Document exposes what the RNC really thinks of its donors, admits to using "fear."

[Bricker]

@Richard_Parker

Well, at least you’ve gotten him to the point of admitting that it’s not about the money. That’s something.

Yes, I suddenly, for the first time ever, admiited this. :rolleyes:

@Bricker

“Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute,” is, by your lights, also “irrational,” I imagine. That’s another calculus in which more than simply the dollars expended at the moment are considered.

So it’s not convincing to say, “Any objection to ‘subsidizing the other guy’ is irrational because an intelligent system is bound to cost much, much less…” when the objection is to forced subsidization of the other guy, regardless of cost. Someone may rationally say, in other words, that it’s not the cost, it’s the objection to being forced to pay for someone else, period.

(December 11, 2009)

@Bricker

@emacknight

But it doesn’t matter at all if it’s a right or not. You are still paying for people’s health care under the current non-right system. The whole “health care is not a right” is just a big red herring.

Do you understand what is meant by the phrase millions for defense but not one cent for tribute?

(January 10, 2010)

@Bricker

@Lobohan

You pay for their medical care now though higher premiums. You are adverse to paying less?

Never mind that the subsidies are a small part of the overall bill.

Your argument isn’t very compelling.

I am adverse to paying for others.

I’ve lost track of where it was, but in one of these threads, I offered the analogy of “Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute.”

December 15, 2009

Yup. Good thing someone wrested that new admission out of me just now. Newly. As in, just now.