The numbnut who had the freakout at the Arlen Specter townhall meeting

Thing is, it doesn’t appear that there are enough like-minded folk around to keep you from eventually paying for some tiny fraction of jsgoddess’s (or others’) health care, just as some of your tax burden already goes to programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. What’s more, no one around here seems to care very much at all whether your tax burden happens to go up by 3 percent or whatever. So what good is it doing you to bitch endlessly about it on this particular message board anyway?

I’ve gotta say I marvel at your genius for alienating other people. I really have no clue what you think you are accomplishing here, and I have rarely seen anyone so ham-handedly inept at attempting to represent one’s own interests.

Dance, monkey, dance.

OK, I think we’re pretty much done here. Off to Coventry with you.

I know about the underground river, motherfucker.

You mean, the sewer?

Big surprise. :wink:

Rand Rover:

Yes, counselor, unless you have some kind of evidence with which you can support this claim, it really is nothing but an empty slogan.

We do know that publicly run health care systems in other countries are less expensive, more effective, and (generally) achieve better outcomes than the US system. We know that public satisfaction with these systems in these countries is much higher than the satisfaction US consumers express in relation to their current private health care system.

We also know that the deregulation of the banking and investment sector over the last two decades was directly responsible for the economic meltdown that nearly tanked the world economy.

These facts alone seem to falsify your assertion, as far as I can tell, unless you have some very obscure definition of the phrase “society works best.

I also found this floating around on the net, and for some reason it made me think of you:

Finally, I’m a bit curious about your response to jsgodess, given your belief in the efficacy of small governments. To her you write, “Because I think that all the government should do is protect us from other countries and terrorists.” These criteria seems quite arbitrary to me. Don’t you think those sorts of protections could be better handled by the private sector as well? And really, why should I pay the government to protect you, or your property?

Sounds like a handout to me.

And when I refer to you as the guy who thinks “The weak shall perish”, you complain that I’m quoting you out of context. :rolleyes:

I still find it amusing that you actually agreed with a quote from a TV villain, which I had picked as a reductio ad absurdum. I really expected you to backpedal instead.

Der Trihs, you are just physically unable to shake yourself out of the belief that if the government doesn’t provide something then people won’t have it. People will take responsiblity for themselves if the other option is to sit there and rot. Also, there are plenty of charities already, and there would likely be more if the goverment got out of the charity business.

Also, as I’ve explained many times, when I ageed with the statement you love so much, the context showed that what I meant is that some people are going to essentially commit suicide and there’s nothing anyone can do to stop them.

Hey RandRover, if you really want to return to the law of the jungle, I’m ready any time you are, baby. You think your life of certified chartered accounting has prepared you for life without a safety net? I’d be just as happy to take all your toys away by main force, myself, and I know a lot of my comrades feel the same way. You hide behind the skirts of the State’s protection, all the while crying about all the stuff the State is doing to protect you from people like me – like welfare, universal health care, and labour laws. Without those crumbs to the hungry masses, my comrades and I would be leading hordes of raging proles through your house, taking back all the shit you’ve stolen from the rest of us.

You think the New Deal was for OUR benefit? All of North America was teetering on the brink of armed insurrection, and the unions were powerful, militant, and growing. The New Deal was created to keep YOUR sorry ass off the firing line by taking away our strength, giving people just enough to keep them from saying “fuck it” and picking up a gun.

Hey, sparky, if you want to pull off the kid gloves and go hammer and tongs in the streets, we’re up for it any time you are. Bring an army.

Sounds like a plan to me. I’ll just distract you by throwing a twinky just over your shoulder and then take 10 steps back, confident that you couldn’t cover the distance without a rest break.

Also, you are free to take back absolutely everything I’ve stolen from the rest of society.

How many times do we have to go down this same road?

You can start by paying back everything the government spent on your public education.

Also, I’m not too crazy about you driving on the roads that I’ve paid for, so I’d like that money back too.

Clearly, though, you can keep your massive self-esteem. Since it has no basis in reality, we can safely conclude it is entirely your own.

Psst. Post 262. He’s just trying to wind everyone up. Don’t waste your time.

Since no one’s said this yet:

Ayn Rand, ironically (apart from the “he” part).

Everyone? No. Just those looking to get wound up. I try not to disappoint.

I agree–the books are fiction, so caricature to make a point is de rigeur.

I’ve said this before, but…this is precisely why “Idiocracy” made me want to cry instead of laugh. It’s not the future. We’re already there.