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.

(Think Progress)   The SCOTUS's decision not to deny millions of people of health care is just like that time an earlier SCOTUS denied citizenship for thousands of people because they were black, at least according to false equivalency scholar RAND PAUL   ( divider line
    More: Dumbass, Sen. Rand Paul, U.S. Supreme Court, health cares, lunch counters, Dred Scott  
•       •       •

1829 clicks; posted to Politics » on 06 Jul 2012 at 8:02 AM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2012-07-06 08:36:06 AM  
3 votes:
"Think of how our country would look now had the Supreme Court not changed its view of what is constitutional. Think of 1857, when the court handed down the outrageous Dred Scott decision, which said African Americans were not citizens".

The Supreme Court didn't change it's mind about Dred Scott you farking dumbass. The Constitution was amended after a long and bloody farking civil war. Christ.
2012-07-06 09:53:19 AM  
2 votes:

Independentandproud: Did you people even READ what he said? He wasn't comparing the decision to Dred Scott. He was saying that the Court does change its views of what its constitutional over a period of time. It changed quite a bit since the Dred Scott decision, and he is saying that the Court's view of what is constitutional will change again! Christ ON A HOVERBOARD IN DRAG! Do you drooling monkeys always take whatever is written at ThinkRegress as gospel?

But that's a stupid thing to say. The court didn't change it's mind about Dred Scott. There was a war and a constitutional amendment that invalidated it. The court had little to do with it. Paul could have chosen a number of court cases but he decided on the one that was both inflammatory and made him look stupid. Which is pretty much what we expect from Paul.
2012-07-06 08:26:09 AM  
2 votes:

randomjsa: it would have bipartisan support, and the Democrats wouldn't have to lie hand over fist about its cost or what it actually is.

You mean like how the bill was altered and Republican ideas like the individual mandate added to address the concerns of the GOP?

Yeah, they did that... Guess what the Republicans did when it came to a vote? They voted in lock step against a plan that was basically theirs because they didn't want to "give the president a single victory".

In short, you're a willfully ignorant, partisan shiat heel, who wouldn't know the truth if it slapped you upside your misshapen head.
2012-07-06 02:19:44 PM  
1 vote:

L82DPRT: HighOnCraic: L82DPRT: Dr. Mojo PhD: Republicans did

Tired talking point is tired. The fact that a minority of left leaning Republicans supported an idea that was seen as fall back plan if all else FAILed and was never voted out of committee doesn't mean shiat.

Still, you have to admit that Republicans designed the plan.

Correct. I said it didn't mean shiat. So what. Big deal. The idea went nowhere.

Actually it definitively, 100% means that when randomjsa says this:

randomjsa: Obama and his fellow Democrats are that benevolent and did not design this plan for any noble purpose. If they had it wouldn't be such a cluster fark, it would have bipartisan support

And attempts to blame the perceived negative qualities of Obamacare on Obama and Democrats, they are speaking falsely.

I know it enrages you that randomjsa is a pure, dyed-in-the-wool, black-hating, gay-murdering conservative like you and that if randomjsa speaks falsely it's a detriment to crucifying Matthew Shepard on a chainlink fence or executing Trayvon Martin for the crime of being caught on tape purchasing his Skittles instead of stealing them like a good little negro stereotype should, but that's simply the facts:

1. Your little pet biatch spoke falsely.
2. Your little pet biatch was caught in their lie.

No matter how much you mewl and piss your pants, your "hnnNHhUUguhg it doesn't count" nonsense means nothing.

This plan is based on the plans of no less than three Republicans. The idea that it would have bipartisan support if not for Democrats is provably false. The end.
2012-07-06 09:26:52 AM  
1 vote:
The Republican messaging on this issue has been absolutely terrible (which is odd because that is usually their strong point). I still say it is a function of the fact that they honestly thought they were going to win the Supreme Court case and when it came down against them they really didn't know how to react. Over the past week there has been a variety of weak-sauce responses ranging from "this is really a win for Republican's because Robert's called it a tax" to "we will elect Mitt Romney, take the Senate and repeal the whole thing" to "this is the end of the Republic as we know it, AAAARGHGGGG."

I think a few things are going on here:

1. The dream of a conservative judiciary that would support all of their crazy agenda is dead. Roberts drove a stake right through the heart of that, and this is something that Republicans have been struggling for literally for 50 years. That's why you see all the attacks on Robert's, he really is their Judas as he crushed a half-century conservative dream.

2. The Republicans chose the absolute worst candidate for President to attack Obamacare. He is literally the only other human being ever to sign a health care bill with an individual mandate into law. You can see the messaging confusion over the past couple of days as Mitt tries to have it both ways, but he knows he can't. Either Obamacare is not a tax and the Republican's lose the talking point or it is a tax that their own candidate also instituted.

3. Conservatives hate losing. They REALLY hate losing to the Kenyan, Muslim, socialist usurper. That's why you see all the spinning to try to turn this into a win and all the doom saying crazy (like this Rand Paul) article. To accept their defeat graciously and move on (like the Democrats have basically done on 2nd amendment issues) is beyond their capabilities. So they will keep hammering on this point, even if it is a detriment to them politically because they literally cannot help themselves. Sure it may rile up the base but most of the non-crazy Conservative-leaning Independents are already sick of it.
2012-07-06 08:42:20 AM  
1 vote:
I am now convinced that randomjsa is hired by the staff here to make us all feel smarter
2012-07-06 08:41:30 AM  
1 vote:
Corporations are people, my friend, and this decision has just made it impossible for these people to determine the quality of customers they want to deal with. It's a freedom of association issue, really, and unfairly groups these fine citizens into a special class of people who must now sit at the back of the economic bus for nothing more than the desire to practice their traditions free from unreasonable seizures of their property. Where's the due process for these people? This has been taken out of their hands and that's not what this country's about is it? Disempowerment of a minority? Special regulation of people simply by virtue of their industry? This is not America, my friends, not the America we should be building. We should be building an America where every person is free to congress with whom they please, to engage in commerce as they please and to be free of the impositions of false inclusion as mandated by this overbroad decision.
2012-07-06 08:25:28 AM  
1 vote:

randomjsa: If they had it wouldn't be such a cluster fark, it would have bipartisan support, and the Democrats wouldn't have to lie hand over fist about its cost or what it actually is.

If Obama wanted a resolution passed saying that puppies are cute he still wouldn't get bipartisan support.
Displayed 8 of 8 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  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.