You realize that this was not penned or, hell, supported by Obama? That his press secretary was miffed about not getting a copy? It really seems like you guys aren't reading. look:
As a candidate, the president campaigned hard against making health insurance a requirement, and fining people for not getting it.
there's no indication that Obama would support fines.
You are "PISSED OFF AT THE PRESIDENT" that someone is presenting an idea to the him. Silly? Biased? Yes. So cool your jets bud.
And is this health care for homosexuals or by homosexuals?
Originally posted by Red Nemesis
You realize that this was not penned or, hell, supported by Obama? That his press secretary was miffed about not getting a copy? It really seems like you guys aren't reading. [b]look:You are "PISSED OFF AT THE PRESIDENT" that someone is presenting an idea to the him. Silly? Biased? Yes. So cool your jets bud.
And is this health care for homosexuals or by homosexuals? [/B]
its an adjective. Are you saying this bill isn't for homosexuals? That would be really surprisingly homophobic of you Red. 🙂
I do know that if Obama vetoes this bill, it will not pass. So if it passes, I hold him responsible.
For the sake of correctness, we are talking more like 8% of my income at my income level, btw, to correct what I said earlier.
Originally posted by Red Nemesis
You realize that this was not penned or, hell, supported by Obama? That his press secretary was miffed about not getting a copy? It really seems like you guys aren't reading. [b]look:You are "PISSED OFF AT THE PRESIDENT" that someone is presenting an idea to the him. Silly? Biased? Yes. So cool your jets bud.
And is this health care for homosexuals or by homosexuals? [/B]
I never claimed it was supported or penned by Obama. I hope that reply was to TJ. I'm asserting that the democrats can't get their shit straight. They go from one extreme to another and for once(ironically) the Republican party is united. However, all the claims I HAVE made about Obama are factual.
It was for TJ.
1. It is an adjective that refers to a sexual orientation.
2. If you mean to say that the bill has a sexual orientation then you are not worth the time of day. (Because that is dumb.)
3. If you mean to use 'homosexual' as a disparaging remark then you should remember that gay =/= bad. Using it like that is totally incorrect. To call me homophobic is both dumb and stupid, especially in light of your previous post.
4. You are angry at Obama now, during what should be a debate over policy. The only reason I can think of to be angry about is that you disagree with the bill. The bill does not originate from Obama. Being angry at him for the bill is like me being angry at candles for 9/11. Inane.
I give you 0/4. That was just bad, even the attempt at levity.
5. DS, do you think it is unusual for the Republican party to be united? Getting liberals to agree is like herding cats.
Originally posted by Red NemesisQFP.
4. You are angry at Obama now, during what should be a debate over policy. The only reason I can think of to be angry about is that you disagree with the bill. The bill does not originate from Obama. Being angry at him for the bill is like me being angry at candles for 9/11. Inane.
Originally posted by Red Nemesis
It was for TJ.1. It is an adjective that refers to a sexual orientation.
2. If you mean to say that the bill has a sexual orientation then you are not worth the time of day. (Because that is dumb.)
3. If you mean to use 'homosexual' as a disparaging remark then you should remember that gay =/= bad. Using it like that is totally incorrect. To call me homophobic is both dumb and stupid, especially in light of your previous post.
4. You are angry at Obama now, during what should be a debate over policy. The only reason I can think of to be angry about is that you disagree with the bill. The bill does not originate from Obama. Being angry at him for the bill is like me being angry at candles for 9/11. Inane.
I give you 0/4. That was just bad, even the attempt at levity.5. DS, do you think it is unusual for the Republican party to be united? Getting liberals to agree is like herding cats.
It's definitely a far cry from the election where the Republicans were bickering like crazy and the Democrats were all behind Obama so yea, it's a little weird.
Originally posted by Red Nemesis
It was for TJ.1. It is an adjective that refers to a sexual orientation.
2. If you mean to say that the bill has a sexual orientation then you are not worth the time of day. (Because that is dumb.)
3. If you mean to use 'homosexual' as a disparaging remark then you should remember that gay =/= bad. Using it like that is totally incorrect. To call me homophobic is both dumb and stupid, especially in light of your previous post.
4. You are angry at Obama now, during what should be a debate over policy. The only reason I can think of to be angry about is that you disagree with the bill. The bill does not originate from Obama. Being angry at him for the bill is like me being angry at candles for 9/11. Inane.
I give you 0/4. That was just bad, even the attempt at levity.
1. yes. But since you made four points. and I got 0/4, how is identifying what the word is for, get me a 0 point?
2. This is a bill for homosexuals, transgenders, bi-sexuals and hetero's is it not? I didn't see anything to suggest otherwise?
3.This I take a 0/1 on willingly. Do you know anyone that says "That's gay" on a regular basis? Do you correct them every time? I generally do. gay has nothing to do with it, so i have no problem being corrected on the point. It was in anger, and was mis-used to boot, so i apologize for that one.
However, I don't apologize for the homophobic comment, as it was obviously in jest, no different from when I kept telling a friend she was racist (when we both know she is the farthest possible thing from racist there is) because she preferred Italian food over Thai food. If you didn't recognize it as jest, then so help you. However, you may have found it in poor taste... If so, i've been guilty of worse things than a bad joke.
4.Yes, I disagree with this bill, and Obama IS the driving force behind the health care debate. He campaigned on it, he made it his signature issue, he asked Congress to find a way to pay for it, and he will have the final say on what passes. I feel quite secure in saying nothing like this will actually pass, but if it DOES, it will be Obama that has the final say. That is what the Veto pen is for. Its why you can blame Bush(and I do) for anything he didn't veto.
Do you correct them every time?
Yes.
Your attempt to justify your use of the word 'homosexual' shows that you at least know that it was wrong.
Obama IS the driving force behind the health care debate.
Martin Luther King Jr. was the (a, but for the integrity of the analogy, the) driving force behind the civil rights movement. That does not mean that he can be blamed for the violence that erupted during that time period. Obama can no more be held accountable for an idea presented that he has yet to endorse than Rachel Carson can be blamed for ecoterrorism.
If you are determined to spend your energy being angry at a man unrelated to the "official" cause of your anger then I cannot help you. I can only hope that you'll see just how silly and childish it is and come to a more reasonable conclusion. Until you admit this idiocy I'll not talk about the subject with you again.
Originally posted by Red Nemesis
Well then you should stop.And I am not attacking it to score points within the context of the issue but to change behavior by refusing to condone such behavior with inaction.
not disagreeing. As i said, i speak up often when it said as well. I have several friends who are homosexual, and i don't think ill of them. Here is a question though: Have you ever called someone a douche-bag? i have not, but I have heard it said often enough from h.s. students that I wouldn't be surprised if you have heard the term. Do you correct those that use that term? That they shouldn't call someone a douche-bag, when a d-bag has nothing to do with the situation at hand?
We will have to agree to disagree on the Health Care Bill. Perhaps, because I remember almost 8 years of President Bush being blamed for everything that happened in the country, from Hurricane Katrina, (Kanye, President Bush doesn't care about the Black Man) to being blamed ALONE for the war in Iraq, despite the lopsided vote in favor of, to being blamed ALONE for the economy going sour. How many times did we hear "The failed economic policies of George W. Bush" During the election?
Did he write those bills? No. Did he sign them? yes. Is he responsible for the bills that were passed? Yes.
To insinuate that Obama is not responsible for bills that he signs isn't fair in the slightest. Just because he can't control the extremist left (and extremist on both sides suck) doesn't mean he has to sign into law a bad bill. If he keeps sending it back to them, they will fix it eventually.
Its like all the lawmakers that signed the Stimulus package (O included) and then claimed later they had never read it, when parts of it were unpopular.
Is this the action of an educated people? I think not. The first thing we need to do is make it law that these people understand what they are voting on. Hell, Test them on it before they are allowed to vote for all I care. Scantron the whole lot of them!
So basically Red, after 8 years of hearing the left paint President Bush as the sole reason for every bad thing that happened in this country, and EVEN NOW hearing him blamed for every bad thing that comes up makes me a bit hesitant to say that Obama is not responsible for the things that happens in his term. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
Meeting in the middle is a concept that I would pursue, but I will not unilaterally make a move to support the left's guy simply because he is the President, considering the disrespect they poured down upon the elected President for 8 years prior.
Originally posted by Eminence
No one said anything remotely along those lines.
I know this... Did i say anyone said it? I said to insinuate it would be unfair.
It is as of right now, a concept, an idea, a propsal, which I myself said will probably not be passed. However, if it IS passed, I will indeed blame the man in the Oval office.
Originally posted by Autokrat
You know I use the word "gay" all the time when I wish to describe something as lame. In fact it's so normal that attacking the usage of it in a debate could arguably be nitpicking.
Finally, another person who uses the word in that context. We must say gay at least 100+ times during hookah sessions, with the most famous being, "dude that's gay."
Why not blame Obama for his other failures? Let's see.
1. Deficit spending
2. Stimulus packages
3. Attempt to create universal health care with no money
4. Attempt to create universal health care with upper class tax moeny
5. Allowing Bernanke and the FED to print money on obscene levels
6. Re-electing Bernanke
7. Failing to decrease the trade deficit
8. Creating a projected extra 9 trillion dollars in new debt over the next 8 years.
Let's face it. He's done nothing but take our economy to record levels since he's been in office.