I am Pitting the stupid question: Do you want to cancel Medicare?

[freedumb2003]

@wierdaaron

I suggest you would fucking love to be banned, because it would get your dick hard to be BANISHED FROM THIS DEN OF LIBERALISM.

All you want to do is wag around your republican ideals. You have no interest in actual discussion, and this is the stupidest thread ever. I suggest you just go away, because you aren’t going to accomplish anything here.

I am not asking for banning – as I said, I think this is a fun place.

But I see you have 2 choices:

1. Report me for violating some rule
2. go away and quit whining like a little girl

My Pit point remains unchallenged – and all you can do is sniffle and run to someone (mommy, daddy?) and break into tears with "he- he- he-s a CONSERVATIVE! Make the bad man go away!)

If I am wrong for this board, bring it. If I am not, STFU. And I don’t care if I am newbie – I know your kind: talk about stereotype.

[freedumb2003]

@Bosstone

Preserving human dignity by removing the barrier of outrageous health costs to the less fortunate so they can maintain a reasonable level of health seems pretty worthwhile.

Only when YOU get to define “outrageous.” And I assume that you are willing to sell your car, your house and all your stuff to ensure such a bnarrier is removed…? Or is it just talk?

The devil is in the details.

[wierdaaron]

Your pit remains unchallenged because it doesn’t make any god damned sense. And there’s been 2 pages now of people debating your pit. What’s your damn problem?

You’re not going to convert anybody here, mister man. Whatever jollies you wanted to get here, I hope you get them quick so you can go back to watching NICS.

[davidm]

@freedumb2003

…Are you suggest I be banned? Or are you just unable to address my premise, which remains unchallenged so far?..

It hasn’t remained unchallenged. Your premise was that it was a stupid question. I challenged that premise by explaining the purpose of the question and the fact that a lot of public option opponents don’t answer it the way you do, which makes them inconsistent. Maybe you didn’t see my post.

[Frank]

@freedumb2003

I am afraid I don’t do smileys icons (I despise them) – text smileys I understand.

What does yours mean?

That is of course, the dubious smiley.

Above, you said, “Society must help those who cannot help themselves. The very young, the unborn, the infirm, the aged.” What do you think is the purpose of the various types of Social Security and Medicare benefits?

[freedumb2003]

@davidm

The point is that most of the people who are asked this question do NOT want to eliminate Medicare. The question is asked in order to show the supposed hypocrisy of those who rail against the idea of government provided health insurance, but do not want to eliminate Medicare.

Whether or not they’re really hypocritical, as opposed to ignorant or simply not thinking things through, is a legitimate question, but it’s hard to deny that they are at least being inconsistent.

A typical citizen attending a town meeting may simply have not thought things through, but I find it difficult to see someone like Michael Steele as anything but hypocritical.

Obviously people who would want to eliminate Medicare (such as yourself) are consistent and are not being hypocritical. Good for you, but there are a lot of people out there who are not that consistent.

Actually, I think Medicare is not totally terrible – I think it needs some serious reform, but for a gummit program it isn’t the worst.

But comparing a program that already exists and we are stuck with a conceptual one is disingenuous. It isn’t the people speaking out who are inconsistent, it is the politicians who only ask 1/2 a question.

Thanks for addressing the point. This is the kind of discussion that helps everyone (IMHO)

[freedumb2003]

@davidm

It hasn’t remained unchallenged. Your premise was that it was a stupid question. I challenged that premise by explaining the purpose of the question and the fact that a lot of public option opponents don’t answer it the way you do, which makes them inconsistent. Maybe you didn’t see my post.

I stand corrected – hard as I try electrons inflight are above my Super Right-Wing Perception Powers

But in this whole thread, you are the only one who saw and addressed the issue.

I thank you again and look forward to extending the discussion (if I survive).

[wierdaaron]

@davidm

It hasn’t remained unchallenged. Your premise was that it was a stupid question. I challenged that premise by explaining the purpose of the question and the fact that a lot of public option opponents don’t answer it the way you do, which makes them inconsistent. Maybe you didn’t see my post.

I think when he said his pit remains unchallenged, he means that Medicare still exists. We were supposed to be in awe of his craftily composed OP and then rush out like the proud right-wing terrorists we are and blow up the government.

ETA: Err, I’m sorry, “gummit”

[Bosstone]

@freedumb2003

Only when YOU get to define “outrageous.” And I assume that you are willing to sell your car, your house and all your stuff to ensure such a bnarrier is removed…? Or is it just talk?

The devil is in the details.

No, but I will let Obama kill my gramma.

[Frank]

@freedumb2003

And I assume that you are willing to sell your car, your house and all your stuff to ensure such a bnarrier is removed…?

Who’s asking anyone to do that? Paying taxes has, somehow, not kept me from acquiring a car, a nice place to live, and stuff. I, for one, am certainly willing to pay taxes.

[freedumb2003]

@Frank

That is of course, the dubious smiley.

Above, you said, “Society must help those who cannot help themselves. The very young, the unborn, the infirm, the aged.” What do you think is the purpose of the various types of Social Security and Medicare benefits?

We are floating a bit. I am not against Medicare, per se. I am saying that if you “threaten” (or posit) removal of Medicare, you must also posit refunding the money that created and nourishes it. It isn’t the trump card the leftist politicians think it is.

And were it not for that (although SSI was supposed to be retirement, not welfare, but that is a discussion for another day), it would be our job, as a society, to take care of those who truly cannot take care of themselves and give a leg up to those who fall.

[freedumb2003]

@Frank

Who’s asking anyone to do that? Paying taxes has, somehow, not kept me from acquiring a car, a nice place to live, and stuff. I, for one, am certainly willing to pay taxes.

So it is just a question of degree, then. And who pays how much…?

[freedumb2003]

@wierdaaron

I think when he said his pit remains unchallenged, he means that Medicare still exists. We were supposed to be in awe of his craftily composed OP and then rush out like the proud right-wing terrorists we are and blow up the government.

ETA: Err, I’m sorry, “gummit”

That isn’t the point at all. Reading is FUNdamental.

[wierdaaron]

I bet freedumb2003 would support higher taxes if it would mean Space Ghost would come back on the air.

[Bosstone]

@freedumb2003

So it is just a question of degree, then. And who pays how much…?

Well, obviously the government will just ask you, yourself, you personally, to pay all of it. Good luck with that.

[begbert2]

@freedumb2003

A distinction without a difference. It isn’t cognitive dissonance, it is slightly clumsy phasing.

All people can excel, but some have barriers to that excellence. Government should help – but that help should be removing barriers. Some barriers are insurmountable. Not all hands are dealt the same.

But the Government should provide assistance, not a permanent crutch. I worked my butt to get where I am. It is patently unfair for someone who decided to skip college and go party (a simple example but I hope you can grasp the underlying point) to be provided that which I worked for, subsidized by my work.

We reach down to help those that need raising. But those than can raise themselves should (and must) do so.

Like I said, it is about human dignity.

Bolding mine. This appears to be the core of your point - you worked really hard, and therefore it’s unfair that people who worked less hard get any benefit at all from the fact you pay taxes.

I don’t think this was about dignity, even a little. I think it’s about bitterness about the unfairness of it all. It’s not enough for you that you are SPECTACULARLY more wealthy than them, no. The fact that really, the taxes you pay aren’t grinding, and don’t force you to sell your car or live on the street (as you demand of your opponents) isn’t relevent to you at all. It bothers you that you are helping the lazy people!

Ooh, poor baby.

We’ll try to ignore that you’re stating that the government assistance is literally as good as everything your money can buy. Because that merely proves you have no clue how bad it can get for people, even with government assistance. It proves that you and reality? You’ve heard of it, and seen it across the room at parties sometimes, but never actually excanged words.

@freedumb2003

@begbert2

:dubious:

I am afraid I don’t do smileys icons (I despise them) – text smileys I understand.

What does yours mean?

Um, that I’m dubious.

Which is to say, you’ve been challenged left and rught and up and down in this thread. The fact that you think you are unbattered by objection tells quite alot about how detached you are from reality.

[Defensive_Indifference]

@freedumb2003

We are floating a bit. I am not against Medicare, per se. I am saying that if you “threaten” (or posit) removal of Medicare, you must also posit refunding the money that created and nourishes it. It isn’t the trump card the leftist politicians think it is.

And were it not for that (although SSI was supposed to be retirement, not welfare, but that is a discussion for another day), it would be our job, as a society, to take care of those who truly cannot take care of themselves and give a leg up to those who fall.

OK. In the pre-Medicare/SS days, did we, as a society “take care of those who truly cannot take care of themselves and give a leg up to those who fall”?

[davidm]

@freedumb2003

Actually, I think Medicare is not totally terrible – I think it needs some serious reform, but for a gummit program it isn’t the worst.

But comparing a program that already exists and we are stuck with a conceptual one is disingenuous. It isn’t the people speaking out who are inconsistent, it is the politicians who only ask 1/2 a question.

Thanks for addressing the point. This is the kind of discussion that helps everyone (IMHO)

This is exactly the kind of discussion that the question is trying to bring about. It gets people thinking beyond talking points and slogans and actually talking about the issues. If they’re going to defend one government healt insurance program then they can’t just go around saying things like “keep the government out of my health care!” They need to explain why one program is acceptable and another one isn’t.

[DanBlather]

If I took the portion of my salary that is used for the military and invested it for 30 years then I would have a kajillion dollars I could invade Iran with.

[wierdaaron]

Just to make sure I’m following…

When democrats ask the rhetorical question, “Do you want to cancel Medicare?” they are being stupid, because if we canceled Medicare, we wouldn’t get our tax money back.

Does that make sense to anyone?