# "The" Issue in 2008



## TMMKC (Aug 2, 2007)

Politicians from the Left and the Right all have their take on what the defining issue is for the 2008 election. It would be interesting to see what the members of AAAC think. Vote now, play nice.


----------



## JRR (Feb 11, 2006)

I picked other. People want entitlements.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

I would think (or at least hope) loss of life takes precedence over all other issues for most Americans. We're at 3,800+ dead, 29,000+ seriously wounded Americans in the Iraqi occupation, over half a trillion dollars spent, not to mention 70,000+ Iraqi civilians killed and God knows how many more wounded. 2.5 million Iraqi refugees are wreaking havoc in surrounding countries. Etc.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

JRR said:


> I picked other. People want entitlements.


Ditto, plus more. A significant part of the population are actually looking to be punitive to the successful. A large group of people fail to see the years and years of hard work, sacrifice, and delayed gratification it takes for the vast majority of high income earners to move into that income strata. This group of people seem to feel one is either born to it or somehow cheats the system to obtain it. They want high income earners to "pay their fair share", oblivious to the fact they already pay more than it and had to sacrifice much to get there.

So, entitlements because they "deserve" them, at the cost of those "greedy rich folk", as this is right and proper. I feel it is becoming John Galt time.


----------



## Rossini (Oct 7, 2007)

If you don't mind me saying... it's a disgrace, but an interesting commentary in itself, that the environment doesn't make the list automatically. Nor Global/local poverty... In any other country, just not yours for some scary reason.


----------



## Spence (Feb 28, 2006)

I think the big issue this time around is going to be electability 

-spence


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Rossini said:


> If you don't mind me saying... it's a disgrace, but an interesting commentary in itself, that the environment doesn't make the list automatically. Nor Global/local poverty... In any other country, just not yours for some scary reason.


Really? So Sarko was elected on a platform of poverty and the environment? I wonder if he knows?! Or Putin? Or Harper? The environment is the worm that turns the current Pakistani elections?

No, the disgrace is your uninformed, incorrect insult.


----------



## marlinspike (Jun 4, 2007)

I'll be happy when people get wise and election cycles stop having one defining issue.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

marlinspike said:


> I'll be happy when people get wise and election cycles stop having one defining issue.


Do not hold your breathe! :teacha:


----------



## TMMKC (Aug 2, 2007)

marlinspike said:


> I'll be happy when people get wise and election cycles stop having one defining issue.


Excellent point but I think vast segments of the voting public are too intellectually lazy to think beyond one issue.


----------



## Lawson (Dec 2, 2007)

Personality, character, and looks may outweigh all issues in American elections.


----------



## RSS (Dec 30, 2003)

_Economy/global competitiveness_ ... but it is only one of many important issues that -- more than likely -- will once again fall by the wayside to minor issues that become "hot-button" wedge issues via twisted spin.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Wayfarer, One of the pressing concerns of late 19th century cities was the mass of manure from the many horses that powered civilization. The only people worried about horse manure today are those who measure nitrogen runnoff and it's negative impact on our offshore resources. Issues, or 'problems' can change dramaticaly and quickly. We look back as heirs and historians to the 19th century and see only the rise of Industrialism as the pivotal event. Future generations may very well look back and see the global issue of climate change and the feeding of an ever increasingly impoverished world collective as ours. There may be a paragraph mentioning the terrorism of extremists, but no more remembered than the name of the Madhi who slew Gordon at Khartoum or a dozen other Kipling characters turning to worm's meat twice in old history books about the British Empire. ALL issues should be of the deepest appreciation and concern. We need a leader, or leaders who can meet them all, known today or revealed tommorow.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Kav said:


> Wayfarer, One of the pressing concerns of late 19th century cities was the mass of manure from the many horses that powered civilization. The only people worried about horse manure today are those who measure nitrogen runnoff and it's negative impact on our offshore resources. Issues, or 'problems' can change dramaticaly and quickly. We look back as heirs and historians to the 19th century and see only the rise of Industrialism as the pivotal event. Future generations may very well look back and see the global issue of climate change and the feeding of an ever increasingly impoverished world collective as ours. There may be a paragraph mentioning the terrorism of extremists, but no more remembered than the name of the Madhi who slew Gordon at Khartoum or a dozen other Kipling characters turning to worm's meat twice in old history books about the British Empire. ALL issues should be of the deepest appreciation and concern. We need a leader, or leaders who can meet them all, known today or revealed tommorow.


Kav:

I do not claim to have the insight into the future you do. I mean, if you can be sure the future will look back and see feeding the impoverished billions as the issue, my hat is off to you. I always figured they would look back and ask why we tried to stretch the resources of Earth in an endeavor logically doomed to ultimate failure. As an anthropologist, I am surprised you do not know the ultimate outcome of this situation, as so many societies have fallen for it throughout history. What makes me sad is that apparently humans have not learned the lesson history has so often taught.


----------



## jpeirpont (Mar 16, 2004)

I'm not sure. I have been rather apathetic lately. I starting to look the candidates views on healthcare and who is going to make it the most widely available.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

jpeirpont said:


> I'm not sure. I have been rather apathetic lately. I starting to look the candidates views on healthcare and who is going to make it the most widely available.


Healthcare is available to anyone that shows up at an ER, be they native born, legal immigrant, or involved in an auto accident running from la Migra.


----------



## marlinspike (Jun 4, 2007)

Wayfarer said:


> Healthcare is available to anyone that shows up at an ER, be they native born, legal immigrant, or involved in an auto accident running from la Migra.


The question is, would it be cheaper to give poor legal citizens/perm residents access to preventative care? Though I guess the bigger problem is getting them to use the preventative care and getting them to realize these programs are already available to them.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

marlinspike said:


> The question is, would it be cheaper to give poor legal citizens/perm residents access to preventative care? Though I guess the bigger problem is getting them to use the preventative care and getting them to realize these programs are already available to them.


You nailed it your first shot marlin. Take it from someone that has made his career in healthcare, born and raised in Canada, and been in the States since the 90's. Like the time the Detroit Department of Health spent 250k on advertising free childhood vaccines and the participation was so low they lost millions in public funding. Oddly enough, health care is not a Field of Dreams. Just a pasture of political sound bytes.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

I picked Iraq (getting out).This war has been going on far too long.


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

Rossini said:


> If you don't mind me saying... it's a disgrace, but an interesting commentary in itself, that the environment doesn't make the list automatically. Nor Global/local poverty... In any other country, just not yours for some scary reason.


Well, it is not suprising that Wayfarer weighs in with his mindless criticism of common sense. I am with Rossini here!


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Leather man said:


> Well, it is not suprising that Wayfarer weighs in with his mindless criticism of common sense. I am with Rossini here!


With Rossini? LOL, I think you two socks are kept in the same drawer. And yes, bothering to offer up facts is usually a mindless endeavor with puppets.


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

Wayfarer said:


> With Rossini? LOL, I think you two socks are kept in the same drawer. And yes, bothering to offer up facts is usually a mindless endeavor with puppets.


Wayfarer you are not offering facts. You mindlessly criticised Rossini - you accused him of " an uniformed incorrect insult" - I read no insult in his post - only your insult of him!

Could it be that you are a small world Republian of the kind who screams like a three year old every time someone mentions the "E" word!

I am sure other things will be big issues this year but if you need to react so badly to Rossini asking why isn't the environment up there - and that he isn't surprised - then it says more about you than it does about him!

You add to the impression that we have that American's don't care about the environment - I know that isn't true and that a huge number of Americans care very much - but that is not how the world perceives it.

I see you are Canadian but now live in America.

It is the strength of your reaction to Rossini and the paranoid rant that leads me to post a defence of Rossini - and the fact that I think what he said was perfectly reasonable and didn't warrant a factless and mindless attack from you.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Leather man said:


> Wayfarer you are not offering facts. You mindlessly criticised Rossini - you accused him of " an uniformed incorrect insult" -* I read no insult in his post* - only your insult of him!
> 
> Could it be that you are a small world Republian of the kind who screams like a three year old every time someone mentions the "E" word!
> 
> ...


To the bolded sections, yes, "disgrace" must have a different meaning in puppet land. 

Does anyone else find it odd how Leather posts, then Bishop of Briggs posts, then Leather posts....


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

To he who reported this thread: As far as the Interchange goes, this is lightweight stuff. Don't bother the moderators with it.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Lightweight? I thought I picked a nice heavy wool sock


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Leatherman, as A former crewman with Sea Shepherd, supporter of Julia Butterfly Hill during her treesit, Black Mesa defense comittee volunteer I think I can claim a mantle of tree hugging enviromeddelista. And as one I have heard far worse than Wayfarer's cracks. So grow a thick skin akin to a Finwhale ( 4 are making a rare appearance down by Andy, and I'm worrying about to wear when I go out to say hello) and just present information in a calm manner. The object of a thread is to win over people, even bagpipe playing canadians affected by the Arizona Sun.


----------



## jpeirpont (Mar 16, 2004)

Wayfarer said:


> Healthcare is available to anyone that shows up at an ER, be they native born, legal immigrant, or involved in an auto accident running from la Migra.


Well without having to go bankrupt or take serious hits on their credit if they can not afford that visit.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

jpeirpont said:


> Well without having to go bankrupt or take serious hits on their credit if they can not afford that visit.


Ad hoc rescue. Original complaint was no access. I disproved that. Now you want it done for free or without monetary consequences too? Gee, I show up at an ED with a gun shot wound (GSW) and no insurance. Yeah, I'm worried about my FICO.

The person inclined to success sees his bill for the care he received for his GSW and says, "Bloody hell! I'm lucky to be alive. I better bust my hump and pay this bill."

The person inclined to government handouts sees his bill for the care he received for his GSW and says, "WAAA, WAAA, WAAA. Poor me. Who is going to pay for this? How do they expect me to pay for this, I just got shot!"

The funny thing is, 9 times out of 10, the first person is the type of person that has a bunch of friends that hold a fund raiser for him and helps him pay his bill. The other person has no friends of note, just case workers and POs.


----------



## jpeirpont (Mar 16, 2004)

Wayfarer said:


> Ad hoc rescue. Original complaint was no access. I disproved that. Now you want it done for free or without monetary consequences too? Gee, I show up at an ED with a gun shot wound (GSW) and no insurance. Yeah, I'm worried about my FICO.
> 
> The person inclined to success sees his bill for the care he received for his GSW and says, "Bloody hell! I'm lucky to be alive. I better bust my hump and pay this bill."
> 
> ...


You ever tire of your nonsense? I need no rescue, I know what meant your not important enough for to need a save. The question was what was my issue this is my issue.
I do not recall bringing up gun shot wounds, and I'm sure that its not the only thing people go to the ER for. Some people are poor or simply just scraping by and can not afford medical bills they accrue, plain fact. I care little if one is inclined for "success" I am more worried about the medical care they reasonable access to.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

jpeirpont said:


> You ever tire of your nonsense? I need no rescue,


Nonsense? It's called "debate" and/or "conversational logic". "Need no rescue"? The replies are just too rich to this. Hint: take a course or read book on conversational logic. You are in dire need.

English is your primary language?


----------



## vwguy (Jul 23, 2004)

It's the economy, stupid! Perhaps followed, by "change" whatever that means.

I love politics, but I've been getting more & more jaded towards the whole process every year. The man on the street will vote for whoever makes the best promise "Well so and so said we'll all get a million dollars if their elected and that sounds good to me". Yeah, doesn't quite work that way in the end, does it?

Brian


----------



## Daveboxster (Dec 30, 2006)

*My other*

Health care - my 10 year is a type 1 diabetic. I'm lucky to have fantastic health coverage at my work. What happens to my son when he wants to start his own business at say 22-25 years old? I don't proclaim a solution, but just know that something is wrong.

Long term retirement - I'm 40 and I hit a big milestone this month - I've saved $500K for retirement (I don't mean to brag... please don't think that is my point). I don't have a pension nor expect to work for a company that does. My concern: What % of the population realizes that they have to DEFER CONSUMPTION and WORRY about their own retirement (that Social Security won't be enough)? Sadly, my HR folks have told me that I would be shocked if I knew who didn't participate in a 401(k) plan, even though the company contributes FREE CASH to it!

If I had to pick one of the ones listed, it would probably be getting out of Iraq.

Sadly, I have zero confidence in our government fixing any of the issues.


----------



## agnash (Jul 24, 2006)

*Healthcare*

Not my #1 issue, but it is a topic that is getting thrown around. Before I switched paymasters, I worked on an analysis for a Medicare Advantage program. The program covers children as well as retirees. For same cost of providing health insurance to one person over age 65 for one year, the company was providing coverage to ten people under age 18. So, just cancel the program for the elderly, and we can cover all children in the U.S., and do it for less money. This would also represent an investment in the future, as opposed to simply providing welfare to formerly productive membbers of society. Actually, we could expand the age range and cover everyone to age 40 for about half of the current cost of Medicare. Just a modest proposal.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

agnash said:


> Not my #1 issue, but it is a topic that is getting thrown around. Before I switched paymasters, I worked on an analysis for a Medicare Advantage program. The program covers children as well as retirees. For same cost of providing health insurance to one person over age 65 for one year, the company was providing coverage to ten people under age 18. So, just cancel the program for the elderly, and we can cover all children in the U.S., and do it for less money. This would also represent an investment in the future, as opposed to simply providing welfare to formerly productive membbers of society.


Ah, but you see, people under 18 do not vote and AARP has a multi-billion dollar empire designed to do nothing but whip the retiree crowd into a frenzy come election time.

I do not think we need to cancel it agnash, just modify it so it makes sense. I have posted innumerable times here the expensive procedures I see being done to complete GOMERs merely since Medicare will pay for it. I am in total agree about the misallocation of scarce resources.


----------



## marlinspike (Jun 4, 2007)

Am I the only one who finds agnash's concept shocking to the conscience (I guess he might too since he calls it a modest proposal)? I think there is something about our culture that makes us not care for the elderly. Only in Western nations do you hear of waves of elderly people dieing in heat waves simply because there was nobody around to make sure they kept hydrated. In my experience, most American kids of European descent also view their grandparents as people they have to be dragged to visit rather than wanting to go and enjoy their company.

Wayfarer, what do you think about Edwards' scheme that would completely cover everybody whether they want it or not (to avoid the people just not signing up problem), but keeps it private so stays a profitable and productive system?

BTW, you've noted that people get just whatever procedure covered, but I've heard otherwise in different states (and heard the same in yet other states). Just how much is it allowed/supposed to vary?


----------



## agnash (Jul 24, 2006)

marlinspike said:


> Am I the only one who finds agnash's concept shocking to the conscience (I guess he might too since he calls it a modest proposal)? I think there is something about our culture that makes us not care for the elderly.


What I find disturbing is the amount of money spent on the elderly as compared to the amount of money invested in children. What I find disturbing is the money wasted researching Viagra, when there is no money available for the diseases of childhood.

As Wayfarer correctly pointed out, children do not vote, but the elderly do, and they do it dispraportionately. Drug companies research therapies that would never work from an economic standpoint, but they throw out a few advertisments, and then every member of AARP calls Congress, and a drug that should have never been created is suddenly Medicare approved, regardless of cost. There is a reason that 70% of all money spent on healthcare in this country is spent the elderly, and it is not because of neglect. Correction, it is because of neglect. The neglect of grandchildren by their grandparents.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

marlinspike said:


> BTW, you've noted that people get just whatever procedure covered, but I've heard otherwise in different states (and heard the same in yet other states). Just how much is it allowed/supposed to vary?


Marlin:

Medicare is a federal program with federally mandated coverage. There is no variance in straight Medicare patients. (Although I suppose there might be slight variance in payment due to differing fiscal intermediaries, but we are talking extreme hair splitting here.) With the advent of Medicare HMOs, a Medicare recipient can sign over their Medicare benefits to an HMO. Each HMO *must* meet the federal coverage requirements and may or may not add to them. They always do, else why sign up for the HMO? So the only possible variance would be on a per HMO basis and the variance would always be in addition to what Medicare covers.

The only thing Medicare will not cover, in 99% of cases, is experimental treatment. But 95 and totally demented, bed bound, totally incontinent with COPD and renal failure? Hell, they'll ORIF you and PEG you and give you LOx and dialysisize you and even 'scope you and put you on cholesterol lowering drugs! It is truly sad and amazing.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

Around here there are doctors that are not taking on new Medicare patience because the government does not pay enough to cover the cost. So, government is not the answer.

There are a number of charities that pay for those who can not pay. At present I am one of those, and I prefer it to government dependency. I have donated thousands of dollars to charities before and believe in some of them. The problem with government is so much money gets squandered. So many Canadians come south of the border and pay hard cash for their medial needs, because government medical can't do enough. Those that push government medical are not telling us everything, and it may hurt you in your time of need.


----------



## marlinspike (Jun 4, 2007)

Wayfarer said:


> Marlin:
> 
> Medicare is a federal program with federally mandated coverage. There is no variance in straight Medicare patients. (Although I suppose there might be slight variance in payment due to differing fiscal intermediaries, but we are talking extreme hair splitting here.) With the advent of Medicare HMOs, a Medicare recipient can sign over their Medicare benefits to an HMO. Each HMO *must* meet the federal coverage requirements and may or may not add to them. They always do, else why sign up for the HMO? So the only possible variance would be on a per HMO basis and the variance would always be in addition to what Medicare covers.
> 
> The only thing Medicare will not cover, in 99% of cases, is experimental treatment. But 95 and totally demented, bed bound, totally incontinent with COPD and renal failure? Hell, they'll ORIF you and PEG you and give you LOx and dialysisize you and even 'scope you and put you on cholesterol lowering drugs! It is truly sad and amazing.


Hmmm...a source I know personally (I don't want to implicate anybody) who has worked both in DC and NJ hospitals found that in DC medicare was like a bank of free flowing money, but in NJ they're constantly frustrated by a refusal to cover. I figured since each state has their own medicare it was a state thing (you know, like so many federal programs, where it's federally mandated, but state funded). Was it just that the time in NJ started 2 years after the time in DC ended and something changed recently?

I'd still be interested to hear your thoughts on the Edward's plan (outside of simply saying "it's expensive," since he admits that)


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

marlinspike said:


> Hmmm...a source I know personally (I don't want to implicate anybody) who has worked both in DC and NJ hospitals found that in DC medicare was like a bank of free flowing money, but in NJ they're constantly frustrated by a refusal to cover. *I figured since each state has their own medicare it was a state thing (you know, like so many federal programs, where it's federally mandated, but state funded). *Was it just that the time in NJ started 2 years after the time in DC ended and something changed recently?
> 
> I'd still be interested to hear your thoughts on the Edward's plan (outside of simply saying "it's expensive," since he admits that)


You are clearly thinking of Medicaid, not Medicare. Indeed, each state determines what shall and shall not be covered. Again, Medicare is a federally run program for people 65 and older, have ESRD, or have been officially labeled as being disabled for > 2 years. Medicaid is the common name of state run healthcare coverage for the poor under the age of 65. Each state runs its own Medicaid and determines the parameters.

I do not know much about Edward's plan. I do not plan to learn much about it either, unless he gets the nomination. Needless to say, if you force a population to buy something, you have bypassed market solutions from the get go. The eventual problems that develop will however, get blamed on free markets. It is a perfect political situation IMO. Mandate a solution knowing said solution will be problematic, hence you need to re-elect me to counter these new problems (caused by the greedy <insert here scapegoat>).

Your confusion of Medicare vs. Medicaid is a perfect example of how politicians manipulate people too.


----------



## marlinspike (Jun 4, 2007)

Wayfarer said:


> You are clearly thinking of Medicaid, not Medicare. Indeed, each state determines what shall and shall not be covered. Again, Medicare is a federally run program for people 65 and older, have ESRD, or have been officially labeled as being disabled for > 2 years. Medicaid is the common name of state run healthcare coverage for the poor under the age of 65. Each state runs its own Medicaid and determines the parameters.
> 
> I do not know much about Edward's plan. I do not plan to learn much about it either, unless he gets the nomination. Needless to say, if you force a population to buy something, you have bypassed market solutions from the get go. The eventual problems that develop will however, get blamed on free markets. It is a perfect political situation IMO. Mandate a solution knowing said solution will be problematic, hence you need to re-elect me to counter these new problems (caused by the greedy <insert here scapegoat>).
> 
> Your confusion of Medicare vs. Medicaid is a perfect example of how politicians manipulate people too.


I actually knew that I was talking about Medicaid (i.e. the one for poor people), I don't know why I typed Medicare...my only excuse is that my life is extremely hectic/slightly crumbling right now.

My understanding is the forcing will be businesses can choose to either offer their employees a health insurance plan or contribute to health care markets to keep health insurance costs down. Then for the ultra poor there will be an expansion of Medicaid and SCHIP (medicaid will cover all adults under the poverty line - no child requirement - or under 2.5xpoverty line if you have a child). The health care markets (which will offer no-profit health insurance) will get money from the fed government, state government, and businesses that don't offer health care to offer a government regulated buy-in program to cover those who work in jobs where they don't get coverage. If you don't want to buy in somewhere (through your job, Medicaid, Medicare, SCHIP, health care markets) then you have to state your case (religious reasons, something like that).


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

marlinspike said:


> I actually knew that I was talking about Medicaid (i.e. the one for poor people), I don't know why I typed Medicare...my only excuse is that my life is extremely hectic/slightly crumbling right now.


Hup, hup. Stiff upper lip chap. You will work through things and life will calm down quickly.


----------



## marlinspike (Jun 4, 2007)

Wayfarer said:


> Hup, hup. Stiff upper lip chap. You will work through things and life will calm down quickly.


Yeah I know, 2.5 more years (which in the grand scheme of even a single person's life is very short) and I'll be a jackas...lawyer. Still though, you can't help but let it affect you a little bit in the moment.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

marlinspike said:


> Yeah I know, 2.5 more years (which in the grand scheme of even a single person's life is very short) and I'll be a jackas...lawyer. Still though, you can't help but let it affect you a little bit in the moment.


Today was my first day back from a great NYE vacation. You know how rough first day back from vacation is. As I was driving to work, all I could think of is that very likely, the best thing that could happen to me career wise, was that I would do this drive, every day, for the next 10-15 years.

Sort of scary.


----------



## jpeirpont (Mar 16, 2004)

Wayfarer said:


> Nonsense? It's called "debate" and/or "conversational logic". "Need no rescue"? The replies are just too rich to this. Hint: take a course or read book on conversational logic. You are in dire need.
> 
> English is your primary language?


Yes, I should take advice from an Internet intellectual, such as yourself. I suppose this is your attempt at cyber bullying.
I didn't post my opinion for debate, atleast not with you, that would imply I respect your opinion.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

JPIERPONT, You've got a chip on your shoulder as big as a cotton bale prop from GONE WITH THE WIND. Your posts are about as fresh as a 60's black studies teacher's guide sitting on a Thriftstore bookshelf next to a manual for rasing parakeets and a remaindered book about Y2K. I'll let you in on a minor detail kept secret. We'd walk home from High School with all that Black Like Me, Confessions of Nat Turner, Malcom X shoved down our throats and purge our ravaged young minds with mexican beer in the old walnut orchard and talk about our odds of going to Vietnam. If those castrated versions of Bob Dylon had kept quiet we never would have noticed everybody had a different skin tone. So you just keep pounding away. Eventually you will beat into our collective conscious the guy on TeeVee with a piece of cement yelling 'no mercy for the white guy' during the last Watts riots over Rodney, er excuse me, the people's uprising or whatever KPFK called it. Toney Brown you ain't.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

jpeirpont said:


> Yes, I should take advice from an Internet intellectual, such as yourself. I suppose this is your attempt at cyber bullying.
> I didn't post my opinion for debate, atleast not with you, that would imply I respect your opinion.


Cyber bullying? LOL, is this a new PC term I have no yet heard? I am sure you lack the ability to make it up on your own, where does this come from? Sorry jpier, I previously thought you were one that would at least think about things, but I am afraid my opinion has been changed. As you do not respect my opinion, per the above, my moving you over to the same column as FrankDC should not bother you.


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Cyber bullying? LOL, is this a new PC term I have no yet heard? I am sure you lack the ability to make it up on your own, where does this come from? Sorry jpier, I previously thought you were one that would at least think about things, but I am afraid my opinion has been changed. *As you do not respect my opinion, per the above, my moving you over to the same column as FrankDC should not bother you*.


Wow. That _is_ drastic. ic12337:


----------



## zarathustra (Aug 24, 2006)

in the end, doesn't it really matter who is going to put more money in my pocket? Who can bring me to the promised land of prosperity?


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

zarathustra said:


> in the end, doesn't it really matter who is going to put more money in my pocket? Who can bring me to the promised land of prosperity?


Some of us are already there. We just feel we are "paying our fair share" already!


----------



## JRR (Feb 11, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> Cyber bullying? LOL, is this a new PC term I have no yet heard? I am sure you lack the ability to make it up on your own, where does this come from? Sorry jpier, I previously thought you were one that would at least think about things, but I am afraid my opinion has been changed. As you do not respect my opinion, per the above, my moving you over to the same column as FrankDC should not bother you.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyber-bullying


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

JRR said:


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyber-bullying





> Cyberbullying can be as simple as continuing to send e-mail to someone who has said they want no further contact with the sender. Cyberbullying may also *include threats, sexual remarks, pejorative labels (i.e., hate speech). Cyber-bullies may publish personal contact information for their victims at websites.* They may attempt to assume the identity of a victim for the purpose of publishing material in their name that defames or ridicules them.


Let us see:

Threats: check (I am a known ITG, right?  )
Sexual Remarks: check (Yup, I am on the make for jpier)
Pejorative labels: check (Well, I did put him in a new column)
Publish personal information: check (Just wait until he finds out!)

(For the sarcastically and/or satirically challenged, all above statements are said in jest and not the case).

LOL, thanks for the link JRR. Just as I thought. :teacha:


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Puts Wayfarer into straitjacket and face mask, shackles legs and wheels him out on a dolly. pht pht pht


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Kav said:


> Puts Wayfarer into straitjacket and face mask, shackles legs and wheels him out on a dolly. pht pht pht


Mmm, rrrrw, wwrrmm ffttt. 
:icon_smile_big:


----------



## RSS (Dec 30, 2003)

Cyberbully? 

Well, this is the interchange ... where anything goes ... except, of course, for the "P-word." :icon_smile_wink:


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Cyber bullying is real. Remember that 13 y/o girl who committed suicide? The case has been presented to a Federal Grand Jury. I truly wish no emotional or physical harm on anyone here. Well, maybe waking up in a sweat and hearing a treebranch tapping on the window at 2 A.M. If I ever push anyone into deep angst a simple plea for cessation is sufficient. However, having just listened to our Governator lay out the 'State of the State' I am reminded of his admonition " Don't be a bunch of Girly-Men!"


----------



## Daveboxster (Dec 30, 2006)

*Private industry*



Wayfarer said:


> I do not know much about Edward's plan. I do not plan to learn much about it either, unless he gets the nomination. Needless to say, if you force a population to buy something, you have bypassed market solutions from the get go. The eventual problems that develop will however, get blamed on free markets. It is a perfect political situation IMO. Mandate a solution knowing said solution will be problematic, hence you need to re-elect me to counter these new problems (caused by the greedy <insert here scapegoat>).
> 
> Your confusion of Medicare vs. Medicaid is a perfect example of how politicians manipulate people too.


+100000000000000000000000 on the mandating a solution vs. free markets. I completely agree with this. It is certainly a complicated issue on how to solve the health care issue - long term - in America.

Also, on another poster's comment regarding taking care of the elderly: It's a very big moral question on when you should stop treatment for someone. My father-in-law is 75 years old with a terrible back where he can barely walk any more. He is emphatic on something: No form of cancer gets treatment for me, period. He thinks he's had a great life and doesn't want the government nor his own continuing a life that is not rewarding and satisfying.

And, as a parent of a child of a TERRIBLE disease (Type 1 juvenile diabetes), here is something I fear: The drug companies make a lot of money off diabetes monitoring and maintenance supplies. An example: my son tests his blood glucose 5-6 times a day. Each test strip retails for $1 a piece. I'm really lucky because I pay $.10 for each strip.

So, will the drug companies innovate on something that eliminates the "golden goose?" People who are in the know have told me that promising research at drug companies to CURE TYPE 1 DIABETES has been vetoed by company management. Diabetes is just one example; I'm sure there are many more illnesses like this.

SOME public money is being spent to find a cure. And organizations like Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation are sponsoring research at major medical universities. A cure WILL be found in my son's lifetime... but it's not likely it will come from Merck, Bristol Myers, Johnson and Johnson, etc.

Sorry, ranting off the topic of this thread.


----------



## Capt Ron (Dec 28, 2007)

TMMKC said:


> Politicians from the Left and the Right all have their take on what the defining issue is for the 2008 election. It would be interesting to see what the members of AAAC think. Vote now, play nice.


Play nice? Are you insane man? This is politics! Let the gloves come off, spill some blood and be men! (well dressed men)
Regulators mount up!!!!!!

Of course this is still AAAC, so... let's not forget proper grammar and spelling and please be courteous, tasteful, and polite when destroying your opponents.


----------



## jpeirpont (Mar 16, 2004)

Wayfarer said:


> Cyber bullying? LOL, is this a new PC term I have no yet heard? I am sure you lack the ability to make it up on your own, where does this come from? Sorry jpier, I previously thought you were one that would at least think about things, but I am afraid my opinion has been changed. As you do not respect my opinion, per the above, my moving you over to the same column as FrankDC should not bother you.


PC? It is a rather common term. Wit all the attacking I thought maybe that is what you were trying to do, everyone is tough on the net.
Anyone who attempts to twist someones meaning to for whatever reason is unworthy of respect. I corrected what I said and you attempt to tell me what I actually meant. If you were seeking to have a serious discussion you wouldn't resorted to such tactics. Whatever feeds you arrogance I suppose, I have no idea why you think I'd change my opinion simply because you disagreed.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

jpeirpont said:


> PC? It is a rather common term. Wit all the attacking I thought maybe that is what you were trying to do, everyone is tough on the net.
> Anyone who attempts to twist someones meaning to for whatever reason is unworthy of respect. I corrected what I said and you attempt to tell me what I actually meant. *If you were seeking to have a serious discussion you wouldn't* resorted to such tactics. Whatever feeds you arrogance I suppose, I have no idea why you think I'd change my opinion simply because you disagreed.


If I was seeking a serious discussion, you would not be part of it. :teacha:


----------



## jpeirpont (Mar 16, 2004)

Wayfarer said:


> If I was seeking a serious discussion, you would not be part of it. :teacha:


Your mother.lol
Wow, so clever. Isn't that kind playgroundish?


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

jpeirpont said:


> Your mother.lol


Wow, I guess I was "served". You are indeed one tough homie. You are to be commended for that culturally appropriate and ultimate "dis". You sir, have earned cred.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> Wow, I guess I was "served". You are indeed one tough homie. You are to be commended for that culturally appropriate and ultimate "dis". You sir, have earned cred.


I think it actually goes, "Yo momma." followed by "D'you say somethin' 'bout my momma?" This is then followed by "whazzup, you got something to say?"..."you want some of this?"...some shoving and a lot of MFers and F this and that. I once saw a huge brawl develop this way outside a burrito joint.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Laxplayer said:


> I think it actually goes, "Yo momma." followed by "D'you say somethin' 'bout my momma?" This is then followed by "whazzup, you got something to say?"..."you want some of this?"...some shoving and a lot of MFers and F this and that. I once saw a huge brawl develop this way outside a burrito joint.


:aportnoy:


----------



## Capt Ron (Dec 28, 2007)

Laxplayer said:


> I think it actually goes, "Yo momma." followed by "D'you say somethin' 'bout my momma?" This is then followed by "whazzup, you got something to say?"..."you want some of this?"...some shoving and a lot of MFers and F this and that. I once saw a huge brawl develop this way outside a burrito joint.


Lax,
or whatever youre street name maybe. I mean no disrespect, but off the subject for a moment. I see on the web there are many black-tie and white fundraisers in St Louis. Do you ever go to them?
Below is the link to the calendar events of which I speak of in St Louis.

https://www.blacktie-stlouis.com/calendar/index.cfm?fuseaction=showcalendar&region=0


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Capt Ron said:


> Lax,
> or whatever youre street name maybe. I mean no disrespect, but off the subject for a moment. I see on the web there are many black-tie and white fundraisers in St Louis. Do you ever go to them?
> Below is the link to the calendar events of which I speak of in St Louis.
> 
> https://www.blacktie-stlouis.com/calendar/index.cfm?fuseaction=showcalendar&region=0


Yes, I have been to some of them. LFCS and the mayor's Mardi Gras ball are the two I have been to most often. As you have probably noticed, most of the events are not really black tie. The oldest and most exclusive is the Veiled Prophet ball. White tie and tails for the VP ball. I've never been to that one. It's only for old money St. Louis families.

The Veiled Prophet and his Queen of Love and Beauty


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Entitlements are a part of global competitiveness; or uncompetitiveness. So you should pick that option.
Corporate "greed" is just Liberal code for entitlements. So, you should pick the economic option as well.
Other than the economic and global competitiveness issues we probably should have open borders. No one really believes that "closing the border" will stop terrorists do they? 

onward then.

It is our growing collective that makes us uncompetitive. An example is the corporate tax rate. We are in the beginning of a viscious downward spiral economically. We are going to have to decide whether we want the country and some individuals to survive and what unintended costs we are willing to pay. If we pay all these entitlements then we will continue to lose globally economically and eventually militarily. The level of economic illiterateness shown by all except 1 or 2 of the candidates and most of the media & moderators in the debates is IMHO increasing the feeling of panic about the economy. On the Republican side this is somewhat unusual. McCain and Huckabee, for example, are just awful on the economic issues. None of the moderators bat an eye or follow-up on what are clearly non-answers, flawed answers, or broken paradigms. On the Democratic side it is more pervasive, but Richardson and Biden were almost totally ignored while others promote the proven economic policies of hope and safety-nets.

on that tangent 

The other night my head almost spun off when McCain was speaking about the borders. His point was basically as follows: He's from a border state. In fact, he's from THE border state with the largest unsolved border problems. THEREFORE: He "knows how to fix the borders!" Well for God's sake man why haven't you fixed your own state's border??? In contrast, Duncan Hunter who actually did fix a section of the border where he had some responsibility and wants greater authority to implement his "fix" across the entire border can't get any respect, traction, or time in the debates. McCain says things like "I know how to fix the border", "I know how to balance the budget", "I know how to create jobs", "I know how to protect this country", blah blah blah. Yet he has never, ever, done a single one of these. In fact, his bills and proposed bills have all been fatally flawed: McCain-Feingold; McCain-Kennedy; McCain-Lieberman (after running on the RKBA/NRA platform) ... Yet, he gets a total pass even from such so-called Republican stalwarts as Brit Hume. Everything with McCain is like he has these 'secret solutions' to all our problems if only we had elected him President he would tell us what they are! I have respect for McCain's military service, but that only speaks to his competence as a squadron leader. I haven't been in the military, but as I understand it squadrons do not pay their own way. As a Senator, as an economic and social leader he's been a complete disappointment IMHO.

back to the point
Staying or Leaving Iraq is the same issue just different sides of it. As is the War on Terror. 

This election, like all elections, will come down to two issues: who can best lead the government to protect us, our country, and our interests; and then who will get the heck out of the way and let us do what we do best - live our own lives, create jobs and compete in the free markets of the world to increase our individual lot in life. 

Just my opinion though. I haven't really thought about it that much!


----------



## Rossini (Oct 7, 2007)

Wayfarer said:


> Really? So Sarko was elected on a platform of poverty and the environment? I wonder if he knows?! Or Putin? Or Harper? The environment is the worm that turns the current Pakistani elections?
> 
> No, the disgrace is your uninformed, incorrect insult.


I didn't say "platform", What I'm saying is it's not good it didn't even make the Top Eight in the poll. And, yes, you can alway find obvious exceptions. Are you saying it's actually alright then?!! That doesn't hide the fact that it's possibly highlighting a serious problem.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Rossini said:


> I didn't say "platform", What I'm saying is it's not good it didn't even make the Top Eight in the poll. And, yes, you can alway find obvious exceptions. Are you saying it's actually alright then?!! That doesn't hide the fact that it's possibly highlighting a serious problem.


Obvious exceptions? I could not find a country with a meaningful GDP where is was a huge issue. I am sure one exists, it just that this is the exception, not the rule you implied. Further, torpedo'ing your flawed criticism of the US is not dismissing anything other than your flawed criticism.


----------



## Rossini (Oct 7, 2007)

Wayfarer said:


> Obvious exceptions? I could not find a country with a meaningful GDP where is was a huge issue. I am sure one exists, it just that this is the exception, not the rule you implied. Further, torpedo'ing your flawed criticism of the US is not dismissing anything other than your flawed criticism.


Instead of wasting energy torpedo'ing things and engaging in pedantry, you might consider the issue at hand rather than deflecting away from it! Or do you also not consider that these things should be priority issues?


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Rossini said:


> Instead of wasting energy torpedo'ing things and engaging in pedantry, you might consider the issue at hand rather than deflecting away from it! Or do you also not consider that these things should be priority issues?


You are correct. I could indeed stop wasting energy on obviously false statements soley meant to bash the US and/troll from a sock puppet. In fact, I think I shall.

Carry on!


----------



## Rossini (Oct 7, 2007)

Charming. All I'm saying is that, for every country, issues like the environment and global poverty should be "on the list". The US always draws criticism in this regard, and it's well documented. So I just think it would be healthy in a poll like this that it should be highlighted and included. We have to start somewhere. It's important. If we get it on our agenda, then we can get it on the candidates' agendas.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Rossini said:


> Charming. All I'm saying is that, for every country, issues like the environment and global poverty should be "on the list". The US always draws criticism in this regard, and it's well documented. So I just think it would be healthy in a poll like this that it should be highlighted and included. We have to start somewhere. It's important. If we get it on our agenda, then we can get it on the candidates' agendas.


Sadly, that sounds so reasonable.

What part of the Constitution authorizes the US Government to address global poverty?

Enough with the legalized plunder already.

"WE have to start somewhere?" No. You might have to start somewhere. Many of us started long ago and without waiting for candidates or government. How would the addition of any of the candidates help? How could Hillary help? How could Huckabee help? By stealing money from others? That is the only way government can "help."

"I'm from the government and I'm here to help."


----------



## Bama Mike (Dec 14, 2007)

To answer the original question - for me, the main issue is certainly Iraq. I'm scheduled to deploy next month (after being called up from the Inactive Reserve) and am torn between my personal views of the war/mission and my duty as an officer and Soldier. I also understand and have a personal connection to the immigration issue since my wife (well, soon to be ex-wife, but still mother of my child) is an immigrant from South America. I believe the border needs to be secured and I don't feel any candidate from either party, besides Ron Paul, is really committed to addressing the issue outside of political rhetoric. I do, however, have a more personal connection and understanding of immigrant struggles and think that what sometimes gets lost in the argument is that there are millions of individuals with different stories, struggles, and reasons for coming to the US.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Rossini said:


> Charming. All I'm saying is that, for every country, issues like the environment and global poverty should be "on the list". The US always draws criticism in this regard, and it's well documented. So I just think it would be healthy in a poll like this that it should be highlighted and included. We have to start somewhere. It's important. If we get it on our agenda, then we can get it on the candidates' agendas.


I agree with you as far as the environment goes. As for global poverty, I don't think it is the job of the U.S. to take care of the world, but I also don't think we should be the world's police.


----------



## Rossini (Oct 7, 2007)

Thanks - I agree Laxplayer. It's not the US's job. I was just commenting that it should be on the agenda in the U.S. as it should be for every other country. Collective responsibility rather than "somebody else's problem".


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Rossini said:


> Thanks - I agree Laxplayer. It's not the US's job. I was just commenting that it should be on the agenda in the U.S. as it should be for every other country. Collective responsibility rather than "somebody else's problem".


Where can I find a list of these collective responsibilities?


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Rossini said:


> Thanks - I agree Laxplayer. It's not the US's job. I was just commenting that it should be on the agenda in the U.S. as it should be for every other country. Collective responsibility rather than "somebody else's problem".


Mischaracterization of your original post, post #5 in this thread. You did not comment it should be on the agenda but rather said is was a "disgrace" it was not a top priority and that the US is the only developed country in this situation. I then proved that to be false. You have spent the last several posts back pedalling and trying to reframe things after your initial flippant and false bashing of the US.

Let me remind you of what you said:



Rossini said:


> If you don't mind me saying... it's a disgrace, but an interesting commentary in itself, that the environment doesn't make the list automatically. Nor Global/local poverty... In any other country, just not yours for some scary reason.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

ksinc said:


> Where can I find a list of these collective responsibilities?


Well, the environment would certainly be one since we all share this planet. You do want to keep those beaches in Florida clean don't you?


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Laxplayer said:


> Well, the environment would certainly be one since we all share this planet. You do want to keep those beaches in Florida clean don't you?


I think the difference is in the concept of a "collective responsibility" based on the individual vs. one based on government mandate. I mean, do we go to war over this issue? Say, what if the US voting public decides the destruction of the Amazon rain forrest is a bad thing for the planet. Should we invade as a nation? Economic sanctions by the US government? Should say, Canada bring suit in the world court over acid rain hurting its environment, caused by pollution from the US?

I agree, the environment is important. The "who" as much as the "how" though, that stewards things is a very problematic question IMO.


----------



## jpeirpont (Mar 16, 2004)

Wayfarer said:


> Wow, I guess I was "served". You are indeed one tough homie. You are to be commended for that culturally appropriate and ultimate "dis". You sir, have earned cred.


I do not know what "served" means in your vernacular, but, if it means what I think it does, you idiotic posts have already indited you better than I ever could. Anyways, I had no idea mother jokes were related to any particular culture, you and Lax can keep your racial issues amongst yourselves, do not try to involve me.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> I think the difference is in the concept of a "collective responsibility" based on the individual vs. one based on government mandate. I mean, do we go to war over this issue? Say, what if the US voting public decides the destruction of the Amazon rain forrest is a bad thing for the planet. Should we invade as a nation? Economic sanctions by the US government? Should say, Canada bring suit in the world court over acid rain hurting its environment, caused by pollution from the US?
> 
> I agree, the environment is important. The "who" as much as the "how" though, that stewards things is a very problematic question IMO.


I was unclear. I was meant that the environment should be on the list of important issues for politicians, and the nations of the world have a "collective responsibilty" to take care of it. Start a war? No. Sanctions? Maybe. It depends on what they are doing I guess. If for example China started dumping toxic waste material into the oceans then yeah, I'd be all for sanctions against them. It's not an easy fix, I realize that. I'm not saying that corporations in the U.S. should immediately have to spend millions to clean up and be finished within the next few months, but we should be moving in that direction.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

jpeirpont said:


> I do not know what "served" means in your vernacular, but, if it means what I think it does, you idiotic posts have already indited you better than I ever could. Anyways, I had no idea mother jokes were related to any particular culture, you and Lax can keep your racial issues amongst yourselves, do not try to involve me.


Well I guess you told me. Just for shytes and giggles though, outside of my obviously sarcastic post to which you are necro-responding, could you outline for me what is "idiotic" in my replies to you? I mean, you stated you woud be for a candidate that made healthcare available to as many as possible. I pointed out the EMTALA laws to you. Then you ad hoc'ed and said it was about not hurting one's credit rating. I then pointed out a reasonable person would consider a bill or a knock on one's FICO should be put into perspective, considering death, disability, or disfigurement was at stake. You then simply got tired of attempting any logical conversation and just deemed it all "nonsense". From there you got rather obnoxious and silly, reverting to mere insult as any attempt at a factual discussion was beyond you.

So, exactly, where was I "idiotic"? (Other than in bothering to attempt a reasonable discussion with you).


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Laxplayer said:


> I was unclear. I was meant that the environment should be on the list of important issues for politicians, and the nations of the world have a "collective responsibilty" to take care of it. Start a war? No. Sanctions? Maybe. It depends on what they are doing I guess. If for example China started dumping toxic waste material into the oceans then yeah, I'd be all for sanctions against them. It's not an easy fix, I realize that. I'm not saying that corporations in the U.S. should immediately have to spend millions to clean up and be finished within the next few months, but we should be moving in that direction.


I see what you are saying and really do not have any strong disagreement. Part of my love of where I live, is this great environment that still has huge areas, right near the city, of unspoiled desert. I do not have any good answers myself but totally agree with you in that it is not all the fault of the Great Satan nor should we allow the argument to be framed that way. The problem, Rossini is a good example, is that is how many people try to frame it.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

jpeirpont said:


> I do not know what "served" means in your vernacular, but, if it means what I think it does, you idiotic posts have already indited you better than I ever could. Anyways, *I had no idea mother jokes were related to any particular culture*, you and Lax can keep your racial issues amongst yourselves, do not try to involve me.


Oh, please you're so full of crap. You know very well that momma jokes are common in urban areas. And, who said anything at all about race? I went to school with blacks, whites, hispanics etc. that talked like this. All the ones who did were a bunch of wannabe gangsters or tough guys.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> I see what you are saying and really do not have any strong disagreement. Part of my love of where I live, is this great environment that still has huge areas, right near the city, of unspoiled desert. *I do not have any good answers myself but totally agree with you in that it is not all the fault of the Great Satan nor should we allow the argument to be framed that way.* The problem, Rossini is a good example, is that is how many people try to frame it.


Yeah, anyone that believes that is clueless. China is one of the worst polluters in the world. Besides, a lot of the polluting I see is not caused by corporations, but rather ordinary people who toss their cigarettes, trash etc. wherever the hell they feel like it. I always laugh when I see a car with a recycle sticker on the back window, and the driver tosses a bottle or cigarette out the window.


----------



## jpeirpont (Mar 16, 2004)

Laxplayer said:


> Oh, please you're so full of crap. You know very well that momma jokes are common in urban areas. And, who said anything at all about race? I went to school with blacks, whites, hispanics etc. that talked like this. All the ones who did were a bunch of wannabe gangsters or tough guys.


I'm 100% sure I've heard non Urban people talk about peoples mothers. I'm also pretty sure I said "Your mother". It is a juvenile style of joking and has nothing to do with where one is from. Way brought "culture" in, implying it was appropriate for to say because I am Black, and you agreed, making it about race.


----------



## jpeirpont (Mar 16, 2004)

Wayfarer said:


> Well I guess you told me. Just for shytes and giggles though, outside of my obviously sarcastic post to which you are necro-responding, could you outline for me what is "idiotic" in my replies to you? I mean, you stated you woud be for a candidate that made healthcare available to as many as possible. I pointed out the EMTALA laws to you. Then you ad hoc'ed and said it was about not hurting one's credit rating. I then pointed out a reasonable person would consider a bill or a knock on one's FICO should be put into perspective, considering death, disability, or disfigurement was at stake. You then simply got tired of attempting any logical conversation and just deemed it all "nonsense". From there you got rather obnoxious and silly, reverting to mere insult as any attempt at a factual discussion was beyond you.
> 
> So, exactly, where was I "idiotic"? (Other than in bothering to attempt a reasonable discussion with you).


Case in point of you general idiocy. First you implied I was attempting to back track after I corrected myself, then you added a bunch of unrelated things about gun shot victims and such. I'm not really interest in discussing anything with your sort, I just played along with the juvenile tactics you introduced into the thread.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

jpeirpont said:


> *Case in point of you general idiocy. First you implied I was attempting to back track after I corrected myself, *then you added a bunch of unrelated things about gun shot victims and such. I'm not really interest in discussing anything with your sort, I just played along with the juvenile tactics you introduced into the thread.


I implied nothing. From the start, I told you that you were committing the _ad hoc_ fallacy. You just seem too dense to understand that fact. Gunshot wounds, used as an example when discussing EMTALA and access to healthcare, are hardly unrelated. I can see why you are not interested in discussing anything with my "sort", as I make you look foolish and irrational. I do apologize for bringing this to your attention.

I have to ask, without Googling, do you even know what "_ad hoc_ rescue fallacy" and "EMTALA" are? If you are just 'playing along' I have to say you imitate a rather simple person with great skill.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

jpeirpont said:


> I'm 100% sure I've heard non Urban people talk about peoples mothers. I'm also pretty sure I said "Your mother". It is a juvenile style of joking and has nothing to do with where one is from. *Way brought "culture" in, implying it was appropriate for to say because I am Black*, and you agreed, making it about race.


Black culture is not the only culture who uses this style of joking. He could have meant urban culture or hip hop culture, or maybe in your case juvenile culture.


----------



## Rossini (Oct 7, 2007)

Wayfarer said:


> Mischaracterization of your original post, post #5 in this thread. You did not comment it should be on the agenda but rather said is was a "disgrace" it was not a top priority and that the US is the only developed country in this situation. I then proved that to be false. You have spent the last several posts back pedalling and trying to reframe things after your initial flippant and false bashing of the US.
> 
> Let me remind you of what you said:


Ok, so it's not important then :deadhorse-a::stupid::icon_hailthee::thumbs-up::icon_headagainstwal:biggrin2::icon_jokercolor:


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Rossini said:


> Ok, so it's not important then :deadhorse-a::stupid::icon_hailthee::thumbs-up::icon_headagainstwal:biggrin2::icon_jokercolor:


First, I hope you recycle that egregious over-use of icons.

Second, the issue of whether or not it is important is completely seperate from the truth content of your statement in post #5. You can continue to try and divert attention from this or just admit your post #5 was, at best, hyperbole.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

jpeirpont said:


> I'm 100% sure I've heard non Urban people talk about peoples mothers. I'm also pretty sure I said "Your mother". It is a juvenile style of joking and has nothing to do with where one is from. *Way brought "culture" in, implying it was appropriate for to say because I am Black, and you agreed, making it about race.*


Stop right there. I brought culture in? WTF are you talking about? The first hint of anything "culturally" related statement in this thread was brought in by you, post #61, where your response to me was, "Your mother". I then responded somewhat sarcastically in response to such a juvenile response.



jpeirpont said:


> Your mother.lol


Do you and reality ever maintain the same plane at the same time?


----------



## Rossini (Oct 7, 2007)

Wayfarer said:


> First, I hope you recycle that egregious over-use of icons.
> 
> Second, the issue of whether or not it is important is completely seperate from the truth content of your statement in post #5. You can continue to try and divert attention from this or just admit your post #5 was, at best, hyperbole.


Focusing on the big issues! No wonder the environment's in trouble :icon_smile_big::icon_pale:


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Rossini said:


> Focusing on the big issues! No wonder the environment's in trouble :icon_smile_big::icon_pale:


Truth telling is usually considered a big issue. How can we work together, and with our politicians, if we do not tell the truth consistently and expect the same of others. Can you not see if we had a spirit of trust, the issue of whether global warming is real or not would not be an issue? It is the distrust that so many liars have created that brings these types of things about.

I have to now move you over to the "liar" category, as I have given you so many reasonable opportunities to just admit Post #5 was incorrect.


----------



## Rossini (Oct 7, 2007)

Wayfarer said:


> Truth telling is usually considered a big issue. How can we work together, and with our politicians, if we do not tell the truth consistently and expect the same of others. Can you not see if we had a spirit of trust, the issue of whether global warming is real or not would not be an issue? It is the distrust that so many liars have created that brings these types of things about.
> 
> I have to now move you over to the "liar" category, as I have given you so many reasonable opportunities to just admit Post #5 was incorrect.


Q.E.D. Clearly it's not really that important to you then.

Where is the "blowing a raspberry" icon!?


----------



## rnoldh (Apr 22, 2006)

Obviously, the key issue is the economy and it shall get more so as the election draws closer.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Laxplayer said:


> Well, the environment would certainly be one since we all share this planet. You do want to keep those beaches in Florida clean don't you?


I think you have an individual responsibility to share the list of collective responsibilities if you have it!


----------



## jpeirpont (Mar 16, 2004)

Wayfarer said:


> Stop right there. I brought culture in? WTF are you talking about? The first hint of anything "culturally" related statement in this thread was brought in by you, post #61, where your response to me was, "Your mother". I then responded somewhat sarcastically in response to such a juvenile response.
> 
> Do you and reality ever maintain the same plane at the same time?


I obvious said Your mother to point out how juvenile your post was. You started to use what I imagine you see as Ebonics(served and whatever) and saying it was culturally appropriate. What culture would that be?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

rnoldh said:


> Obviously, the key issue is the economy and it shall get more so as the election draws closer.


Absolutely! Economics drive process! Even the War is about the economy.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

jpeirpont said:


> I obvious said Your mother to point out how juvenile you post was. You started to use what I imagine you see as Ebonics(served and whatever) and saying it was culturally appropriate. What culture would that be?


The culture that would consider the term, "Your mother" an insult. Are we done now? I am.


----------



## jpeirpont (Mar 16, 2004)

Laxplayer said:


> Black culture is not the only culture who uses this style of joking. He could have meant urban culture or hip hop culture, or maybe in your case juvenile culture.


Kids, talk about others mothers to hurt their feelings, common amongst all groups. You experience is simply limited.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

ksinc said:


> I think you have an individual responsibility to share the list of collective responsibilities if you have it!


I don't have a list, but if a list existed, the environment would be on it. As for what else would be on it, you'd have to ask Rossini.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

jpeirpont said:


> Kids, talk about others mothers to hurt their feelings, common amongst all groups. You experience is simply limited.


Yes, I will admit that I have not conducted any indepth study on the frequency of momma jokes among children.


----------

