PDA

View Full Version : Obama signs children's health initiative into law



DenButsu
02-05-2009, 12:29 PM
Obama signs children's health initiative into law

President Barack Obama claimed the second major legislative victory of his young administration Wednesday, signing a bill to provide federally funded health care to an estimated 4 million children.

The final version of the new law, which expands the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) by roughly $35 billion over the next five years, passed a sharply polarized House of Representatives earlier in the day, with almost every Democrat voting in favor of the expansion and most Republicans opposing it.

With the bill, Obama said at a White House ceremony, "We fulfill one of the highest responsibilities that we have -- to ensure the health and well-being of our nation's children."

The president said the bill was a downpayment on his "commitment to cover every single American."

The SCHIP expansion is Obama's second major legislative win in less than a week. The first was Thursday's approval of the Lilly Ledbetter Pay Equity Act, which makes it easier to sue employers for wage-based discrimination.

The expansion is also a sign of the strength of Washington's new Democratic majority. Former President George W. Bush vetoed two similar health care bills in 2007, arguing that the legislation would encourage families to leave the private insurance market for the federally funded, state-run program.

Before the bill's passage, SCHIP covered almost 7 million children whose parents earn too much to qualify for Medicaid -- the federal health insurance program for the poor -- but who can't afford private insurance.

The new law boosts total SCHIP funding to approximately $60 billion. The expanded program will be financed with a 62-cent-per-pack increase in the federal tax on cigarettes.

"This is a day worthy of celebration. There can be no greater cause ... than protecting the well-being of our nation's children," New Jersey Rep. Frank Pallone, the legislation's primary House author, said shortly before the bill's final passage on a 290-135 vote.

Passing the health program's expansion is "morally the right thing to do by our children," said freshman Rep. Tom Perriello, D-Virginia. "At a time when the cost of health care is crushing America's families ... this is an important lifeline."

Opponents of the legislation argued that, among other things, it will allow undocumented immigrants to illegally access taxpayer-financed health care, and is insufficiently funded.

"This will go out of control just like all the other [entitlement] programs have, and our children will pay," Rep. Jack Linder, R-Georgia, warned during the House debate Wednesday.

Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, ripped the bill as a "foundation stone for socialized medicine in the United States," arguing that raising the income limit for SCHIP eligibility will serve as the basis for a massive expansion of government-run health care.

The Senate passed the expansion Friday in a 66-32 vote. All those voting against the bill were Republicans, though nine Republicans voted in favor of the measure.cnn (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/04/schip.vote/index.html)

CuseDude87
02-05-2009, 12:35 PM
It always cracks me up how stubborn Republicans are to aid the poor in any way. And now we're talking about innocent, defenseless children and only nine Republicans found the bill to be worth their vote. :pity:

behindmydesk
02-05-2009, 12:50 PM
It always cracks me up how stubborn Republicans are to aid the poor in any way. And now we're talking about innocent, defenseless children and only nine Republicans found the bill to be worth their vote. :pity:

35 billion is a tough pill to swallow. I think republicans aren't cold hearted they want to help poor, they just a want to help those that pay taxes first, and be want to offset the charges with cuts to other spending.


And as a heads up, be very very very careful when saying republicans never want to help poor innocent defenseless children, because you are going to end up with a Roe Vs Wade discussion in a matter of minutes.

PHX-SOXFAN
02-05-2009, 12:56 PM
35 billion is a tough pill to swallow. I think republicans aren't cold hearted they want to help poor, they just a want to help those that pay taxes first, and be want to offset the charges with cuts to other spending.


And as a heads up, be very very very careful when saying republicans never want to help poor innocent defenseless children, because you are going to end up with a Roe Vs Wade discussion in a matter of minutes.

quite an understatement. they want to help those that pay taxes first, starting from the top income levels and working their way down:o

ari1013
02-05-2009, 03:01 PM
It always cracks me up how stubborn Republicans are to aid the poor in any way. And now we're talking about innocent, defenseless children and only nine Republicans found the bill to be worth their vote. :pity:
To come to their defense for a moment, the bulk of Republican Congressman hail from the number one tobacco producer in the world -- The South.

There's no way their constituency is going to be happy with them voting for a bill that'll economically cripple their industry.

CuseDude87
02-05-2009, 04:41 PM
35 billion is a tough pill to swallow. I think republicans aren't cold hearted they want to help poor, they just a want to help those that pay taxes first, and be want to offset the charges with cuts to other spending.


And as a heads up, be very very very careful when saying republicans never want to help poor innocent defenseless children, because you are going to end up with a Roe Vs Wade discussion in a matter of minutes.

The amount of money is a non-factor. Both parties pass bills worth billions of dollars all the time. I would say that Republicans wanting to help the poor who pay taxes is true, but their idea of help and the Democrats' idea is far apart.

Ehh, I'm talking about children already requiring the assistance of government to ensure their survival. Regardless of your view on abortion, you can't use fetuses in this argument.


To come to their defense for a moment, the bulk of Republican Congressman hail from the number one tobacco producer in the world -- The South.

There's no way their constituency is going to be happy with them voting for a bill that'll economically cripple their industry.

So what's BMD's excuse? :p

ink
02-05-2009, 05:10 PM
Outstanding news. Congratulations for this one!!

behindmydesk
02-05-2009, 05:11 PM
The amount of money is a non-factor. Both parties pass bills worth billions of dollars all the time. I would say that Republicans wanting to help the poor who pay taxes is true, but their idea of help and the Democrats' idea is far apart.

Ehh, I'm talking about children already requiring the assistance of government to ensure their survival. Regardless of your view on abortion, you can't use fetuses in this argument.



So what's BMD's excuse? :p

I hate children especially poor ones.

ari1013
02-05-2009, 05:21 PM
I hate children especially poor ones.
I knew it! I knew you were an *******! I just knew it!

:)

gcoll
02-05-2009, 08:58 PM
It always cracks me up how stubborn Republicans are to aid the poor in any way. And now we're talking about innocent, defenseless children and only nine Republicans found the bill to be worth their vote. :pity:

Republicans believe in liberty, limited government, and self reliance. Sometimes people paint that as "hating the poor" but all it really is is a desire to see the government play less of a role in people's day to day lives.

Also, Republicans sometimes think this type of thing could be handled better on a state by state basis, rather than at the federal level.

DenButsu
02-05-2009, 11:22 PM
I was glad to see this pass for the sake of the bill itself since I support moves to increase health care, especially for those who need it the most.

But I was also glad just to see that in spite of being heavily bogged down with all the stimulus bill hoopla, Obama is continuing to execute other aspects of his agenda, and the Hill hasn't grinded to a complete halt.

Brewersin08
02-06-2009, 01:41 AM
Maybe Glenn Beck and myself are the only two people to see the ridicolousness of this bill. A children's health bill that depends upon cigarette taxes to support it? So are schools now going to start teaching that smoking is good? Because without new smokers, there isn't any funding for this bill. I don't care if this bill benefits little children or not. The government has no right to tell people how much money to give to charity.

DenButsu
02-06-2009, 01:57 AM
Glen Beck's universe: Where "having a healthy population" equates to "giving to charity".

It's so nice not living there. :)

Brewersin08
02-06-2009, 02:03 AM
Glen Beck's universe: Where "having a healthy population" equates to "giving to charity".

It's so nice not living there. :)

Glenn Beck is certainly way out there on alot of issues, but I agree with him here. Yes it is charity. My parents pay for my health insurance. Why aren't they eligible for special treatment? Why should one group (the poor) recieve any more help from the government than anyone else? The government needs to stay out of social issues.

Brewersin08
02-06-2009, 02:19 AM
Health care and education are not rights, they are privelages. I think if parents were forced to start paying for public schooling we would see more involvement by the parents, and an overall better performance by problem students, or removal of problem students which would improve the group as a whole. Right now a lot of these parents have nothing invested in their children's education, they rent, and don't pay property taxes.

ink
02-06-2009, 02:25 AM
^ You've got a point there about privileges. It's vital that there be a separation in terms of health and education between the rich and the poor. Maintain that division and protect all that is good and right. ;)

ink
02-06-2009, 02:44 AM
I am so grateful this is now law so it is no longer a debate topic.

DenButsu
02-06-2009, 02:51 AM
Why should one group (the poor) recieve any more help from the government than anyone else?

Because first of all, they need it. And secondly, a lot of other, richer people get a lot more help from the government than the poor do.

BroadwayJoe
02-06-2009, 09:43 AM
health is not a privilege... it's part of that whole "LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" thingamajig...

EVERYONE deserves to be healthy in america... especially defenseless kids!

Zep
02-06-2009, 09:51 AM
My parents pay for my health insurance.

Stopped reading here...

behindmydesk
02-06-2009, 10:30 AM
Health care and education are not rights, they are privelages. I think if parents were forced to start paying for public schooling we would see more involvement by the parents, and an overall better performance by problem students, or removal of problem students which would improve the group as a whole. Right now a lot of these parents have nothing invested in their children's education, they rent, and don't pay property taxes.

what do you think your property taxes, and state taxes are for?

SmthBluCitrus
02-06-2009, 10:33 AM
.

CuseDude87
02-06-2009, 12:45 PM
Health care and education are not rights, they are privelages. I think if parents were forced to start paying for public schooling we would see more involvement by the parents, and an overall better performance by problem students, or removal of problem students which would improve the group as a whole. Right now a lot of these parents have nothing invested in their children's education, they rent, and don't pay property taxes.

Oh, you're right. I forgot we had a caste system here in the U.S.

ari1013
02-06-2009, 12:50 PM
Health care and education are not rights, they are privelages. I think if parents were forced to start paying for public schooling we would see more involvement by the parents, and an overall better performance by problem students, or removal of problem students which would improve the group as a whole. Right now a lot of these parents have nothing invested in their children's education, they rent, and don't pay property taxes.
That's a sad, sad statement.

Life is an inalienable right in this country. Without good health, we have no life.

And you seriously don't believe that people shouldn't have a right to an education? I can understand that Glenn Beck might rather have a group of brainless zombies listen to him, but you've gotta know better than that.

Brewersin08
02-06-2009, 01:04 PM
That's a sad, sad statement.

Life is an inalienable right in this country. Without good health, we have no life.

And you seriously don't believe that people shouldn't have a right to an education? I can understand that Glenn Beck might rather have a group of brainless zombies listen to him, but you've gotta know better than that.

So you think we should close abortion clinics right? That interferes with someone's right to a life. How about that fertility clinic that allowed that lady to have 8 embryos implanted in her? What kind of life will those 8 plus the 6 she already has have? Don't give me the liberal ******** about how we need to give everyone a chance at life, when you support places that take lives, and create freaks that will have terrible lives. Health care is not a right, it's a service that you pay for, much like a TV. Education is also a service that should be paid for, not given to you for free. Alot of people rent and pay no property taxes, shouldering the burden of the education system on home owners who may not even have children.

BroadwayJoe
02-06-2009, 01:10 PM
you just compared health care to paying for cable

your logic fails

ari1013
02-06-2009, 01:11 PM
So you think we should close abortion clinics right? That interferes with someone's right to a life. How about that fertility clinic that allowed that lady to have 8 embryos implanted in her? What kind of life will those 8 plus the 6 she already has have? Don't give me the liberal ******** about how we need to give everyone a chance at life, when you support places that take lives, and create freaks that will have terrible lives. Health care is not a right, it's a service that you pay for, much like a TV. Education is also a service that should be paid for, not given to you for free. Alot of people rent and pay no property taxes, shouldering the burden of the education system on home owners who may not even have children.
If you really want to get technical -- as it's clear you do -- abortions occur pre-life.

ari1013
02-06-2009, 01:13 PM
you just compared health care to paying for cable

your logic fails
That's what happens when you get home schooled. Because obviously, since education shouldn't be provided, he definitely must not have gone to school.

behindmydesk
02-06-2009, 01:16 PM
If you really want to get technical -- as it's clear you do -- abortions occur pre-life.

Cue in the abortion debate. Where does life being!

ari1013
02-06-2009, 01:18 PM
Cue in the abortion debate. Where does life being!
It's the fallback option for any Talk Radio listener. Once their leader has been shown to be incompetent, they'll drag out their social values and say that anyone who disagrees is giving them "liberal ********."

ink
02-06-2009, 01:20 PM
Let's not veer off into a right to life debate.

BroadwayJoe
02-06-2009, 01:21 PM
Cue in the abortion debate. Where does life being!

the thing is, while there is a debate regarding whether or not life begins pre or post delivery, there is NO debate about the "life" of an already living child

thus, brewers' attempt to use the abortion debate in regards to the health care issue at hand is both invalid and utterly flawed

ink
02-06-2009, 01:22 PM
the thing is, while there is a debate regarding whether or not life begins pre or post delivery, there is NO debate about the "life" of an already living child

thus, brewers' attempt to use the abortion debate in regards to the health care issue at hand is both invalid and utterly flawed

And off topic. :smoking:

Brewersin08
02-06-2009, 01:23 PM
you just compared health care to paying for cable

your logic fails

They are both services. Services are things that are bought, not given to you for free. If you can't afford it, that's your problem.

ink
02-06-2009, 01:25 PM
35 billion is a tough pill to swallow.

Over 5 years that's 7 billion per year. Considering what it achieves, it's really not that high.

Zep
02-06-2009, 01:29 PM
Let's not veer off into a right to life debate.

Killjoy

joking, joking

BroadwayJoe
02-06-2009, 01:29 PM
They are both services. Services are things that are bought, not given to you for free. If you can't afford it, that's your problem.

what part of the bill of rights do you not understand? health falls directly under that whole "the right to life..." part. cable... not so much.

i think you'd be better served living in ancient india with a system of classes... that seems to better suit your mentality and outlook on life.

Brewersin08
02-06-2009, 01:30 PM
It's the fallback option for any Talk Radio listener. Once their leader has been shown to be incompetent, they'll drag out their social values and say that anyone who disagrees is giving them "liberal ********."

He claimed that "life" is an inalienable right. If he truly believed that, he would be against abortion, since it prevents a baby from living its life. Also, I am a senior at a public high school, not home schooled. I strongly disagree with the public school system, and think people should pay for school themselves, not depend on Uncle Sam. Free school lunches piss me off even more. You honestly can't afford to pay the $2.10 for lunch? If that's the case the kid should be taken from the home, because they can't be getting fed to well at home. And if the government is going to give away free lunch, they better give it to everyone.

BroadwayJoe
02-06-2009, 01:31 PM
so young, and such a bleak outlook at life...

ink
02-06-2009, 01:34 PM
He claimed that "life" is an inalienable right. If he truly believed that, he would be against abortion, since it prevents a baby from living its life. Also, I am a senior at a public high school, not home schooled. I strongly disagree with the public school system, and think people should pay for school themselves, not depend on Uncle Sam. Free school lunches piss me off even more. You honestly can't afford to pay the $2.10 for lunch? If that's the case the kid should be taken from the home, because they can't be getting fed to well at home. And if the government is going to give away free lunch, they better give it to everyone.

Sounds like you're cribbing from Charles Dickens characters.

Brewersin08
02-06-2009, 01:39 PM
Sounds like you're cribbing from Charles Dickens characters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaKkuJVy2YA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvICN8DNMpY&feature=related

behindmydesk
02-06-2009, 02:10 PM
Over 5 years that's 7 billion per year. Considering what it achieves, it's really not that high.

it's 25 bucks a year for every person in this country.

ink
02-06-2009, 02:18 PM
it's 25 bucks a year for every person in this country.

Where do I send my check? That's peanuts. :) I've spent more on coffee in a week ...

Zep
02-06-2009, 02:24 PM
Where do I send my check? That's peanuts. :) I've spent more on coffee in a week ...

The best way to send them is to make them out to cash:

c/o Zep
PSD Political Sub-Forum


I will also accept payment in the form of Dunkin Donuts coffee, so....bonus.

SmthBluCitrus
02-06-2009, 02:28 PM
Mmmm ... coffee.

ink
02-06-2009, 02:39 PM
The best way to send them is to make them out to cash:

c/o Zep
PSD Political Sub-Forum


I will also accept payment in the form of Dunkin Donuts coffee, so....bonus.

:laugh2:

behindmydesk
02-06-2009, 03:05 PM
I understand where you are coming from ink. But its' 25 bucks per person here, 40 bucks here 3 bucks here etc. Now granted that is not factoring in corp profits at all. Thank god for Exxon and their 40 billion a year tax contribution.

behindmydesk
02-06-2009, 03:08 PM
You know that's one thing I hate about the left, and the general population. They are quick to say look at Exxon making so much money, they dont' say look at how much they are paying in taxes.

I think certain programs should be Insert federal program to help insert something brougth to you by Exxon.

As long as that program isn't anything to do with booze, tankers, or oil spills.

ink
02-06-2009, 04:47 PM
They are quick to say look at Exxon making so much money, they dont' say look at how much they are paying in taxes.


Funny you should mention Exxon ... they've partnered with a Vancouver-based fuel cell company called Questair to develop an on-vehicle hydrogen production system for use in fuel cell-powered trucks. On their way to becoming the good guys ... :D

ari1013
02-06-2009, 05:31 PM
He claimed that "life" is an inalienable right. If he truly believed that, he would be against abortion, since it prevents a baby from living its life. Also, I am a senior at a public high school, not home schooled. I strongly disagree with the public school system, and think people should pay for school themselves, not depend on Uncle Sam. Free school lunches piss me off even more. You honestly can't afford to pay the $2.10 for lunch? If that's the case the kid should be taken from the home, because they can't be getting fed to well at home. And if the government is going to give away free lunch, they better give it to everyone.
Such hypocrisy from you. :)

When you have to face the world for yourself you'll see things in a different light. Most Democrats AND Republicans have a completely different set of priorities than 14-18 year old high school kids.

gcoll
02-06-2009, 05:31 PM
health is not a privilege... it's part of that whole "LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" thingamajig
No it's not.

You can argue that it's a right, but not based on that. That's not what those mean.

The health care as a right argument belongs in the "liberty vs. security" debate. Which means...you give up a bit of liberty to have the government control and distribute health care.

Oh, you're right. I forgot we had a caste system here in the U.S.
We do. It's called college.

ari1013
02-06-2009, 05:35 PM
No it's not.

You can argue that it's a right, but not based on that. That's not what those mean.

The health care as a right argument belongs in the "liberty vs. security" debate. Which means...you give up a bit of liberty to have the government control and distribute health care.

We do. It's called college.
Who says the government has to provide it? Why can't we simply let the government negotiate prices for us to make HC more affordable?

gcoll
02-06-2009, 05:38 PM
Who says the government has to provide it? Why can't we simply let the government negotiate prices for us to make HC more affordable?

We can, if we want. But that wouldn't fall under "life, liberty and pursuit of happiness".

But is what you're suggesting, with one giant buyer.....they can have more influence on prices? And you suggest making that buyer the Federal government?

behindmydesk
02-06-2009, 05:44 PM
Funny you should mention Exxon ... they've partnered with a Vancouver-based fuel cell company called Questair to develop an on-vehicle hydrogen production system for use in fuel cell-powered trucks. On their way to becoming the good guys ... :D

no they are just such a great company they know when to make money off a situation.

ari1013
02-06-2009, 05:54 PM
We can, if we want. But that wouldn't fall under "life, liberty and pursuit of happiness".

But is what you're suggesting, with one giant buyer.....they can have more influence on prices? And you suggest making that buyer the Federal government?
Yes. When a family buys health insurance they pay less per person than they would if each individual got it alone.

It's much cheaper for the insurance companies to have groups of buyers than individual buyers. That's part of the reason that they're able to charge us less when we buy collectively at our workplaces.

ari1013
02-06-2009, 05:55 PM
no they are just such a great company they know when to make money off a situation.
That's my thought. They know that there's probably only a few more decades of profit to be made from oil. So why not get a head start on the next source of energy?

ink
02-06-2009, 05:58 PM
That's my thought. They know that there's probably only a few more decades of profit to be made from oil. So why not get a head start on the next source of energy?

That's what I was getting at with my comment ... that and they don't want to become the Underwood Typewriters of the energy sector.

CuseDude87
02-06-2009, 06:11 PM
We do. It's called college.

And this relates to healthcare how?

As for college being a caste system, there's a reason it's called higher education. There's nothing stopping you from going all the way through high school on federal funding and then earning a scholarship to a college (also free). The difference is basic education should be provided; higher education is up to the individual.

ink
02-06-2009, 06:13 PM
And this relates to healthcare how?

As for college being a caste system, there's a reason it's called higher education. There's nothing stopping you from going all the way through high school on federal funding and then earning a scholarship to a college (also free). The difference is basic education should be provided; higher education is up to the individual.

Some would argue that a country that wants to compete in the global marketplace would ensure that higher education is provided (or at least made affordable) too. But that's a topic for another thread.

CuseDude87
02-06-2009, 06:17 PM
Some would argue that a country that wants to compete in the global marketplace would ensure that higher education is provided (or at least made affordable) too. But that's a topic for another thread.

Haha, of course. I really didn't want to put that in though, because I didn't want to see Brewersin08's reaction. I suppose his response would be something to the effect of, "If you work really hard, regardless of your environment, you'll get in to any college you want" or some other BS.

Randy West
02-06-2009, 06:19 PM
Mo money
Mo money
Mo money

gcoll
02-06-2009, 06:20 PM
And this relates to healthcare how?
It doesn't. You mentioned a caste system. We do have one. Those who have college degrees on one end, those who don't on the other.


As for college being a caste system, there's a reason it's called higher education.
It's a scam. If it were really "higher education" there wouldn't be so many stupid people hanging around.

It's a place of indoctrination, and of ripping kids off of their money while posing as a place of higher education. They also get to be the gate keepers between a good career, and a not so good career. That's bull ****.

CuseDude87
02-06-2009, 06:35 PM
It's a scam. If it were really "higher education" there wouldn't be so many stupid people hanging around.

It's a place of indoctrination, and of ripping kids off of their money while posing as a place of higher education. They also get to be the gate keepers between a good career, and a not so good career. That's bull ****.

Are you saying that people should go from being "stupid" to, I suppose, "knowledgeable" just because they attended college? If so, I have news for you, friend. By the time most students get to college age, they've already decided whether or not to be open to new things.

Take Brewersin08 here. It's painfully obvious that he has mentally checked out from learning new perspectives on life, and he hasn't even graduated from high school yet! The idea that everyone who gets into college will come out with a new outlook on life is a fantasy at best. However, going to college does afford you the opportunity--if you wish to take it--to see various new worldviews that can shape the way you look at life after graduation.

You are correct, there is a lot of indoctrination involved in the college system. Your hope is to find at least one professor during your career that will help guide you through the bureaucracy and see what viewing things in perspective really means. If you never receive that guidance, then you'll end up a bitter graduate whose only goal in the world is to make a lot of money.

I agree with ink, there should be federal funding for higher education, as well. I don't believe that only people who can afford it should go. Hell, I'm paying for my entire four years from loans. I know what it is going to be like after I graduate, and it won't be easy.

gcoll
02-06-2009, 06:44 PM
Are you saying that people should go from being "stupid" to, I suppose, "knowledgeable" just because they attended college?
I'm saying a couple things.

a) stupid people don't belong in college.
b) a college degree shouldn't be necessary for starting a good career, and working your way up through a company.


Take Brewersin08 here. It's painfully obvious that he has mentally checked out from learning new perspectives on life, and he hasn't even graduated from high school yet!
Well. With that condescending attitude towards people who disagree with you, college would be a great fit for you.

That's another effect college has. It imbues people with an unwarranted sense of self importance, and confidence in their intellectual ability.


The idea that everyone who gets into college will come out with a new outlook on life is a fantasy at best
I don't give a **** about new world views, or "opening up minds" or "new experiences"...that's just a bunch of hippy liberal bull ****.


You are correct, there is a lot of indoctrination involved in the college system. Your hope is to find at least one professor during your career that will help guide you through the bureaucracy and see what viewing things in perspective really means.
Which is indoctrination. Which is wrong. Which does not belong in a place that is supposed to be about education.


If you never receive that guidance, then you'll end up a bitter graduate whose only goal in the world is to make a lot of money.
I do not need guidance.

CuseDude87
02-06-2009, 07:07 PM
I'm saying a couple things.

a) stupid people don't belong in college.
b) a college degree shouldn't be necessary for starting a good career, and working your way up through a company.


Well. With that condescending attitude towards people who disagree with you, college would be a great fit for you.

That's another effect college has. It imbues people with an unwarranted sense of self importance, and confidence in their intellectual ability.


I don't give a **** about new world views, or "opening up minds" or "new experiences"...that's just a bunch of hippy liberal bull ****.


Which is indoctrination. Which is wrong. Which does not belong in a place that is supposed to be about education.


I do not need guidance.

Case in point.

ink
02-06-2009, 07:24 PM
Case in point.

In terms of basic brain development, exposure to new world views is probably the best exercise you could ever ask for.

I've had my eyes opened to lots of Republican thinking here in the Obama forum. ;) It doesn't mean I have to agree, but it helps me understand the obstacles that have to be overcome and the beliefs that counter my own. IMO this is all CuseDude is asking for.

PHX-SOXFAN
02-06-2009, 07:39 PM
Case in point.

stubbornness is sad. so is thinking that educating yourself and experiencing alternative philosophies and cultures is liberal hippy bs.:rolleyes::rolleyes: damn that learning and education it just makes people smarter and more tolerant and hurts the size of the conservative voting block.:rolleyes:

CuseDude87
02-06-2009, 08:20 PM
In terms of basic brain development, exposure to new world views is probably the best exercise you could ever ask for.

I've had my eyes opened to lots of Republican thinking here in the Obama forum. ;) It doesn't mean I have to agree, but it helps me understand the obstacles that have to be overcome and the beliefs that counter my own. IMO this is all CuseDude is asking for.

Yes, it is. It gives you perspective on how others see the world, and it reminds you that your culture is not the only (or correct) way to see the world.


stubbornness is sad. so is thinking that educating yourself and experiencing alternative philosophies and cultures is liberal hippy bs.:rolleyes::rolleyes: damn that learning and education it just makes people smarter and more tolerant and hurts the size of the conservative voting block.:rolleyes:

At first, I thought your post was criticizing me. :) After re-reading it though, I understand the point you were making.

While it is true that the higher education system is flawed in its attempts to "weed out" those it does not deem "intelligent enough," staying within your geographical bubble will not help things either. At no point did I say someone couldn't gain the same insights into different perspectives of the world by traveling abroad and speaking to the local communities.

gcoll
02-07-2009, 01:04 AM
Case in point.
Please do not patronize me.


In terms of basic brain development, exposure to new world views is probably the best exercise you could ever ask for.
I get exposed to "new world views" through reading the work of great authors. Through reading the words of philosophers. Through watching the films of great directors.

I don't care what some girl with orange skin thinks about Socrates.

so is thinking that educating yourself and experiencing alternative philosophies and cultures is liberal hippy bs
That's not really what I meant to say.

College has turned those concepts into meaningless talking points. Like "diversity". I will say "**** diversity". But I don't mean "**** the concept of diversity" I mean "**** the talking point diversity" because it's meaningless in the context that it is used. That is what I mean about "hippy liberal bs".


damn that learning and education it just makes people smarter and more tolerant and hurts the size of the conservative voting block
"Tolerance" is another one.


Yes, it is. It gives you perspective on how others see the world, and it reminds you that your culture is not the only (or correct) way to see the world.
Kind of.

For example. If you want to criticize Christianity.....it's fine. You can have a nice little debate. Sometimes it gets heated. But often times it's done under the facade that we are participating in some kind of interesting, scholarly exercise.

Criticize Islam and watch how fast they call it hate speech. Why? Because you need to be "tolerant". Because you need to "be open to different ideas", you need to "appreciate diversity", you need to learn that "your culture isn't the only way to view the world". Get what I'm saying?


While it is true that the higher education system is flawed in its attempts to "weed out" those it does not deem "intelligent enough,"
Because it's goal is not to be a place of higher education. It's goal is to make money, and to indoctrinate people. That's the purpose it serves. That's what it does.

It robs the people who don't take higher education seriously, and wastes the time of those that do.

Brewersin08
02-07-2009, 01:09 AM
Are you saying that people should go from being "stupid" to, I suppose, "knowledgeable" just because they attended college? If so, I have news for you, friend. By the time most students get to college age, they've already decided whether or not to be open to new things.

Take Brewersin08 here. It's painfully obvious that he has mentally checked out from learning new perspectives on life, and he hasn't even graduated from high school yet! The idea that everyone who gets into college will come out with a new outlook on life is a fantasy at best. However, going to college does afford you the opportunity--if you wish to take it--to see various new worldviews that can shape the way you look at life after graduation.

You are correct, there is a lot of indoctrination involved in the college system. Your hope is to find at least one professor during your career that will help guide you through the bureaucracy and see what viewing things in perspective really means. If you never receive that guidance, then you'll end up a bitter graduate whose only goal in the world is to make a lot of money.
I agree with ink, there should be federal funding for higher education, as well. I don't believe that only people who can afford it should go. Hell, I'm paying for my entire four years from loans. I know what it is going to be like after I graduate, and it won't be easy.

I love how liberals say that people need to be more tolerant of other cultures. They are tolerant of everyone but themselves. If you disagree with them they think you are a biggot. I'm proud of my culture and heritage. Stop with the white guilt. I honestly think liberals hate themselves because they are white, and wish they were a minority. Also, I'm not bitter, I just want to see the government stay out of people's lives. Let people fail. People have this attitude that we need the government to look out for us. Take Chris Gardner (Pursuit of Happiness), he become the head of a huge stock brokerage firm after being homeless. I know you're going to say that this is an isolated situation and not truly representative of what really happens, but I think that if people do actually try, they can make something out of their lives without the help of the government, and if they aren't willing to try, **** them.

ink
02-07-2009, 01:19 AM
... if people do actually try, they can make something out of their lives without the help of the government, and if they aren't willing to try, **** them.

And if they try and succeed, then get sideswiped by an economic crash, a traffic accident, or a prolonged and expensive illness **** them then too. In fact, why even give them a chance as children right? Just working through the though process ...

gcoll
02-07-2009, 01:22 AM
And if they try and succeed, then get sideswiped by an economic crash, a traffic accident, or a prolonged and expensive illness **** them then too. In fact, why even give them a chance as children right? Just working through the though process ...

The thought process is that "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have".

And yes, I realize how annoying the use of quotes can be, but **** it.

*note. I'm not arguing for or against the expansion of S-Chip. I'm just trying to relay to you guys the conservative thought process. A lot of times the liberals paint it as "hating the poor" or something like that. It's not the case. Why would I hate the poor? I never had health insurance when I was a kid.

ink
02-07-2009, 01:27 AM
The thought process is that "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have".

And yes, I realize how annoying the use of quotes can be, but **** it.

*note. I'm not arguing for or against the expansion of S-Chip. I'm just trying to relay to you guys the conservative thought process. A lot of times the liberals paint it as "hating the poor" or something like that. It's not the case. Why would I hate the poor? I never had health insurance when I was a kid.

I understand what you're saying. I don't agree with it, but I understand it. The point I'm making is that Social Darwinism isn't very persuasive if one is trying to make converts. Too many completely innocent people suffer unjustly and that is why the passionate drive for health coverage for children.

CuseDude87
02-07-2009, 01:52 AM
Please do not patronize me.

And this isn't patronizing?
|
|
V


that's just a bunch of hippy liberal bull ****.

Of course it is. It goes both ways.


I get exposed to "new world views" through reading the work of great authors. Through reading the words of philosophers. Through watching the films of great directors.

You do know that this is what also occurs in college, right?


I don't care what some girl with orange skin thinks about Socrates.

I hope you can look at this statement and see how you're missing my point entirely.


College has turned those concepts into meaningless talking points. Like "diversity". I will say "**** diversity". But I don't mean "**** the concept of diversity" I mean "**** the talking point diversity" because it's meaningless in the context that it is used. That is what I mean about "hippy liberal bs".

While some of what you say is certainly valid--especially the diversity part--your tone implies bitterness. To me, it seems that you either a) didn't go to college, or b) had a terrible experience in college. Which is it?


Kind of.

For example. If you want to criticize Christianity.....it's fine. You can have a nice little debate. Sometimes it gets heated. But often times it's done under the facade that we are participating in some kind of interesting, scholarly exercise.

Criticize Islam and watch how fast they call it hate speech. Why? Because you need to be "tolerant". Because you need to "be open to different ideas", you need to "appreciate diversity", you need to learn that "your culture isn't the only way to view the world". Get what I'm saying?

I'm not sure at what venue you are talking about criticizing Christianity or Islam, but if you do it in a college classroom and actually bring up valid points, no professor is going to crucify you (pun intended) and call it hate speech.

Also, I never said a thing about "tolerance."


Because it's goal is not to be a place of higher education. It's goal is to make money, and to indoctrinate people. That's the purpose it serves. That's what it does.

It robs the people who don't take higher education seriously, and wastes the time of those that do.

I think that your first paragraph is a very narcissistic way of viewing the college system. Sure, the university wants to make money. Indoctrinate? Maybe. Is that their only, undying goal? Certainly not.

I would also like ask why you feel it is okay for a business corporation to have the goal of making money but not the university. Seems to be a double standard, no?


I love how liberals say that people need to be more tolerant of other cultures. They are tolerant of everyone but themselves.

Again, I never said anything about being "tolerant."


If you disagree with them they think you are a biggot.

Not true.


I'm proud of my culture and heritage.

Good for you. You aren't the only one.


Stop with the white guilt. I honestly think liberals hate themselves because they are white, and wish they were a minority.

The "white guilt," eh? At what point did I tell you to give all of your money to blacks, Asians, Hispanics, Native Americans, and/or Other? Hmm? Please, tell me.

You know what I honestly think? I honestly think white liberals wish they could share the privileges they possess (based solely on the lottery of birth to white parents, by the way) with those who face institutionalized racism every day of their lives. And I honestly think white conservatives could give a damn.


Also, I'm not bitter, I just want to see the government stay out of people's lives. Let people fail.

You certainly have no reason to be bitter. You were born into the higher class, according to our society. You live every day with the privileges of being a white male. You face no type of discrimination, no matter what you do. You have more of an opportunity to make something of yourself than most people in the world could dream of. And when someone or something requests a bit of reciprocation that will not cause you irreparable harm in the long run, you balk. That sounds humane.


People have this attitude that we need the government to look out for us.

You are speaking from the privileged majority. Try to keep that in mind.


Take Chris Gardner (Pursuit of Happiness), he become the head of a huge stock brokerage firm after being homeless.

Okay, fair enough. Let's see where this goes.


I know you're going to say that this is an isolated situation and not truly representative of what really happens, but I think that if people do actually try, they can make something out of their lives without the help of the government,

No, you're right. This is truly representative of what happens. Now, I want you to try. Become the head of a huge stock brokerage firm in 30 years. Oh wait, you have to go live on the streets for a while first. If you're not head of that huge firm by the time 2039 rolls around, here's what I can say:


and if they aren't willing to try, **** them.

"I guess you weren't willing to try. Sorry."

gcoll
02-07-2009, 02:16 AM
We've wandered off topic.

Back to S-Chip.

DenButsu
02-07-2009, 04:01 AM
I don't give a **** about new world views, or "opening up minds" or "new experiences"...that's just a bunch of hippy liberal bull ****.

Hey, I resemble that remark! :mad:

But seriously, dude, if you're serious about maintaining that closed-minded hardline, you are doing yourself a great disservice. Everybody should travel the world if they have the chance to do so. If not, they should cross over to those parts of town they never go. Pushing yourself beyond your horizons of familiarity is the best educational experience you can get, imho. Obviously, since I don't live in the U.S. anymore, and have traveled a good deal, I'm biased. But I think my experience counts for something. And I'm not trying to play the wisened sage or anything like that. I just know that so many of my own false assumptions have been questioned and corrected through encounters beyond what I'd previously known, and so many of my own limited ways of thinking have been cracked open through exposure to the unexpected, that I value those things highly. And hell, new world views, opening up minds, and new experiences are just plain fun. You seem like an inquisitive person who likes to question the assumptions that you and others hold. I'd be surprised if you didn't also dig the whole "new experiences" thing. :smoking:

In the words of Robert Hunter, "Once in a while you can get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right"

And THAT is some 100% genuine hippy **** for ya. :cheers:

Brewersin08
02-07-2009, 01:22 PM
And this isn't patronizing?
|
|
V



Of course it is. It goes both ways.



You do know that this is what also occurs in college, right?



I hope you can look at this statement and see how you're missing my point entirely.



While some of what you say is certainly valid--especially the diversity part--your tone implies bitterness. To me, it seems that you either a) didn't go to college, or b) had a terrible experience in college. Which is it?



I'm not sure at what venue you are talking about criticizing Christianity or Islam, but if you do it in a college classroom and actually bring up valid points, no professor is going to crucify you (pun intended) and call it hate speech.

Also, I never said a thing about "tolerance."



I think that your first paragraph is a very narcissistic way of viewing the college system. Sure, the university wants to make money. Indoctrinate? Maybe. Is that their only, undying goal? Certainly not.

I would also like ask why you feel it is okay for a business corporation to have the goal of making money but not the university. Seems to be a double standard, no?



Again, I never said anything about being "tolerant."



Not true.



Good for you. You aren't the only one.



The "white guilt," eh? At what point did I tell you to give all of your money to blacks, Asians, Hispanics, Native Americans, and/or Other? Hmm? Please, tell me.

You know what I honestly think? I honestly think white liberals wish they could share the privileges they possess (based solely on the lottery of birth to white parents, by the way) with those who face institutionalized racism every day of their lives. And I honestly think white conservatives could give a damn.


You certainly have no reason to be bitter. You were born into the higher class, according to our society. You live every day with the privileges of being a white male. You face no type of discrimination, no matter what you do. You have more of an opportunity to make something of yourself than most people in the world could dream of. And when someone or something requests a bit of reciprocation that will not cause you irreparable harm in the long run, you balk. That sounds humane.



You are speaking from the privileged majority. Try to keep that in mind.



Okay, fair enough. Let's see where this goes.



No, you're right. This is truly representative of what happens. Now, I want you to try. Become the head of a huge stock brokerage firm in 30 years. Oh wait, you have to go live on the streets for a while first. If you're not head of that huge firm by the time 2039 rolls around, here's what I can say:



"I guess you weren't willing to try. Sorry."

Why share your possessions that were given to you with a group of people that for the most part doesn't even appreciate them? A group of people who take your money every month with no intention of getting off welfare? White males don't face discrimination? Affirmative action? Chris Gardner actually did it in about ten years by the way. I don't want to be the head of a brokerage firm, so why would I try to do that? No, in 30 years I will be a lawyer possibly running for congress.

CuseDude87
02-07-2009, 04:16 PM
Why share your possessions that were given to you with a group of people that for the most part doesn't even appreciate them?

The possessions I was "given" simply based on the color of my skin?


A group of people who take your money every month with no intention of getting off welfare?

Are you really generalizing entire racial groups based on the actions of a few? Please post some stats that back up your claim that a majority of the people on welfare abuse it.

P.S. Poor white people are on welfare too.


White males don't face discrimination? Affirmative action?

Wow, your entire defense is based on affirmative action? Sad. While AA is not a particularly well thought out or efficient program, it does have an undeniable effect on getting some people out of dangerous environments and into the working world. Should it be improved upon? Definitely. Can it be done? Of course. Should it be eliminated in the mean time? Hell no.


Chris Gardner actually did it in about ten years by the way. I don't want to be the head of a brokerage firm, so why would I try to do that? No, in 30 years I will be a lawyer possibly running for congress.

You missed my point entirely.

I'm telling you to start out your career from the bottom up. Not from your parents' house, which has provided you with comfort and safety your entire life, and has afforded you the opportunity to complete high school and go on to obtain a college degree, but from the gutter. You say Gardner was homeless for a while? Go live on the street and try to get a job. And, if in ten years, you manage to accomplish what you set out to do, remember that you did it all without the hindrance of discrimination for the color of your skin.

gcoll
02-07-2009, 04:55 PM
But seriously, dude, if you're serious about maintaining that closed-minded hardline, you are doing yourself a great disservice.
That's not what I meant. I clarified it a bit in a subsequent post, but thought it was too off topic.

A lot of that stuff has been turned into mindless talking points. Like "diversity". That's what I dislike.

Brewersin08
02-07-2009, 06:33 PM
The possessions I was "given" simply based on the color of my skin?


Are you really generalizing entire racial groups based on the actions of a few? Please post some stats that back up your claim that a majority of the people on welfare abuse it.

P.S. Poor white people are on welfare too.



Wow, your entire defense is based on affirmative action? Sad. While AA is not a particularly well thought out or efficient program, it does have an undeniable effect on getting some people out of dangerous environments and into the working world. Should it be improved upon? Definitely. Can it be done? Of course. Should it be eliminated in the mean time? Hell no.



You missed my point entirely.

I'm telling you to start out your career from the bottom up. Not from your parents' house, which has provided you with comfort and safety your entire life, and has afforded you the opportunity to complete high school and go on to obtain a college degree, but from the gutter. You say Gardner was homeless for a while? Go live on the street and try to get a job. And, if in ten years, you manage to accomplish what you set out to do, remember that you did it all without the hindrance of discrimination for the color of your skin.

I was given everything in life because my dad is white? Are you ****ing kidding me? Seriously, you really must hate yourself with comments like that. You even said yourself that there are poor white people. Your race has nothing to do with what kind of life you have, your parent's success is what determines that. I was given what I have because my father worked hard his entire life, not because he's white. There are plenty of successful black people. The ones who are living in the ghettos today are there by choice, certainly not the ones 40 years ago, but today they are. We've created a black society that just takes government protection for granted and doesn't even try anymore to get out of poverty, because that would be too difficult. It's far easier to cash that check every month.

ari1013
02-07-2009, 07:01 PM
I love how liberals say that people need to be more tolerant of other cultures. They are tolerant of everyone but themselves. If you disagree with them they think you are a biggot. I'm proud of my culture and heritage. Stop with the white guilt. I honestly think liberals hate themselves because they are white, and wish they were a minority. Also, I'm not bitter, I just want to see the government stay out of people's lives. Let people fail. People have this attitude that we need the government to look out for us. Take Chris Gardner (Pursuit of Happiness), he become the head of a huge stock brokerage firm after being homeless. I know you're going to say that this is an isolated situation and not truly representative of what really happens, but I think that if people do actually try, they can make something out of their lives without the help of the government, and if they aren't willing to try, **** them.
Didn't he drive Morgan Stanley into the ground? Perhaps not the greatest example?

ari1013
02-07-2009, 07:04 PM
I was given everything in life because my dad is white? Are you ****ing kidding me? Seriously, you really must hate yourself with comments like that. You even said yourself that there are poor white people. Your race has nothing to do with what kind of life you have, your parent's success is what determines that. I was given what I have because my father worked hard his entire life, not because he's white. There are plenty of successful black people. The ones who are living in the ghettos today are there by choice, certainly not the ones 40 years ago, but today they are. We've created a black society that just takes government protection for granted and doesn't even try anymore to get out of poverty, because that would be too difficult. It's far easier to cash that check every month.
Wow. That's so ignorant. All the people living in ghettos are there by choice? Maybe living in WASPy little suburbia you can be that close minded, but if you actually talk to people on a metro train and see what they're doing with their lives, the bulk of people are trying to work hard to make sure their children can get out of the inner city.

ink
02-07-2009, 07:54 PM
There are plenty of successful black people. The ones who are living in the ghettos today are there by choice, certainly not the ones 40 years ago, but today they are.

Sometimes a laugh is the only answer. :shrug:

CuseDude87
02-07-2009, 09:49 PM
I was given everything in life because my dad is white? Are you ****ing kidding me?

You won the lottery of birth. Don't you get it? One extra thrust from your papa and that 1,000,001 sperm gets into your mom's egg instead of you. And guess what? This alternate kid is born, and he is raised in the exact same house you have been raised in. The only difference is, this kid understands that he is lucky to have the opportunity to succeed in life, whereas you not only take it for granted, but you crucify people less fortunate than you who had the exact same chance as you of being born into our society's preferred class.


Seriously, you really must hate yourself with comments like that.

Are you hoping that including this statement in every post will eventually validate it?


You even said yourself that there are poor white people. Your race has nothing to do with what kind of life you have, your parent's success is what determines that.

Hah, false. I'm sure you don't realize this, but there are middle class black, Asian, Hispanic, etc. kids who, even though their parents have given them a good life, are STILL discriminated in our society. And you know who perpetuates this discrimination? People like YOU.


I was given what I have because my father worked hard his entire life, not because he's white. There are plenty of successful black people.

You are so naive, it's pitiful. Normally I wouldn't resort to namecalling, but after trying to help you see where I'm coming from and continually running into a brick wall, it's all I can do to keep myself entertained while you prattle away with your inane comments that may or may not come from a human's mouth.


The ones who are living in the ghettos today are there by choice, certainly not the ones 40 years ago, but today they are.

Completely brainwashed, aren't we?


We've created a black society that just takes government protection for granted and doesn't even try anymore to get out of poverty, because that would be too difficult. It's far easier to cash that check every month.

You are truly a pathetic human being.

gcoll
02-07-2009, 11:05 PM
I'm sorry for being white.

My bad.

Any time I accomplish anything in life, I'll be sure to note that it is meaningless because I am the "preferred class" and therefore was handed everything.

Brewersin08
02-08-2009, 10:38 AM
Didn't he drive Morgan Stanley into the ground? Perhaps not the greatest example?

He actually started his own firm, Gardner Rich, and is worth nearly $150 million today. So no.

Brewersin08
02-08-2009, 10:59 AM
I'm sorry for being white.

My bad.

Any time I accomplish anything in life, I'll be sure to note that it is meaningless because I am the "preferred class" and therefore was handed everything.

This guy (CuseDude87) must go home every night and write apology letters to Al Scharpton, followed by a nice evening of burning himself with lit cigarettes.

ari1013
02-08-2009, 11:01 AM
He actually started his own firm, Gardner Rich, and is worth nearly $150 million today. So no.
My bad, it was Dean Witter that crashed after he came on board. Morgan Stanley bought them up afterwards.

Good for him though with his own firm's success.

Anyway, enough with the strawman.

Brewersin08
02-08-2009, 01:20 PM
You won the lottery of birth. Don't you get it? One extra thrust from your papa and that 1,000,001 sperm gets into your mom's egg instead of you. And guess what? This alternate kid is born, and he is raised in the exact same house you have been raised in. The only difference is, this kid understands that he is lucky to have the opportunity to succeed in life, whereas you not only take it for granted, but you crucify people less fortunate than you who had the exact same chance as you of being born into our society's preferred class.



Are you hoping that including this statement in every post will eventually validate it?



Hah, false. I'm sure you don't realize this, but there are middle class black, Asian, Hispanic, etc. kids who, even though their parents have given them a good life, are STILL discriminated in our society. And you know who perpetuates this discrimination? People like YOU.



You are so naive, it's pitiful. Normally I wouldn't resort to namecalling, but after trying to help you see where I'm coming from and continually running into a brick wall, it's all I can do to keep myself entertained while you prattle away with your inane comments that may or may not come from a human's mouth.



Completely brainwashed, aren't we?



You are truly a pathetic human being.

I'm pathetic because I don't believe in forced altruism? I gave $50 this Christmas to a shelter for abused women through work. I have no problem with private charity for a worthy cause. It's when the government wants to step in and tell me who I have to give money to, and how much, that pisses me off, as well as the liberal idea that "we must create a better life for everyone." Especially when it involves creating multi billion dollar programs that people begin to think they are entitled to. I think the government should stay out of my life as much as possible.

CuseDude87
02-08-2009, 02:36 PM
I'm pathetic because I don't believe in forced altruism? I gave $50 this Christmas to a shelter for abused women through work. I have no problem with private charity for a worthy cause. It's when the government wants to step in and tell me who I have to give money to, and how much, that pisses me off, as well as the liberal idea that "we must create a better life for everyone." Especially when it involves creating multi billion dollar programs that people begin to think they are entitled to. I think the government should stay out of my life as much as possible.

You're pathetic for this quote, which has nothing to do with your last post:


We've created a black society that just takes government protection for granted and doesn't even try anymore to get out of poverty, because that would be too difficult. It's far easier to cash that check every month.

And now I'm done "discussing" this subject with you.

Brewersin08
02-08-2009, 04:57 PM
You're pathetic for this quote, which has nothing to do with your last post:



And now I'm done "discussing" this subject with you.

There's no question welfare takes away/lightens the incentive to work. That makes me "pathetic" because I think that? We have created a black society that doesn't want to work. That's absolutely true. Guys like Rev. Peterson of Bond Action, admit that the black community has been harmed by welfare. The black community and the poor in general would be much better off without welfare. I'm tired of the left calling everyone who disagrees with them words like "pathetic" or "bigot" or "fear-mongerer." This country has become drunk with the Obama kool-aid.

ari1013
02-08-2009, 07:12 PM
Let's get back on topic now. The thread is about SCHIP.

PHX-SOXFAN
02-09-2009, 12:12 PM
Let's get back on topic now. The thread is about SCHIP.

but it's funner to reference the one token black guy that sean hannity can get on his show to agree with him.:rolleyes:

gcoll
02-09-2009, 11:13 PM
but it's funner to reference the one token black guy that sean hannity can get on his show to agree with him.:rolleyes:

Token black guy?

ari1013
02-10-2009, 10:11 AM
Token black guy?
Yeah... I've given up on this thread as well.

DenButsu
02-10-2009, 11:01 AM
Not to back seat mod, CG, but you might as well lock this bad boy up. I do believe it's run its course. I'm sure health care will be back on the table in a few weeks after the dust is settled from the stimulus hoopla, so it's not like it's going away anyhow.