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.

(Opposing Views)   Rand Paul thinks congress should get veteran's benefits, food stamps and the special Medal of Honor stipend. OK, he doesn't really think that, but he's brilliantly crafted a constitutional amendment that would make it happen   (opposingviews.com ) divider line 143
    More: Stupid, Medal of Honor, food stamps, constitutional amendments, welfare benefits, Americans, proposed amendments to the United States Constitution, Medal of Honor recipients  
•       •       •

10728 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Oct 2013 at 1:37 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-22 03:57:56 PM  
Wow. Just... wow.

A Congressperson attempts to promote a law which substantially closes the "Class Gap" between Legislators and the common citizen, and all people can do is argue semantics and the typical "Republican vs. Democrat" rhetoric.

We are truly farked. We are stuck between  the greedy and the avaricious.
 
2013-10-22 03:58:11 PM  
WE MUST TAKE DECENT HEALTH CARE COVERAGE AWAY FROM AS MANY AMERICANS AS POSSIBLE. YOU KNOW...TO SAVE THE REPUBLIC. OR SOMETHING. #tcot #bengazi
 
2013-10-22 04:00:04 PM  
ShardingGreat:
Go ahead...tell me how wonderful Obamacare is going to be and I'll be happy to shoot all manner of holes in your pet theories. You don't know shiat about what a farce Obamacare is or how much it's going to end up costing you. Go ahead, sign up and hand the governement the rest of the information that the NSA hasn't already gathered about you. Idiot.

This is a new one, and I'm excited to read it here on Fark.  You're saying that the purpose of the healthcare exchanges is a thinly veiled ploy by the government to gather information on my need for an annual pap smear?  Fantastical.  And now i get why some people are going to say they are unable to shop for new insurance on the exchanges...because they don't want the evil gub'mint all up in their business, spying on them as they pick out a pediatrician.

Good stuff.
 
2013-10-22 04:00:45 PM  

buckler: Uh, wouldn't that mean that Congress would be under the same eligibility rules as any American citizen? Congresscritters couldn't get welfare benifits without poverty means testing, and Congresscritters couldn't get a Medal of Honor without being a member of the military, and carrying out extreme examples of conspicuous gallantry and valor on the field of battle?



Goddammit, why do you have to go and interrupt a good anti-GOP circlejerk!
 
2013-10-22 04:05:38 PM  
Okay I'll go with it, but only if it also means they make minimal wage.
 
2013-10-22 04:09:07 PM  

what_now: Ever since the health care law passed in 2010, conservatives have railed against what they said was an "exemption" for members of congress, who received their health insurance through a federal plan. Paul's amendment would end that so-called "exemption."

Just out of curiosity, is anyone that stupid? Does anyone actually think that people who already have insurance will be forced to choose a new provider? Is Rand Paul that stupid, or does he think we are?


My neighbor was just complaining this weekend that he just took a $700 paycut because he just had to buy insurance from his work even though he is covered by his wife's insurance.  He says now he has to pay for double coverage now because according to Obamacare if your employer provides medical insurance you HAVE to buy it.

I told him I hope your open enrollment isn't closed already because that is not the case, you just have to have insurance from somewhere, or hell take the tax penelty because at his income that would be WAY less than $700 a month.
 
2013-10-22 04:10:10 PM  

Serious Black: ShardingGreat: what_now: Ever since the health care law passed in 2010, conservatives have railed against what they said was an "exemption" for members of congress, who received their health insurance through a federal plan. Paul's amendment would end that so-called "exemption."

Just out of curiosity, is anyone that stupid? Does anyone actually think that people who already have insurance will be forced to choose a new provider? Is Rand Paul that stupid, or does he think we are?

Oh, but they CAN force you to choose a new provider. Allow me to explain, my dear Watson. First, I work in the financial side of the healthcare industry. An actual primary care physician's practice, so I have the credentials to answer this question. There are insurance companies being forced to drop all types of coverage plans in order to comply with Obamacare. Some new plans are only hand picking a small (comparitively) group of participating physicians to participate with the "affordable" plan. Your health care is going to cost you more and provide less coverage. Your current physician may not be included to participate with the plans your current coverage offers or because the allowed amount (the amount the physician is actually paid) is reduced to the point of ridiculous and the doctor chooses to no long participate with your plan because he'd practically be working for free. What happens then? You are forced to choose a new physician in order to accomodate your health insurance plan or pay for your own insurance out of pocket in order to keep seeing your choice of a physician. This will cost you an astronomical amount of money.

Go ahead...tell me how wonderful Obamacare is going to be and I'll be happy to shoot all manner of holes in your pet theories. You don't know shiat about what a farce Obamacare is or how much it's going to end up costing you. Go ahead, sign up and hand the governement the rest of the information that the NSA hasn't already gathered about you. Idiot.

1/10. Acc ...


Dammit I fell right for it.  I am the sunfish of beginning trolls.
 
2013-10-22 04:12:48 PM  

teenytinycornteeth: This is a new one, and I'm excited to read it here on Fark. You're saying that the purpose of the healthcare exchanges is a thinly veiled ploy by the government to gather information on my need for an annual pap smear? Fantastical. And now i get why some people are going to say they are unable to shop for new insurance on the exchanges...because they don't want the evil gub'mint all up in their business, spying on them as they pick out a pediatrician.


Not sure about the veracity of the poster, but I can testify to the fact that the ACA forced me from my wife's insurance plan onto my own employer's plan, which is nowhere near as good.
 
2013-10-22 04:13:25 PM  
You can choose to believe what you will, but I'm telling you guys, Obamacare is a BAD idea. Rand Paul is batshiat crazy, Ted Cruz is a farking Neo Nazi  and I'm terrified for all of us poor farkers who have to break our asses for a living every day.
 
2013-10-22 04:14:22 PM  

HAMMERTOE: Wow. Just... wow.

A Congressperson attempts to promote a law which substantially closes the "Class Gap" between Legislators and the common citizen, and all people can do is argue semantics and the typical "Republican vs. Democrat" rhetoric.

We are truly farked. We are stuck between  the greedy and the avaricious.


No, see, that's spin. What's happening here is that an idiot drafted up a ridiculous bill with huge flaws in it as another in a long line of foolish publicity stunts. Nothing about this relates to any serious attempt to pursue class equality. We're more farked if people really fall for that excuse.
 
2013-10-22 04:18:25 PM  
Rand Paul think the Civil Rights Act of 1964 should be overturned, so he's not the font of wisdom his worshippers put him up to be.
 
2013-10-22 04:19:24 PM  

antidumbass: Rand "Ayn" Paul sure as hell ain't Ron. Guess which one doesn't give a fark about personal liberties. Just another stuffed suit.


Ayn Rand was a pro-choice atheist.  Don't insult her like that.
 
2013-10-22 04:19:26 PM  

Cagey B: MrBallou: That's it. I give up. The system is totally broken when being a circus clown/attention whore instead of a legislator is the way to get reelected.

You're just now noticing? Rand Paul replaced a guy who was elected Senator just because he was a good pitcher.


I didn't know Kentucky even swung that way.
 
2013-10-22 04:20:29 PM  
Obamacare kicked my dog, poured sugar in my gas tank, reported me to the MLB for giving my account of the game, without the express written consent of Major League Baseball, and put anchovies on my pizza. Obamacare is bad news, y'all.
 
2013-10-22 04:21:44 PM  

HAMMERTOE: teenytinycornteeth: This is a new one, and I'm excited to read it here on Fark. You're saying that the purpose of the healthcare exchanges is a thinly veiled ploy by the government to gather information on my need for an annual pap smear? Fantastical. And now i get why some people are going to say they are unable to shop for new insurance on the exchanges...because they don't want the evil gub'mint all up in their business, spying on them as they pick out a pediatrician.

Not sure about the veracity of the poster, but I can testify to the fact that the ACA forced me from my wife's insurance plan onto my own employer's plan, which is nowhere near as good.


Have you been on the exchanges to see if there's a better plan for you?
 
2013-10-22 04:23:20 PM  

ShardingGreat: You can choose to believe what you will, but I'm telling you guys, Obamacare is a BAD idea. Rand Paul is batshiat crazy, Ted Cruz is a farking Neo Nazi  and I'm terrified for all of us poor farkers who have to break our asses for a living every day.



Account created:2013-10-04 15:28:04


www.loveyourdash.com
THE NEW TROLLS ARE HERE!!!!
 
2013-10-22 04:24:08 PM  

teenytinycornteeth: ShardingGreat:
Go ahead...tell me how wonderful Obamacare is going to be and I'll be happy to shoot all manner of holes in your pet theories. You don't know shiat about what a farce Obamacare is or how much it's going to end up costing you. Go ahead, sign up and hand the governement the rest of the information that the NSA hasn't already gathered about you. Idiot.

This is a new one, and I'm excited to read it here on Fark.  You're saying that the purpose of the healthcare exchanges is a thinly veiled ploy by the government to gather information on my need for an annual pap smear?  Fantastical.  And now i get why some people are going to say they are unable to shop for new insurance on the exchanges...because they don't want the evil gub'mint all up in their business, spying on them as they pick out a pediatrician.

Good stuff.


It's more than when you have your annual pap smear or what pediatrician you choose for your child. It's your private financial information, your ssn, and a great deal of personal information which, btw, is going to be entered into a government web site (when it's working, that is) that isn't as secure as it should be. Personally, rather than go near Obamacare, I'll bite the bullet and pay for my own healthcare out of my own pocket. Good luck to you!
 
2013-10-22 04:27:21 PM  
ShardingGreat:
It's more than when you have your annual pap smear or what pediatrician you choose for your child. It's your private financial information, your ssn, and a great deal of personal information which, btw, is going to be entered into a government web site (when it's working, that is) that isn't as secure as it should be. Personally, rather than go near Obamacare, I'll bite the bullet and pay for my own healthcare out of my own pocket. Good luck to you!

DEAR GOD NOT MY SSN!  Next thing you'll be telling me that they government needs my SSN in order for me to collect Social Security when I retire!
 
2013-10-22 04:27:23 PM  

ShardingGreat: teenytinycornteeth: ShardingGreat:
Go ahead...tell me how wonderful Obamacare is going to be and I'll be happy to shoot all manner of holes in your pet theories. You don't know shiat about what a farce Obamacare is or how much it's going to end up costing you. Go ahead, sign up and hand the governement the rest of the information that the NSA hasn't already gathered about you. Idiot.

This is a new one, and I'm excited to read it here on Fark.  You're saying that the purpose of the healthcare exchanges is a thinly veiled ploy by the government to gather information on my need for an annual pap smear?  Fantastical.  And now i get why some people are going to say they are unable to shop for new insurance on the exchanges...because they don't want the evil gub'mint all up in their business, spying on them as they pick out a pediatrician.

Good stuff.

It's more than when you have your annual pap smear or what pediatrician you choose for your child. It's your private financial information, your ssn, and a great deal of personal information which, btw, is going to be entered into a government web site (when it's working, that is) that isn't as secure as it should be. Personally, rather than go near Obamacare, I'll bite the bullet and pay for my own healthcare out of my own pocket. Good luck to you!


I hope you don't get cancer or hit by a bus.
 
2013-10-22 04:28:10 PM  

teenytinycornteeth: Have you been on the exchanges to see if there's a better plan for you?


Tried once. Not going back until the kinks are ironed out. Since my employer pays the premiums, I'm not sure it's even worth my time to.
 
2013-10-22 04:34:41 PM  

HAMMERTOE: teenytinycornteeth: Have you been on the exchanges to see if there's a better plan for you?

Tried once. Not going back until the kinks are ironed out. Since my employer pays the premiums, I'm not sure it's even worth my time to.


Well, that's your decision then.  But understand there's a difference between "being forced" onto a plan and "I'd rather just do what's easiest because i have a grudge against the ACA and don't feel like doing the research".
 
2013-10-22 04:45:32 PM  

HAMMERTOE: teenytinycornteeth: Have you been on the exchanges to see if there's a better plan for you?

Tried once. Not going back until the kinks are ironed out. Since my employer pays the premiums, I'm not sure it's even worth my time to.


Wait...you were on your wife's insurance, right? Did her employer pay the premiums, or did that come out of her paycheck? And now you're on the insurance provided by your employer, right? And your company pays your insurance premiums?

If you were paying for the premiums before, when you were on her insurance, and now you have less coverage, but no premiums to pay, are you saving enough money on the premiums to get some sort of additional coverage...like Aflac, or something, to make up the difference in coverage?
 
2013-10-22 04:52:40 PM  

HAMMERTOE: teenytinycornteeth: This is a new one, and I'm excited to read it here on Fark. You're saying that the purpose of the healthcare exchanges is a thinly veiled ploy by the government to gather information on my need for an annual pap smear? Fantastical. And now i get why some people are going to say they are unable to shop for new insurance on the exchanges...because they don't want the evil gub'mint all up in their business, spying on them as they pick out a pediatrician.

Not sure about the veracity of the poster, but I can testify to the fact that the ACA forced me from my wife's insurance plan onto my own employer's plan, which is nowhere near as good.


I don't think you understand the meaning of the term "forced"
 
2013-10-22 04:54:37 PM  

Sin_City_Superhero: HAMMERTOE: teenytinycornteeth: Have you been on the exchanges to see if there's a better plan for you?

Tried once. Not going back until the kinks are ironed out. Since my employer pays the premiums, I'm not sure it's even worth my time to.

Wait...you were on your wife's insurance, right? Did her employer pay the premiums, or did that come out of her paycheck? And now you're on the insurance provided by your employer, right? And your company pays your insurance premiums?

If you were paying for the premiums before, when you were on her insurance, and now you have less coverage, but no premiums to pay, are you saving enough money on the premiums to get some sort of additional coverage...like Aflac, or something, to make up the difference in coverage?


But that's a lot of woooooooork.  I wasn't told I'd have to put forth any efforrrt!  Plus, it's very hard for me to work up a frothy cup of sympathy when you don't even have to pay the premiums.  My employer pays mine as well...and in my book...that's a pretty good deal, even if it means I don't have every choice I ever wanted.
 
2013-10-22 05:19:51 PM  

James!: what_now: Just out of curiosity, is anyone that stupid?

Yes.


Yes. And RP is supposed to be one of the brighter demogogues in the Reichstag.
 
2013-10-22 05:27:31 PM  

Serious Black: DarnoKonrad: RightToWork: DarnoKonrad: That's even dumber.

See here's the thing. Health insurance is compensation. What farkwits in the GOP are trying to do is give federal workers a pay cut before going into the exchanges out of spite, nothing more, nothing less. There's no "exemption."

I'm not arguing the Obamacare "exemption" point. I'm just trying to clean up his messy amendment as an intellectual exercise. As I worded it, it might not prevent that specific action, but it would prevent a lot of other B.S. Congressional exemptions.


No one knows what "general applicability" is supposed to mean, and we already have a clear and adjudicated legal principal called  "equal protection."

Laws are already written to be generally applicable. For example, Congress and the President could approve of a tax credit given to all businesses originally incorporated in Sharon, MA with less than $1 million in payroll whose exclusive industry is making ice cream in pint containers. That's a generally applicable law even though it, in practice, would almost certainly apply to just one company.


I stand corrected.  Although I can't see what the proposed amendment really means in this context.
 
2013-10-22 05:43:05 PM  
What I don't understand is that it's the states that elect and send senators and representatives to Washington.. why aren't the state legislators responsible for setting the salaries and benefits of their representatives.

The idea that Senators and republicans can vote their own salary out of the federal budget is nonsense.
 
2013-10-22 06:02:02 PM  

dwrash: What I don't understand is that it's the states that elect and send senators and representatives to Washington.. why aren't the state legislators responsible for setting the salaries and benefits of their representatives.

The idea that Senators and republicans can vote their own salary out of the federal budget is nonsense.


Wait, so if you're either a senator *or* a Republican you can vote yourself a salary?  Or is it only if you're a senator *and* a Republican?  'Cause if it's the first one I think I might have to join up for reals.  Either way, Democrats are excluded or not?  Sorry for all the questions.  This is new to me.
 
2013-10-22 06:10:13 PM  

what_now: Ever since the health care law passed in 2010, conservatives have railed against what they said was an "exemption" for members of congress, who received their health insurance through a federal plan. Paul's amendment would end that so-called "exemption."

Just out of curiosity, is anyone that stupid? Does anyone actually think that people who already have insurance will be forced to choose a new provider? Is Rand Paul that stupid, or does he think we are?


except that lots of those same plans are not available anymore. so ya.

thanks obama!!
 
2013-10-22 06:17:27 PM  

Serious Black: ShardingGreat: what_now: Ever since the health care law passed in 2010, conservatives have railed against what they said was an "exemption" for members of congress, who received their health insurance through a federal plan. Paul's amendment would end that so-called "exemption."

Just out of curiosity, is anyone that stupid? Does anyone actually think that people who already have insurance will be forced to choose a new provider? Is Rand Paul that stupid, or does he think we are?

Oh, but they CAN force you to choose a new provider. Allow me to explain, my dear Watson. First, I work in the financial side of the healthcare industry. An actual primary care physician's practice, so I have the credentials to answer this question. There are insurance companies being forced to drop all types of coverage plans in order to comply with Obamacare. Some new plans are only hand picking a small (comparitively) group of participating physicians to participate with the "affordable" plan. Your health care is going to cost you more and provide less coverage. Your current physician may not be included to participate with the plans your current coverage offers or because the allowed amount (the amount the physician is actually paid) is reduced to the point of ridiculous and the doctor chooses to no long participate with your plan because he'd practically be working for free. What happens then? You are forced to choose a new physician in order to accomodate your health insurance plan or pay for your own insurance out of pocket in order to keep seeing your choice of a physician. This will cost you an astronomical amount of money.

Go ahead...tell me how wonderful Obamacare is going to be and I'll be happy to shoot all manner of holes in your pet theories. You don't know shiat about what a farce Obamacare is or how much it's going to end up costing you. Go ahead, sign up and hand the governement the rest of the information that the NSA hasn't already gathered about you. Idiot.

1/10. Acc ...


wow, stunning argument
and by 'stunning' i mean you fail and should feel bad & let the adults talk
 
2013-10-22 06:23:26 PM  
Pointless populist nonsense!  Hooray!
 
2013-10-22 06:32:03 PM  
How does the derpy author see "Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to Congress" and read that as "and benefit equally on a case-by-case basis"?

"Therefore, when Congress passes a special law that gives, for example, a one-time death benefit to the widow of a deceased congressmember - as it recently did for the wife of late New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg - under Paul's amendment, every single member of Congress would receive the same amount of money."

Yes, you lunatic: when they die. It means that they can benefit from the same law, not that they get paid when you do.

Otherwise, you nitwit, if I go to jail for 3 days all of Congress would have to go to jail for 3 days as well. Given incarceration rates in this country, that would pretty much keep every member of Congress in jail for life.

. . .

Wait, I think I am on to something....
/seriously, though, is the author huffing paint thinner?
 
2013-10-22 06:34:44 PM  

nmrsnr: Oh, and for the curious, here's the actual proposed language:

'Section 1. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to Congress.

'Section 2. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to the executive branch of Government, including the President, Vice President, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and all other officers of the United States, including those provided for under this Constitution and by law, and inferior officers to the President established by law.

'Section 3. Congress shall make no law applicable to a citizen of the United States that is not equally applicable to judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, including the Chief Justice, and judges of such inferior courts as Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

'Section 4. Nothing in this article shall preempt any specific provision of this Constitution.'

First off, this seems tautological, since all members of Congress are citizens of the US, so all laws which apply to a citizen of the US also, by default, applies to Congress.

Second, it doesn't necessarily go the other way, it doesn't say that any law applicable to members of Congress are necessarily applicable to all citizens of the US, which means that you can craft as many exemptions as you want, and as long as they are tailored specifically to Congress it doesn't violate this amendment.

So this amendment is both unnecessary and ineffective at achieving its stated purpose.


I draft documents for a living. Whoever drafted this POS obviously does not.
 
2013-10-22 07:26:21 PM  
So Congressmen would have to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes, right?
 
2013-10-22 08:22:55 PM  

weltallica: THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS NOT A POLITICAL PARTY.

It is a financial venture for people who want to make an obscene amount of money through short-term exploitation, at the cost of long-term consequences they will not live to see.

They DO NOT believe what they say.
They DO NOT have loyalty to a party.
They DO NOT hate what you hate.

They speak and act in any way that they think you want to them to, in order to gather your support and donations, and make obscene profits, and then move on in 5-8 years.

This requires a complete lack of empathy, and the willingness to screw not only you, me, and everyone else; they must be perfectly happy to screw GENERATIONS of people.  You, your children, your grandchildren, and at least SEVEN generations of Americans will suffer the effects of their actions.  And they don't care.  they don't.  They really don't.  They sleep comfortably, warm, and sound.  They truly DO NOT feel bad about what they have done, and are doing.  They grin when they think how they'll be dead long before all the bad things happen to everyone, everywhere.  They are sociopaths.  They truly believe they are LIFE'S WINNERS.

After all... they got rich.


You just described the Obama administration
 
2013-10-22 09:18:05 PM  
Therefore, when Congress passes a special law that gives, for example, a one-time death benefit to the widow of a deceased congressmember - as it recently did for the wife of late New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg - under Paul's amendment, every single member of Congress would receive the same amount of money.

Is it just me, or is anyone else wondering why Congress felt it necessary to pass special legislation to provide a death benefit to the widow of someone with a net worth of almost $60 million?
 
2013-10-22 10:08:50 PM  

JuggleGeek: Ron Paul is an idiot.  The author of that story is also an idiot.


The author of the post I quoted is an idiot.

/Rand Paul proposed the amendment.
//Ron Paul is Rand Paul's father
///much like Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker's father--doesn't matter how many times you save the farking galaxy if all you do is whine about it
 
2013-10-22 11:01:55 PM  
The subby and author of the fark HEADLINE is a farking idiot.
 
2013-10-23 12:13:28 AM  
I want a constitutional amendment that congress must work without pay till the budget is balanced.
 
2013-10-23 05:14:56 AM  

stuffy: I want a constitutional amendment that congress must work without pay till the budget is balanced.


/sign
 
2013-10-23 06:22:19 AM  

skraptastic: what_now: Ever since the health care law passed in 2010, conservatives have railed against what they said was an "exemption" for members of congress, who received their health insurance through a federal plan. Paul's amendment would end that so-called "exemption."

Just out of curiosity, is anyone that stupid? Does anyone actually think that people who already have insurance will be forced to choose a new provider? Is Rand Paul that stupid, or does he think we are?

My neighbor was just complaining this weekend that he just took a $700 paycut because he just had to buy insurance from his work even though he is covered by his wife's insurance.  He says now he has to pay for double coverage now because according to Obamacare if your employer provides medical insurance you HAVE to buy it.

I told him I hope your open enrollment isn't closed already because that is not the case, you just have to have insurance from somewhere, or hell take the tax penelty because at his income that would be WAY less than $700 a month.


My sister told me today that her husband's insurance went up from $1,500 a month to $7,000. I don't believe her as a far as I could throw her. I mean maybe his spending on prostitutes and ugly transformers on the internet went up but I don't believe his insurance rate went up that much.
 
2013-10-23 10:32:58 AM  
Rand Paul is so goddamn stupid it's staggering. How does he have a cult following.
 
2013-10-23 11:16:03 AM  

raatz01: Rand Paul is so goddamn stupid it's staggering. How does he have a cult following.


There's a reason we have the expression, "As stupid as a Kentucky voter."
 
Displayed 43 of 143 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
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