offensive because of race baiting.
 
2012-08-20 02:15:54 PM  
The GOP seriously wants to create a scandal that will distract from the ongoing "anti-women, anti-middle-class, anti-immigrant, anti-minority" narrative that is increasingly sticking to Romney and the GOP in general. This sort of thing is them trying to use who they (foolishly) perceive as the Obama Campaign's weakest link to try and create that.

Unfortunately, not only do they have a big problem in that Romney and Ryan keep opening their mouths, but folks like Akins are generating REAL political scandals on an almost weekly basis. As such, their construction projects falter almost as soon as they begin.
 
2012-08-20 02:30:06 PM  
the only real problem i have with biden's comment is that it implies that wall street and the banking system doesn't currently have us in chains.
 
2012-08-20 02:31:22 PM  

thomps: the only real problem i have with biden's comment is that it implies that wall street and the banking system doesn't currently have us in chains.


Hah, I actually thought that as well the first time I heard his comment too. I was like "WTF are you talking about remove the chains. Wait, you think they're chained up right now?"

Glad I wasn't the only one.
 
2012-08-20 02:31:51 PM  
Motherf*cker told the truth. It shall not stand.
 
2012-08-20 02:34:55 PM  
I understand the context in which he made the statement. Given his audience, I still think his choice of words was deliberately chosen to race-bait. As almost everything this idiot says, he could have worded it better.
 
2012-08-20 02:34:56 PM  
They should also be offended that William Jennings Bryan accused the Republicans of wanting to crucify mankind. That's religion-baiting!
 
2012-08-20 02:35:10 PM  
I heard an excerpt from Biden's speech. It was well thought out, and was very effective.

Though because this is America, the GOP heard the chains dogwhistle and went after it like a rabid rottweiler.

/See, there is this thing called metaphor
 
2012-08-20 02:41:39 PM  
The only thing silly about the Biden quote was the use of "Y'all"... Otherwise, the remark was fairly spot on.
 
2012-08-20 02:42:00 PM  

radioshack: I understand the context in which he made the statement. Given his audience, I still think his choice of words was deliberately chosen to race-bait. As almost everything this idiot says, he could have worded it better.


Okay, so he deliberately chose to race-bait, but he could have race baited better? I don't get what you're trying to say.

What's the difference in between a person that has to go to work 16 hours a day to pay for his kid's health care and one who has to go to work 16 hours a day or get beaten?
 
2012-08-20 02:42:15 PM  

radioshack: As almost everything this idiot says, he could have worded it better.


If my ouija board is correct, then Tony Snow agrees with your nubianrdly assessment.
 
2012-08-20 02:45:00 PM  

keylock71: The only thing silly about the Biden quote was the use of "Y'all"... Otherwise, the remark was fairly spot on.


upload.wikimedia.org
"It's f*ckin' 'youse guys', Biden!"
 
2012-08-20 02:48:17 PM  

ox45tallboy: radioshack: I understand the context in which he made the statement. Given his audience, I still think his choice of words was deliberately chosen to race-bait. As almost everything this idiot says, he could have worded it better.

Okay, so he deliberately chose to race-bait, but he could have race baited better? I don't get what you're trying to say.

What's the difference in between a person that has to go to work 16 hours a day to pay for his kid's health care and one who has to go to work 16 hours a day or get beaten?


Sorry if I didn't make myself clear. His choice of words was deliberate in order to race-bait. He could have made his point with no race-baiting whatsoever.
 
2012-08-20 02:51:23 PM  

Planterz: radioshack: As almost everything this idiot says, he could have worded it better.

If my ouija board is correct, then Tony Snow agrees with your nubianrdly assessment.


I guess you believe his choice of words was spot-on and that he could not have made his point in any other way than telling his largely African American audience that they would be "back in chains".
 
2012-08-20 02:54:14 PM  

radioshack: Sorry if I didn't make myself clear. His choice of words was deliberate in order to race-bait. He could have made his point with no race-baiting whatsoever.


Okay, let's assume you wanted to make the same point, that further deregulation of businesses and the financial sector will result in involuntary servitude as a matter of survival. How would you have made this point to a largely African-American audience?
 
2012-08-20 02:58:19 PM  

ox45tallboy: radioshack: Sorry if I didn't make myself clear. His choice of words was deliberate in order to race-bait. He could have made his point with no race-baiting whatsoever.

Okay, let's assume you wanted to make the same point, that further deregulation of businesses and the financial sector will result in involuntary servitude as a matter of survival. How would you have made this point to a largely African-American audience?


Something about having to stay in field instead of coming into the house?
 
2012-08-20 02:58:35 PM  

ox45tallboy: radioshack: Sorry if I didn't make myself clear. His choice of words was deliberate in order to race-bait. He could have made his point with no race-baiting whatsoever.

Okay, let's assume you wanted to make the same point, that further deregulation of businesses and the financial sector will result in involuntary servitude as a matter of survival. How would you have made this point to a largely African-American audience?


Re: your homework assignment for me. I have one for you first. Rephrase your question to where it's not a loaded one, i.e. "involuntary servitude", and perhaps I will answer it.
 
2012-08-20 03:04:39 PM  

radioshack: ox45tallboy: radioshack: Sorry if I didn't make myself clear. His choice of words was deliberate in order to race-bait. He could have made his point with no race-baiting whatsoever.

Okay, let's assume you wanted to make the same point, that further deregulation of businesses and the financial sector will result in involuntary servitude as a matter of survival. How would you have made this point to a largely African-American audience?

Re: your homework assignment for me. I have one for you first. Rephrase your question to where it's not a loaded one, i.e. "involuntary servitude", and perhaps I will answer it.


Well, when we have a large underclass that has little access to labor opportunities, no access to capital, and is generally in debt to cover basic living expenses, what other metaphor would you use to describe their situation other than indentured servitude?

It's an effective metaphor for a reason, many people feel their situations are relevantly similar.
 
2012-08-20 03:08:27 PM  

thomps: the only real problem i have with biden's comment is that it implies that wall street and the banking system doesn't currently have us in chains.


The credit card reforms put into place definitely helped with that, though. There's still huge problems with the banking system and wall street, but it's gotten better.
 
2012-08-20 03:09:40 PM  

radioshack: Re: your homework assignment for me. I have one for you first. Rephrase your question to where it's not a loaded one, i.e. "involuntary servitude", and perhaps I will answer it.


Ah! Here we have the crux of the problem! By asking you to rephrase his point, you see it as a "loaded question".

Do you disagree with his point, that deregulation of business and the financial sector will result in involuntary servitude as a matter of survival?

Do you think I am wrong about what his point actually was?
 
2012-08-20 03:10:51 PM  

ox45tallboy: radioshack: I understand the context in which he made the statement. Given his audience, I still think his choice of words was deliberately chosen to race-bait. As almost everything this idiot says, he could have worded it better.

Okay, so he deliberately chose to race-bait, but he could have race baited better? I don't get what you're trying to say.

What's the difference in between a person that has to go to work 16 hours a day to pay for his kid's health care and one who has to go to work 16 hours a day or get beaten?


No, he means that it was acceptable racism.
 
2012-08-20 03:14:06 PM  

palladiate: Well, when we have a large underclass that has little access to labor opportunities, no access to capital, and is generally in debt to cover basic living expenses, what other metaphor would you use to describe their situation other than indentured servitude?


I would use "involuntary", especially when some financial companies will take you to court and force you to pay exorbitant interest rates on loans they should have never given you in the first place, and the only way you can do this is by working a crappy job, since due to the credit reporting agencies, you'll never get a good job while so far in debt.
 
2012-08-20 03:34:46 PM  

ox45tallboy: radioshack: I understand the context in which he made the statement. Given his audience, I still think his choice of words was deliberately chosen to race-bait. As almost everything this idiot says, he could have worded it better.

Okay, so he deliberately chose to race-bait, but he could have race baited better? I don't get what you're trying to say.

What's the difference in between a person that has to go to work 16 hours a day to pay for his kid's health care and one who has to go to work 16 hours a day or get beaten?


The illusion of freedom
 
2012-08-20 03:39:33 PM  

mitEj: The illusion of freedom


I'd say the slave is better off, since he can be morally justified in running away.
 
2012-08-20 03:40:12 PM  

palladiate: radioshack: ox45tallboy: radioshack: Sorry if I didn't make myself clear. His choice of words was deliberate in order to race-bait. He could have made his point with no race-baiting whatsoever.

Okay, let's assume you wanted to make the same point, that further deregulation of businesses and the financial sector will result in involuntary servitude as a matter of survival. How would you have made this point to a largely African-American audience?

Re: your homework assignment for me. I have one for you first. Rephrase your question to where it's not a loaded one, i.e. "involuntary servitude", and perhaps I will answer it.

Well, when we have a large underclass that has little access to labor opportunities, no access to capital, and is generally in debt to cover basic living expenses, what other metaphor would you use to describe their situation other than indentured servitude?

It's an effective metaphor for a reason, many people feel their situations are relevantly similar.


He could have said EXACTLY what he said, minus the "chain" aside. He had a good argument up until that point. There was no need to add that in. And then to change his cadence and to use the word "y'all" was just an added affront.
 
2012-08-20 03:43:30 PM  

Lando Lincoln: thomps: the only real problem i have with biden's comment is that it implies that wall street and the banking system doesn't currently have us in chains.

The credit card reforms put into place definitely helped with that, though. There's still huge problems with the banking system and wall street, but it's gotten better.


Biden and the credit card industry are BFFs. There is a reason that Fight Club takes place in Delaware.
 
2012-08-20 03:46:08 PM  

ox45tallboy: palladiate: Well, when we have a large underclass that has little access to labor opportunities, no access to capital, and is generally in debt to cover basic living expenses, what other metaphor would you use to describe their situation other than indentured servitude?

I would use "involuntary", especially when some financial companies will take you to court and force you to pay exorbitant interest rates on loans they should have never given you in the first place, and the only way you can do this is by working a crappy job, since due to the credit reporting agencies, you'll never get a good job while so far in debt.


It's not "involuntary" dumbass. If you don't borrow money for crap you can't afford then you will never be a "slave". Are the banks assholes? Yes. But they tell you they're an asshole upfront through documents that you sign agreeing to all their terms. If you choose to deal with them on their terms that is not "involuntary". Perhaps you should direct your anger at our education system that for some reason believes that educating our kids on financial issues is not important. B
 
2012-08-20 03:47:14 PM  

radioshack: He could have said EXACTLY what he said, minus the "chain" aside. He had a good argument up until that point. There was no need to add that in. And then to change his cadence and to use the word "y'all" was just an added affront.


So you don't disagree with his point?

And what's wrong with "y'all"? I've lived in the South all my life, and I'm sorry, but you have no freaking clue what you are talking about if you think "y'all" is anything "black" or "ebonics" or "the way black folk talk". It's the way everyone talks.

Furthermore, if you agree with his point, then how would you have stated it? Simply omitted the word "chains"? As in,

"They're going to put y'all back in."

Let's hear an example of your idea for an effective phrasing of this point,
 
2012-08-20 03:54:08 PM  

radioshack: It's not "involuntary" dumbass. If you don't borrow money for crap you can't afford then you will never be a "slave". Are the banks assholes? Yes. But they tell you they're an asshole upfront through documents that you sign agreeing to all their terms. If you choose to deal with them on their terms that is not "involuntary". Perhaps you should direct your anger at our education system that for some reason believes that educating our kids on financial issues is not important. B


Hmmm... "crap you can't afford"... You mean crap like a house? Or you mean crap like college? Or maybe you mean crap like medical bills to keep oneself or a close family member alive? I guess you're right, no one should ever borrow money for crap like that.

You act like the guy selling bottled water for $10 at the Woodstock '99 concert who said, "if you don't like it, don't buy it." Well, water is something a person needs to stay alive. So the choice becomes "pay $10 for a bottle of water" or "suffer from dehydration". That's not much of a choice.

And for the record, I have plenty of anger at the educational system, but mostly at the Republicans who want to cut funding and stop teaching things like personal economics. Call me when a Democratic Presidential Candidate says there are too many teachers and we shouldn't be helping as many people attend college.
 
2012-08-20 04:00:01 PM  

ox45tallboy: radioshack: He could have said EXACTLY what he said, minus the "chain" aside. He had a good argument up until that point. There was no need to add that in. And then to change his cadence and to use the word "y'all" was just an added affront.

So you don't disagree with his point?

And what's wrong with "y'all"? I've lived in the South all my life, and I'm sorry, but you have no freaking clue what you are talking about if you think "y'all" is anything "black" or "ebonics" or "the way black folk talk". It's the way everyone talks.

Furthermore, if you agree with his point, then how would you have stated it? Simply omitted the word "chains"? As in,

"They're going to put y'all back in."

Let's hear an example of your idea for an effective phrasing of this point,


I agree with Biden. But I think the race baiting was a poor decision. If you can't understand that you're simply being obtuse. I live deeper south than you. I live on Louisiana gulf coast. Biden is a north easterner. they laugh at me there when I say "y'all". Northeasterners do not say y'all. It's further evidence that Biden was race-baiting. He went out of his normal speech patterns and cadence to sound like a southern preacher in order to gain more sympathy for his views. It was idiotic and obvious race baiting.
 
2012-08-20 04:07:15 PM  
Biden's race baiting was pathetic.
Did you listen to the tone that he delivered that line? I bet he thought he was being clever.

At least he didn't plagiarize the line though, so he is doing better than normal.
 
2012-08-20 04:09:22 PM  

radioshack: change his cadence and to use the word "y'all" was just an added affront.


This is what playing the race card badly looks like. Just for future reference.
 
2012-08-20 04:10:13 PM  

ox45tallboy: radioshack: It's not "involuntary" dumbass. If you don't borrow money for crap you can't afford then you will never be a "slave". Are the banks assholes? Yes. But they tell you they're an asshole upfront through documents that you sign agreeing to all their terms. If you choose to deal with them on their terms that is not "involuntary". Perhaps you should direct your anger at our education system that for some reason believes that educating our kids on financial issues is not important. B

Hmmm... "crap you can't afford"... You mean crap like a house? Or you mean crap like college? Or maybe you mean crap like medical bills to keep oneself or a close family member alive? I guess you're right, no one should ever borrow money for crap like that.

You act like the guy selling bottled water for $10 at the Woodstock '99 concert who said, "if you don't like it, don't buy it." Well, water is something a person needs to stay alive. So the choice becomes "pay $10 for a bottle of water" or "suffer from dehydration". That's not much of a choice.

And for the record, I have plenty of anger at the educational system, but mostly at the Republicans who want to cut funding and stop teaching things like personal economics. Call me when a Democratic Presidential Candidate says there are too many teachers and we shouldn't be helping as many people attend college.


Buying a house that you can't afford is stupid. College has gotten so expensive that for many it's not a good decision. Direct your anger at educators who have inflated the cost of education beyond a normal person's means. Same with medical care. I broke my arm in France and the total bill, with no subsidy whatsoever, was 100 bucks. Direct your anger at the medical system here that rapes people for their gain. You went to Woodstock '99? I see you have no taste in music, so why am I replying to you?

Republicans in my state push for more economic education such as balancing checkbooks, etc. and less learning how to put a condom on. Your argument is invalid.
 
2012-08-20 04:10:41 PM  

radioshack: But I think the race baiting was a poor decision


tenpoundsofcheese: Biden's race baiting was pathetic.


Why do "you people" think that "y'all" was race baiting?
 
2012-08-20 04:17:49 PM  

ox45tallboy: radioshack: But I think the race baiting was a poor decision

tenpoundsofcheese: Biden's race baiting was pathetic.

Why do "you people" think that "y'all" was race baiting?


The whole sentence was race baiting. Further proof that it was indeed race baiting was his black preacher cadence when he said it and the use of the word "y'all", a term that is not used by Bostonites.

Let me ask you, do you really think he would have said this if he was in front of a Caucasian Bostonite audience?
 
2012-08-20 04:23:03 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Biden's race baiting was pathetic.
Did you listen to the tone that he delivered that line? I bet he thought he was being clever.

At least he didn't plagiarize the line though, so he is doing better than normal.


Who did Biden offend?
 
2012-08-20 04:26:05 PM  

radioshack: He could have said EXACTLY what he said, minus the "chain" aside. He had a good argument up until that point. There was no need to add that in. And then to change his cadence and to use the word "y'all" was just an added affront.


Well, I'm inclined to ask who it is affronting? I'm a native North Carolinian, and a conservative. It didn't affront me, but my lineage is entirely post-slavery era. I couldn't see how it's an affront to any black folks in his audience. Maybe some folks are still bristled by the reminder of how their forefathers systematically disenfranchised an entire people, physically, economically, and politically?

There is a long history in rhetoric, dating back to the dawn of written records, that make inflammatory metaphors to drive support for ideas. The usefulness of such a device is to unify support among those who are very likely to agree. Anyone who would be angered is largely already unpersuadable. I'm guessing his audience largely agreed with his points. Biden is pretty good at speaking to such audiences. I'm impressed by him even when I don't agree with him.

radioshack: It's not "involuntary" dumbass.


You weren't responding to me here, but I feel compelled to answer this. It's not "involuntary" by any means. It is very close to indentured servitude, in that many people felt their only hope at basic survival and social mobility was to sell themselves. While it was to a varying degree "voluntary," we as a society have long decided that this system was barbaric and inhuman. It seems antithetical to our principles to allow this to occur, and certainly immoral to put fellow humans into the position they are pressured into it as a best-choice.

And for the week of "inflammatory rhetoric from politicians," this raises barely more than "this is something he feels strongly about" and there's certainly some area for civil debate over the concerns of the lower class and their opportunities. The award for "horribly inappropriate" goes to our friend from Missouri that seems to think rape pregnancies are nature's way of saying "the biatch wanted it." They might be playing the same league, but one is a grounder to first and the other is a wild hit that leads to a triple play.

You'll have to pardon us if this just doesn't seem recap worthy.
 
2012-08-20 04:30:54 PM  

radioshack: Buying a house that you can't afford is stupid.


I don't disagree with this statement, however, shouldn't some of the onus be on the person doing the selling? Aren't they just taking advantage of someone's stupidity?

radioshack: College has gotten so expensive that for many it's not a good decision. Direct your anger at educators who have inflated the cost of education beyond a normal person's means.


I believe you are misinformed here when you state that you believe that "educators" are responsible for inflating the cost of education. The increases come from the Trustees, not the professors. The Trustees are pressured to do this by the loan sharks who have so much influence in Congress that they have exempted student loans from bankruptcy court! I lay the blame for the cost of education at the feet of

a.) The government for allowing the loan sharks to have so much influence
b.) The Trustees for listening to the loan sharks and charging outrageous fees for things like paying Snooki $32,000 to speak at Rutgers.
c.) The voters who keep voting in Republicans that do this kind of crap.

radioshack: Same with medical care. I broke my arm in France and the total bill, with no subsidy whatsoever, was 100 bucks. Direct your anger at the medical system here that rapes people for their gain.


My anger is already directed at the medical system here. This is one of the things I am talking about, and what Joe Biden was talking about. Forcing someone to go into debt to cover medical expenses, and then forcing them to work off the Court judgement, when their only other option is allow themselves or their loved ones to go without medical care, is putting people in chains.

radioshack: You went to Woodstock '99? I see you have no taste in music, so why am I replying to you?


I didn't go to Woodstock 99. I used that as an example - the vendor was selling a product that people needed, not wanted, and acted as if it was their own fault for needing it in the first place, and felt justified in artificially inflating the price due to demand.

radioshack: Republicans in my state push for more economic education such as balancing checkbooks, etc. and less learning how to put a condom on. Your argument is invalid.


No, my argument is perfectly valid when the Republican candidate for President says we need fewer teachers. If Republicans in your state are actively supporting this guy without condemning this particular viewpoint, then they are just as much at fault.

(I believe you can disagree with some views of a candidate and still believe he or she is the best person for the job without being a hypocrite, as long as you distance yourself from those views.)

So what state are you in? Tell us so we can point and laugh at those Republicans, especially if they don't believe in comprehensive sex ed.

.
 
2012-08-20 04:35:55 PM  

radioshack: Let me ask you, do you really think he would have said this if he was in front of a Caucasian Bostonite audience?


Would he have talked about what a great season the Yankees were having, or would he have mentioned how great the other Boston teams were doing? If he had said something about Tom Brady, would you have said he was "Patriot-baiting"?

Why can a politician not discuss the specific parts of his plan that affect the audience he is speaking to?
 
2012-08-20 04:38:34 PM  

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: The GOP seriously wants to create a scandal that will distract from the ongoing "anti-women, anti-middle-class, anti-immigrant, anti-minority" narrative that is increasingly sticking to Romney and the GOP in general. This sort of thing is them trying to use who they (foolishly) perceive as the Obama Campaign's weakest link to try and create that.

Unfortunately, not only do they have a big problem in that Romney and Ryan keep opening their mouths, but folks like Akins are generating REAL political scandals on an almost weekly basis. As such, their construction projects falter almost as soon as they begin.


Yes, Republicans certainly want to steer the conversation away from the Democrats' contrived campaign talking points to their own contrived campaign talking points.

Both sides bad.

So, vote Biden. For shop boss.
 
2012-08-20 04:41:27 PM  

Cletus C.: So, vote Biden. For shop boss.


lh3.ggpht.com
 
2012-08-20 04:46:08 PM  

palladiate: radioshack: He could have said EXACTLY what he said, minus the "chain" aside. He had a good argument up until that point. There was no need to add that in. And then to change his cadence and to use the word "y'all" was just an added affront.

Well, I'm inclined to ask who it is affronting? I'm a native North Carolinian, and a conservative. It didn't affront me, but my lineage is entirely post-slavery era. I couldn't see how it's an affront to any black folks in his audience. Maybe some folks are still bristled by the reminder of how their forefathers systematically disenfranchised an entire people, physically, economically, and politically?

There is a long history in rhetoric, dating back to the dawn of written records, that make inflammatory metaphors to drive support for ideas. The usefulness of such a device is to unify support among those who are very likely to agree. Anyone who would be angered is largely already unpersuadable. I'm guessing his audience largely agreed with his points. Biden is pretty good at speaking to such audiences. I'm impressed by him even when I don't agree with him.

radioshack: It's not "involuntary" dumbass.

You weren't responding to me here, but I feel compelled to answer this. It's not "involuntary" by any means. It is very close to indentured servitude, in that many people felt their only hope at basic survival and social mobility was to sell themselves. While it was to a varying degree "voluntary," we as a society have long decided that this system was barbaric and inhuman. It seems antithetical to our principles to allow this to occur, and certainly immoral to put fellow humans into the position they are pressured into it as a best-choice.

And for the week of "inflammatory rhetoric from politicians," this raises barely more than "this is something he feels strongly about" and there's certainly some area for civil debate over the concerns of the lower class and their opportunities. The award for "horribly inappropriate" goes to our friend from Missouri that seems to think rape pregnancies are nature's way of saying "the biatch wanted it." They might be playing the same league, but one is a grounder to first and the other is a wild hit that leads to a triple play.

You'll have to pardon us if this just doesn't seem recap worthy.


Sorry to quote your whole post, but I'm on iPhone and there's no ther way to quote.

Yes the "legitimate rape" thing is ridiculous. Being a socially liberal/ecomic conservative type of guy, this was extremely offensive. I think it was the most ridiculous thing said by any politician THIS YEAR. But the chance of this guy's beliefs effecting abortion laws is minuscule. especially now since it looks like he's pulling out of the race.

Things such as abortion and gay marriage are not decided by legislators, i believe they're decided by the populace. Abortion Was debated for decades, it wasn't until the majority of the populace decided it was ok that the law was changed. Same with gay marriage, only when the majority believe in it will laws change to reflect that. We are getting close.

Economic issues, however, are much more influenced in the near-term by legislators.

I believe your definition of indentured servitude is wrong. I need a job to pay for food and water and housing. Does that make me an indentured servitude to my employer? After all, if I don't have a job I can't have any of those things. You argue that I'm an indentured servant because I'm tied to another entity for my survival.

If someone needs housing and can't afford it, the answer is not to borrow money to buy a house. The answer is to rent an affordable apartment. You will pay the same amount as buying a house but will not owe a bank anything at all. The problem of people owing banks for hospital debt is not a problem with the banks, it's a problem of unreasonable and outrageous fees charged by hospitals. To attack the entity that gives you the money to pay your debt is misplaced anger in my opinion.
 
2012-08-20 04:49:15 PM  

mrshowrules: tenpoundsofcheese: Biden's race baiting was pathetic.
Did you listen to the tone that he delivered that line? I bet he thought he was being clever.

At least he didn't plagiarize the line though, so he is doing better than normal.

Who did Biden offend?



The Republican base? They're the only ones who even care about this from what I can tell...

Guess they're not going to vote for Obama now... : (
 
2012-08-20 04:52:50 PM  

radioshack: I broke my arm in France and the total bill, with no subsidy whatsoever, was 100 bucks.


It cost you $100 to have your arm broken in France? That sounds way high. How much does a baseball bat cost over there?

It is so cute that you think there was no subsidy whatsoever involved if you actually meant the $100 was to do an exam, xray, set the arm, etc.
 
2012-08-20 04:53:34 PM  

ox45tallboy: radioshack: Buying a house that you can't afford is stupid.

I don't disagree with this statement, however, shouldn't some of the onus be on the person doing the selling? Aren't they just taking advantage of someone's stupidity?

radioshack: College has gotten so expensive that for many it's not a good decision. Direct your anger at educators who have inflated the cost of education beyond a normal person's means.

I believe you are misinformed here when you state that you believe that "educators" are responsible for inflating the cost of education. The increases come from the Trustees, not the professors. The Trustees are pressured to do this by the loan sharks who have so much influence in Congress that they have exempted student loans from bankruptcy court! I lay the blame for the cost of education at the feet of

a.) The government for allowing the loan sharks to have so much influence
b.) The Trustees for listening to the loan sharks and charging outrageous fees for things like paying Snooki $32,000 to speak at Rutgers.
c.) The voters who keep voting in Republicans that do this kind of crap.

radioshack: Same with medical care. I broke my arm in France and the total bill, with no subsidy whatsoever, was 100 bucks. Direct your anger at the medical system here that rapes people for their gain.

My anger is already directed at the medical system here. This is one of the things I am talking about, and what Joe Biden was talking about. Forcing someone to go into debt to cover medical expenses, and then forcing them to work off the Court judgement, when their only other option is allow themselves or their loved ones to go without medical care, is putting people in chains.

radioshack: You went to Woodstock '99? I see you have no taste in music, so why am I replying to you?

I didn't go to Woodstock 99. I used that as an example - the vendor was selling a product that people needed, not wanted, and acted as if it was their own fault for needing it in the first place, and felt justified in artificially inflating the price due to demand.

radioshack: Republicans in my state push for more economic education such as balancing checkbooks, etc. and less learning how to put a condom on. Your argument is invalid.

No, my argument is perfectly valid when the Republican candidate for President says we need fewer teachers. If Republicans in your state are actively supporting this guy without condemning this particular viewpoint, then they are just as much at fault.

(I believe you can disagree with some views of a candidate and still believe he or she is the best person for the job without being a hypocrite, as long as you distance yourself from those views.)

So what state are you in? Tell us so we can point and laugh at those Republicans, especially if they don't believe in comprehensive sex ed.

.


Ox, dark is a mostly liberal board. Therefore when I write something I have five people arguing with me. It's hard to keep up with it all. I'm going to have to beg off on this discussion. You bring up good points and I respect your opinion. The Woodstock jibe was just a joke. To answer your final question, I live in Louisiana on the gulf coast. Laugh away my friend.
 
2012-08-20 04:54:36 PM  

ox45tallboy: radioshack: Let me ask you, do you really think he would have said this if he was in front of a Caucasian Bostonite audience?

Would he have talked about what a great season the Yankees were having, or would he have mentioned how great the other Boston teams were doing? If he had said something about Tom Brady, would you have said he was "Patriot-baiting"?

Why can a politician not discuss the specific parts of his plan that affect the audience he is speaking to?


WTF does how the Yankees/Boston teams are doing have anything to do with his plans?
False equivalency is false.
 
2012-08-20 04:56:50 PM  

palladiate: I couldn't see how it's an affront to any black folks in his audience.


black folks?

Really??

Really???

Let me guess, some of your best friends are minority folks.
 
2012-08-20 04:56:54 PM  

radioshack: I believe your definition of indentured servitude is wrong. I need a job to pay for food and water and housing. Does that make me an indentured servitude to my employer? After all, if I don't have a job I can't have any of those things. You argue that I'm an indentured servant because I'm tied to another entity for my survival.


Sometimes it is, especially in periods of high unemployment when an employer takes advantage of the fact that people can't just quit and mistreats the employees. We have regulations in place that state that employers must pay a minimum wage and can't do certain things, but sometimes in tough economic times, or especially when these regulations get repealed, businesses can and do take advantage of people - they might not have to work "here", but they do have to work.

This is what Biden was saying. If you start repealing employment regulations, you wind up forcing people to continue to work jobs that they are being mistreated at. If you repeal financial regulations, you begin forcing people to work more, often in low-paying jobs, in order to pay for things such as food and water, since their debts are being paid back involuntarily by withholding income.
 
2012-08-20 04:59:26 PM  

ox45tallboy: radioshack: I believe your definition of indentured servitude is wrong. I need a job to pay for food and water and housing. Does that make me an indentured servitude to my employer? After all, if I don't have a job I can't have any of those things. You argue that I'm an indentured servant because I'm tied to another entity for my survival.

Sometimes it is, especially in periods of high unemployment when an employer takes advantage of the fact that people can't just quit and mistreats the employees. We have regulations in place that state that employers must pay a minimum wage and can't do certain things, but sometimes in tough economic times, or especially when these regulations get repealed, businesses can and do take advantage of people - they might not have to work "here", but they do have to work.

This is what Biden was saying. If you start repealing employment regulations, you wind up forcing people to continue to work jobs that they are being mistreated at.


Which employment regulations that cover the mistreatment of employees are people trying to repeal?

This is a stupid strawman, even for someone of Biden's low intellect.
 
2012-08-20 05:00:07 PM  

radioshack: To answer your final question, I live in Louisiana on the gulf coast. Laugh away my friend.


sajablogs.typepad.com
 
Displayed 50 of 74 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

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