Suck it Dittochumps

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:07 am

poptart wrote:
Python wrote:Again, what the heck is being taxed?
It's a tax.

It's a birth certificate.

It's a...

Fun never ends.

It's whatever they want it to be in BigGovernment Land! Hooray!

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:09 am

Barry saying the health care act is not a tax.

Oops.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Fri Jun 29, 2012 8:11 am

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Fri Jun 29, 2012 1:44 pm

Isn’t the Chief Justice supposed to be such a brilliant legal scholar? How did he wind up on the majority side?

Python · Post by **Python** » Fri Jun 29, 2012 2:34 pm

The obsession with Rush Limbaugh is disturbing on a lot of levels.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:18 pm

KC Scott wrote:

That is so cash.

:bode:

DC Smackmaster · Post by **DC Smackmaster** » Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:19 pm

Rack Scott.

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:32 pm

KC Scott wrote:We used to be an educated and intelligent country able to engage in rational debate - now we're just a macro version of T1B

Good God. Does that mean there’s multiple Cudas?

I know how much a lot of you love Paul Krugman:

The Real Winners
By PAUL KRUGMAN

So the Supreme Court — defying many expectations — upheld the Affordable Care Act, a k a Obamacare. There will, no doubt, be many headlines declaring this a big victory for President Obama, which it is. But the real winners are ordinary Americans — people like you.

How many people are we talking about? You might say 30 million, the number of additional people the Congressional Budget Office says will have health insurance thanks to Obamacare. But that vastly understates the true number of winners because millions of other Americans — including many who oppose the act — would have been at risk of being one of those 30 million.

So add in every American who currently works for a company that offers good health insurance but is at risk of losing that job (and who isn’t in this world of outsourcing and private equity buyouts?); every American who would have found health insurance unaffordable but will now receive crucial financial help; every American with a pre-existing condition who would have been flatly denied coverage in many states.

In short, unless you belong to that tiny class of wealthy Americans who are insulated and isolated from the realities of most people’s lives, the winners from that Supreme Court decision are your friends, your relatives, the people you work with — and, very likely, you. For almost all of us stand to benefit from making America a kinder and more decent society.

But what about the cost? Put it this way: the budget office’s estimate of the cost over the next decade of Obamacare’s “coverage provisions” — basically, the subsidies needed to make insurance affordable for all — is about only a third of the cost of the tax cuts, overwhelmingly favoring the wealthy, that Mitt Romney is proposing over the same period. True, Mr. Romney says that he would offset that cost, but he has failed to provide any plausible explanation of how he’d do that. The Affordable Care Act, by contrast, is fully paid for, with an explicit combination of tax increases and spending cuts elsewhere.

So the law that the Supreme Court upheld is an act of human decency that is also fiscally responsible. It’s not perfect, by a long shot — it is, after all, originally a Republican plan, devised long ago as a way to forestall the obvious alternative of extending Medicare to cover everyone. As a result, it’s an awkward hybrid of public and private insurance that isn’t the way anyone would have designed a system from scratch. And there will be a long struggle to make it better, just as there was for Social Security. (Bring back the public option!) But it’s still a big step toward a better — and by that I mean morally better — society.

Which brings us to the nature of the people who tried to kill health reform — and who will, of course, continue their efforts despite this unexpected defeat.

At one level, the most striking thing about the campaign against reform was its dishonesty. Remember “death panels”? Remember how reform’s opponents would, in the same breath, accuse Mr. Obama of promoting big government and denounce him for cutting Medicare? Politics ain’t beanbag, but, even in these partisan times, the unscrupulous nature of the campaign against reform was exceptional. And, rest assured, all the old lies and probably a bunch of new ones will be rolled out again in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision. Let’s hope the Democrats are ready.

But what was and is really striking about the anti-reformers is their cruelty. It would be one thing if, at any point, they had offered any hint of an alternative proposal to help Americans with pre-existing conditions, Americans who simply can’t afford expensive individual insurance, Americans who lose coverage along with their jobs. But it has long been obvious that the opposition’s goal is simply to kill reform, never mind the human consequences. We should all be thankful that, for the moment at least, that effort has failed.

Let me add a final word on the Supreme Court.

Before the arguments began, the overwhelming consensus among legal experts who aren’t hard-core conservatives — and even among some who are — was that Obamacare was clearly constitutional. And, in the end, thanks to Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., the court upheld that view. But four justices dissented, and did so in extreme terms, proclaiming not just the much-disputed individual mandate but the whole act unconstitutional. Given prevailing legal opinion, it’s hard to see that position as anything but naked partisanship.

The point is that this isn’t over — not on health care, not on the broader shape of American society. The cruelty and ruthlessness that made this court decision such a nail-biter aren’t going away.

But, for now, let’s celebrate. This was a big day, a victory for due process, decency and the American people.

Derron · Post by **Derron** » Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:33 pm

War Wagon wrote:
"Suck it Dittochumps", that's the best you could do?

No reaching across the aisle for this guy.

Tolerance mother fucker..tolerance...

Derron · Post by **Derron** » Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:36 pm

Truman wrote:
And once your precious Obamacare is gone - it's gone. Maybe in another generation when everybody either dies or forgets how destructive and dangerous a Democrat controlled House, Senate and Whitehouse are to our republic, you will have the votes again to pass such an abominable tax on the American people.

I will just go ahead and rack this right now. Maybe the libtards will understand common sense and the Constitution by then.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Fri Jun 29, 2012 7:46 pm

88 wrote:If there are so many countries out there that are better than the United States, why isn't a smart guy like you packing your shit and taking the next plane out of this shit hole?

Because I love my family and my country.

Van · Post by **Van** » Fri Jun 29, 2012 8:08 pm

For what will likely be the only time in my life, I have to side with KC Scott against 88 in a discussion about...anything.

That clip is fucking brilliant. Yes, 88's point about the Constitution is salient, except for one basic fact: it hasn't produced a better country. It's produced a very powerful country, yes, but that's largely a matter of blind good fortune based on locale and Europe having more irksome issues to deal with during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Nonetheless, for all of our good fortune, why do we lack in so many important areas compared to so many other countries?

Well, to play devil's advocate, one reason so many countries enjoy a higher standard of living than we do is precisely because our defense spending is higher than all of theirs combined. Their ability to rely on us to take care of them regarding those pricey military expenditure/manpower matters sure does free up a lot of time and money for quality-of-life issues.

There is that.

Still, we kind of suck, and we're getting worse every day. I blame the media, MTV, and the SEC.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 12:40 am

Van wrote: why do we lack in so many important areas compared to so many other countries?

Do we really? Is there any other nation on this planet that turns such a blind eye to illegal immigration? If we truly "lack in so many important areas compared to so many other countries," why are there so many grubby assholes scrambling to get into the United States in any way they can? Try emigrating to Europe with "Obscenely Fecund, Disease Carrying Lettuce Picker" on your resume.

Plus we have about 42 million nigggers not to mention another 12 million or so illegal aliens and other assorted scum infesting the country. This is an awful lot of economic dead weight. We are hosting an internal parasite that is, for all intents and purposes, the size of a major Western European nation.

It's a pity Hitler gave genocide such a bad rap.

Truman · Post by **Truman** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 12:57 am

BSmack wrote:
88 wrote:If there are so many countries out there that are better than the United States, why isn't a smart guy like you packing your shit and taking the next plane out of this shit hole?
Because I love my family and my country.

You may love your family... But it is clear that you do not love this country. Not as it is presently constituted. Your advocation of Socialized Medicine proves it.

You and your kind are bent on changing it. You profess to a living-and-breathing Constitution. I've argued this document with you for 10 years and you've NEVER been right. You couldn't possibly love this country as much as those of us who are bent on preserving it.

Die in a fire, Brian.

Dr_Phibes · Post by **Dr_Phibes** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 1:07 am

The single thing that makes The United States of America the greatest country on Earth is The U.S. Constitution. Period. End of story.

Christ, you're in for a shock. Welcome to life and planet Earth

Truman · Post by **Truman** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 1:17 am

Phibes, generally you're a good read, and I respect your acumen.

But you're NOT an American.

You have NO idea - nor any concept of understanding - how many of us revere our Constitution. Or what it means to be an American. Sorry you had to find out here.

Your take has no substance. I ask you - respectfully - to bow out. TIA.

Dr_Phibes · Post by **Dr_Phibes** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 1:28 am

Truman wrote: You have NO idea - nor any concept of understanding - how many of us revere our Constitution. Or what it means to be an American. Sorry you had to find out here.

Voila! It was - 'ow you say - elemental my dear Truman for the great 'ercule Poirot!

It iz precisely why I read zis board and like it so much!

Truman · Post by **Truman** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 1:34 am

KC Scott wrote:funny you mention that 88.

That clip is from a new show called "Newsroom" on HBO - and he gives the Constitution and Declaration of Independence as his initial answer.

The moderator replies that he won't accept that beacuse the first is a set of laws and the second is a declaration of war and presses on. That's when he goes off on the tangent

If you take anything away from that clip, it's when he says we're #1 in only three things - # of incararations per capita, # of people who believe angels are real and #1 in defense spending - and that we spend more than the next 26 combined - 25 of which are allies.

The other thing that is spot on and pisses me off to no end is how far we are behind the rest of the world in subjects like Math and Science.

We've got an entire generation of lazy stupid people who think they're entitled to the same life or better than their parents had but aren't willing to do the things necessary to achieve it

You know I love you, dawg.

But I'm about kill you on this - and any subsequent posts on this subject that you might manage.

Number 1 is easy - subtract the scuba suits and messicans from the prison system and whaddya have left? White serial killers? We're a melting pot. Come all, take all. Those countries who score ahead of us... What is their immigration policy? The numbers are skewed policy, and you know it. Fuck you.

So America is a ~~God~~, sorry, "god" fearing country. Why do you care? Has the Community of Christ - right down the street from your crib - affected your living standard? Have they come by the house to condemn you to some kind of fictional hell?

#3. Have you ever troubled your Belton ass to read the Bill of Rights of the Constitution? Guess what Congress's primary charge is? It isn't to fund Social Security. Or Medicare. Or the Affordable Care Act.

It's to fund the military. And postal roads. That's it.

Please tell me your trolling.

Truman · Post by **Truman** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 1:37 am

Dr_Phibes wrote:
Truman wrote: You have NO idea - nor any concept of understanding - how many of us revere our Constitution. Or what it means to be an American. Sorry you had to find out here.

Voila! It was - 'ow you say - elemental my dear Truman for the great 'ercule Poirot!

It iz precisely why I read zis board and like it so much!

We're better than you, Phibes. Always will be. Deal with it.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 2:04 am

mvscal wrote:
Van wrote: why do we lack in so many important areas compared to so many other countries?
Do we really? Is there any other nation on this planet that turns such a blind eye to illegal immigration?

No, there likely isn't, which is just one more reason we suck. We've brought this on ourselves, and rather than follow the Constitution and behave as a nation of laws we instead kowtow to PC whiners who don't have the balls to call a spade a spade.

If we truly "lack in so many important areas compared to so many other countries," why are there so many grubby assholes scrambling to get into the United States in any way they can? Try emigrating to Europe with "Obscenely Fecund, Disease Carrying Lettuce Picker" on your resume.

Because we're still better than Mexico, although even that issue has taken a hit too, what with the flattening out of emigration into our country ever since our economy went into the shitter.

Notice, though, that there aren't a whole lotta Belgians and Danes trying to sneak into the U.S.

Plus we have about 42 million nigggers not to mention another 12 million or so illegal aliens and other assorted scum infesting the country. This is an awful lot of economic dead weight. We are hosting an internal parasite that is, for all intents and purposes, the size of a major Western European nation.

No argument from me there. No way any country doesn't suffer while carrying the dead weight we do.

It's a pity Hitler gave genocide such a bad rap.

Fuck genocide. Just secure your borders and ensure that your legal citizenry is made to follow the law.

Dr_Phibes · Post by **Dr_Phibes** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 2:49 am

Truman wrote: We're better than you, Phibes. Always will be. Deal with it.

But if I gained some wisdom, or insight, I wouldn't tell you about that. It'd go to your head and there'd be no dealing with you.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 2:53 am

Van wrote:Fuck genocide.

Let's not overreact.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 4:47 am

KC Scott wrote:

Doesn't get it.

What has made America the greatest country is the fact that we have sent (by FAR) the most missionaries out to the rest of the world.

God has blessed America for the sake of the Gospel - and for the sake of 'us' being a vehicle by which it is sent to the ends of the earth.

Roger_the_Shrubber · Post by **Roger_the_Shrubber** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 5:15 am

The result of this, that no one has mentioned, is fly by night insurance companies.

Pay $5 a month, you are covered for .01 percent for almost nothing, and now you are covered from the Obama care/tax.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 6:08 am

KC Scott wrote:
poptart wrote:
What has made America the greatest country is the fact that we have sent (by FAR) the most missionaries out to the rest of the world.

God has blessed America for the sake of the Gospel - and for the sake of 'us' being a vehicle by which it is sent to the ends of the earth.
Great melt Looney tune

That's a melt? haha

Oh.

No, I think I just stated what has been the history of the world.

I'm not surprised that you don't recognize it, though.

God has always allowed lands where people held the covenant ---> and sought to further it, to prosper.

And also, where people deny God, they face serious hardship.
Individually and as a people.

America has lost it's 'focus,' and if the trend continues,... well, it will be very ugly.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 6:45 am

pop, there's just one problem with your "God favors Christian nations" theory. The countries that are the most prosperous in the world also happen to be the least religious. In fact, they're the most educated, with the highest percentage of atheists. Meanwhile, the most religious countries are almost without exception total shitholes, Christian or otherwise.

Basically, you have it completely backwards.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:55 am

In "this age," America has been the most prosperous and influential nation.
It has also been the nation most deeply rooted in the Gospel - and the one which has sought most vigorously (by far) to further the Gospel to the world.

This is not to say that other nations do not also experience prosperity.
One could look at say, Norway or Sweden, for example, and notice that they have a nice level of prosperity.

One can also look and notice that waves of muslims (Hi, MClub :) ) have entered and rooted.
The 'prosperity' will not be sustained, imo.

The principle is this...

Joseph was sold as a slave into Egypt - yet he walked w/God.
And God made him (and the entire house of his owner) to prosper even within this situation - for the sake of the Gospel.
Genesis 39:1-6.

Our Python, for example, is a believer.
By virtue of this, he is a phenomenal being.
He IS a blessing - Genesis 12:1-3, Galatians 3:29 - and it's no small thing.

So the believer should never be deceived.
All of Python's surroundings are blessed because of him, and all that he does (despite his personal lackings) will come to good.
He himself IS a source of blessing.

Now when a country has a lot of Pythons, and they align their heart toward what God wants most, there is no choice but for tremendous blessings to come forth.
It will be a land which God will surely bless.

America has been this way.

Terry in Crapchester · Sat Jun 30, 2012 11:16 am

BSmack wrote:
Python wrote:Wrong.
To quote Geddy Shakespeare, "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice."

Geddy sang it, but Neil Peart wrote it.

Btw, I know he's about as popular in these parts as Krugman, but Robert Reich had an interesting take on this, and Roberts' vote in particular:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Rober ... ches-teams

Game changer: Justice Roberts switches teams

The Court’s majority, made possible by Chief Justice Roberts' surprise decision, has given a huge victory to the Obama administration and, arguably, the American people. The Affordable Care Act is still flawed, but it is also a milestone.

By Robert Reich, Guest blogger / June 29, 2012

Yesterday a majority of the Court upheld the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare in recognition of its importance as a key initiative of the Obama administration. The big surprise, for many, was the vote by the Chief Justice of the Court, John Roberts, to join with the Court’s four liberals.

Robert Reich

Robert is chancellor’s professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley. He has served in three national administrations, most recently as secretary of labor under President Clinton. Time Magazine named him one of the 10 most effective cabinet secretaries of the last century. He has written 13 books, including “The Work of Nations,” his latest best-seller “Aftershock: The Next Economy and America’s Future," and a new e-book, “Beyond Outrage.” He is also a founding editor of the American Prospect magazine and chairman of Common Cause.

Roberts’ decision is not without precedent. Seventy-five years ago, another Justice Roberts – no relation to the current Chief Justice – made a similar switch. Justice Owen Roberts had voted with the Court’s conservative majority in a host of 5-4 decisions invalidating New Deal legislation, but in March of 1937 he suddenly switched sides and began joining with the Court’s four liberals. In popular lore, Roberts’ switch saved the Court – not only from Franklin D. Roosevelt’s threat to pack it with justices more amenable to the New Deal but, more importantly, from the public’s increasing perception of the Court as a partisan, political branch of government.

Chief Justice John Roberts isn’t related to his namesake but the current Roberts’ move today marks a close parallel. By joining with the Court’s four liberals who have been in the minority in many important cases – including the 2010 decision, Citizen’s United vs. Federal Election Commission, which struck down constraints on corporate political spending as being in violation of the Constitution’s First Amendment guaranteeing freedom of speech – the current Justice Roberts may have, like his earlier namesake, saved the Court from a growing reputation for political partisanship.

As Alexander Hamilton pointed out when the Constitution was being written, the Supreme Court is the “least dangerous branch” of government because it has neither the purse (it can’t enforce its rulings by threatening to withhold public money) nor the sword (it has no police or military to back up its decisions). It has only the trust and confidence of average citizens. If it is viewed as politically partisan, that trust is in jeopardy. As Chief Justice, Roberts has a particular responsibility to maintain and enhance that trust.

Nothing else explains John Roberts’ switch – certainly not the convoluted constitutional logic he used to arrive at his decision. On the most critical issue in the case – whether the so-called “individual mandate” requiring almost all Americans to purchase health insurance was a constitutionally-permissible extension of federal power under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution – Roberts agreed with his conservative brethren that it was not.

Roberts nonetheless upheld the law because, he reasoned, the penalty to be collected by the government for non-compliance with the law is the equivalent of a tax – and the federal government has the power to tax. By this bizarre logic, the federal government can pass all sorts of unconstitutional laws – requiring people to sell themselves into slavery, for example – as long as the penalty for failing to do so is considered to be a tax.

Regardless of the fragility of Roberts’ logic, the Court’s majority has given a huge victory to the Obama administration and, arguably, the American people. The Affordable Care Act is still flawed – it doesn’t do nearly enough to control increases in healthcare costs that already constitute 18 percent of America’s Gross Domestic Product, and will soar even further as the baby boomers age – but it is a milestone. And like many other pieces of important legislation before it – Social Security, Medicare, Civil Rights and Voting Rights – it will be improved upon. Every Democratic president since Franklin D. Roosevelt has sought universal health care, to no avail.

But over the next four months the Act will be a political football. Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential candidate, has vowed to repeal the law as soon as he is elected (an odd promise in that no president can change or repeal a law without a majority of the House of Representatives and sixty Senators). Romney reiterated that vow this morning, after the Supreme Court announced its decision. His campaign, and so-called independent groups that have been collecting tens of millions of dollars from Romney supporters (and Obama haters), have already launched advertising campaigns condemning the Act.

Unfortunately for President Obama – and for Chief Justice Roberts, to the extent his aim in joining with the Court’s four liberals was to reduce the public appearance of the Court’s political partisanship – the four conservatives on the Court, all appointed by Republican presidents, were fiercely united in their view that the entire Act is unconstitutional. Their view will surely become part of the Romney campaign.

I do agree with Reich's conclusion that the Taxing Clause was a rather flimsy justification for ACA. I think the Commerce Clause, which was what oral argument focused on, is a much stronger argument.

As for Romney vowing to repeal ACA, he'll have to overcome the fact that ACA was modeled on the Massachusetts plan enacted while he was Governor of Massachusetts, and which was the signature oegislative moment of his gubernatorial term. Good luck with that.

Terry in Crapchester · Sat Jun 30, 2012 11:40 am

Truman wrote:President Romney

I laughed. Hard.

Yeah, I know it's still only late June, and politically speaking, the period between now and the election is an eternity. With that being said, however, this projection gives Obama a comfortable 326-212 lead in the electoral count.

Not only that, but the path to a majority for Romney is somewhat limited. Assuming he can hold North Carolina and Iowa (he has a one-point lead in both), he would need to flip Florida and Michigan, plus either: (a) Virginia; or (b) Wisconsin and New Hampshire; in order to win the Presidency. A pretty tall order, that, particularly where he previously penned an op-ed whose theme, essentially, was "let Detroit die." Obama also has a 4-point lead in Florida -- among states labeled "barely Democratic" or "barely Republican," only New Hampshire and Florida have a lead that high. Oh, and there's also the possibility of Obama splitting off NE-2, as he did in '08, which would tie the electoral vote at exactly 269-269 were Rommey to flip Florida, Michigan and Virginia.

Btw, Truman's Senate projection was off as well, at least according to that link. That site has the Dems with a 51-46 lead in the Senate (three races tied), so as it stands right now, even in a worst-case scenario the Democrats would still control the Senate.

Truman · Post by **Truman** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 2:45 pm

KC Scott wrote:We have the largest prison population per capita beacuse we have more criminals and we do a better job catching them. We probably don't have an argument there

Oh, I don’t know, Scott. We’ve always been a violent society by nature. Be that an extension of the “rugged individualism” that helped forge this country, or an inherent reaction to protect our property rights, one of the cornerstones of our nation’s founding. Regardless, fuck with someone, chances are he’s gonna fuck you back.

KC Scott wrote:Regarding religion - fuck them. I'm all for their freedom to have it, as long as they don't try to apply their belief system to anyone else life which they do.

pops still spamming your pm’s with bible verses, Scotty, or are the Covenant of Christers strong-arming you to church again?

Take your pick between abortion,

That isn’t necessarily a “Christian” issue. It is a “legal-taking-of-a-human-life” issue. You don’t have to be a Christian to find homocide reprehensible.

contraception,

Ah, so the Government SHOULD have the power to mandate that a employer, insurance company or pharmacist provide such a benefit even if it completely compromises their religious beliefs? Nice to know. Any other constitutional amendment you care to take a dump on, or are you done here?

the fags

I’m assuming that’s a reference to gay marriage. Regardless, 32 states have put the issue to a vote of the people, and guess how many have passed such a resolution? So all those folks who voted against gay marriage are Christians?

or any other social issue you want and you'll find the right pushing that agenda beacuse that's where their voting block resides.

Because the left certainly has no axe to grind in this regard. Nope, those are Christian Tea Partiers that throw blood on Lynn’s minks and bomb live-animal research labs. They’re also the ones that want to tax your chew, booze, soft drinks, and fast food into the next century to discourage your self-destructive behavior. And that big ass truck you drive? What are you, a Capitalist? You’re killing the environment. Oh, and they’re also the ones who believe that you are too stupid make good life decisions on your own without the help of Big Government (‘sup health care).

KC Scott wrote:You realize that, along with the clusterfuck spending and economic collapse. pushed so many of the centerists left 4 years ago? If you'd don't then your Grandivew degree isn't worth the Charmin they printed it on.

And do you realize that not only was it a continuation of the same clusterfuck spending and economic collapse, the damn Democrats poured ~~coal-oil~~ errr, E-85 ethanol on the fire and pushed the centrists to the right two years ago?

As for my diploma, you may be right. I could see where a remedial course in Belton-to-English might’ve come in handy. You may want to consider hiring TVO to be your proof-reader.

KC Scott wrote:Refarding defense, Maybe you can explain why 60% of our discreationary spending goes towards it?

That’s a bit high. If this looks familiar, it should: You posted it.

Now, of all that spending, discretionary or otherwise, which of these programs are specifically provided for by the United States Constitution?

KC Scott wrote:Who exactly is the enemy these days? The towelheads? Seems like we're spending quite a bit on something that the intellegence communtiy seems to have a pretty good handle on since the restraints were taken off them.

So we take our foot off the gas, allow them to re-group, and watch them take out the Freedom Tower in five years? Now, THERE’s a plan.

KC Scott wrote:Maybe you don't understand how Lockheed, Boeing etc. make money - For those companies and all the lobbyist, ex-millitary they employ we will always need a threat - real or imagined.

Not to mention a playground to test our new toys. Personally, I’d rather see drones over-fly Beirut than Blue Springs, but that’s just me.

KC Scott wrote:While you're at it explain why we're still protecting the world? I don't seem to recall that being in the Constitution either

“Provide for the common defence” is not a provision written into the Constitution to plant French hedgerows along our northern border. Most reasonable people would argue that we deploy our armed forces to protect our nation’s interests – as well as those of our allies. Simply enough, “protecting the world,” as you put it, protects us. And that implicitly IS in the Constitution.

Truman · Post by **Truman** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 2:50 pm

Terry in Crapchester wrote:
Truman wrote:President Romney
I laughed. Hard.

Simply a dig at B, Ter. He brought it up, so I ran with it.

All depends on who's election projections you believe, Terry. For every map that shows the president with a comfortable lead, there's another one burying him in a landslide. The one that matters will be posted on November 7th.

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 4:14 pm

Nice post! I'll say that generally speaking, in order to maintain our high standard of living, we have to get our hands dirty...and this dynamic is depicted very clearly in the pie chart.

Diego in Seattle · Post by **Diego in Seattle** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:10 pm

poptart wrote:
KC Scott wrote:
poptart wrote:
What has made America the greatest country is the fact that we have sent (by FAR) the most missionaries out to the rest of the world.

God has blessed America for the sake of the Gospel - and for the sake of 'us' being a vehicle by which it is sent to the ends of the earth.
Great melt Looney tune
That's a melt? haha

Oh.

No, I think I just stated what has been the history of the world.

I'm not surprised that you don't recognize it, though.

God has always allowed lands where people held the covenant ---> and sought to further it, to prosper.

Burn Colorado Springs....burn.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:23 pm

KC Scott wrote:Regarding defense, Maybe you can explain why 60% of our discreationary spending goes towards it?

Because it is, by far, the largest dept. in the Federal gov't, dolt. You haven't a clue, do you? That's OK. I'm here to help. That figure includes the DoD, DHS, State Dept, FEMA and our wars...err overseas contingency operations. It's also only a drop in the bucket. In 2011, Fedzilla spent $3.6 trillion dollars of which $1.3 trillion was borrowed. We spent $700 billion in the combined defense category and $600 billion in the non-defense category. Discretionary spending only covers the day to day operations of the Federal government. You could eliminate every single Federal department and agency and that would only barely suffice to balance the budget.

Mandatory entitlement spending is what is going to bankrupt us and that is why Odowngrade's Unaffordable Care Act is such a catastrophically stupid thing to do. We can barely afford Medicaid as it is and you morons are proposing to expand it by as much as 40%. This is the policy equivalent of jamming a shotgun in your mouth and toe tapping the trigger.

Wakey, fuckin', wakey...

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 9:14 pm

KC Scott wrote: But if we're to avoid Greece fate there needs to be cuts accross the board including defense

It's a misleading argument, though. Tards like Felchco believe that if we were to cut defense spending we could balance the budget and live happily ever after in fiscally solvent bliss. The fact is, we could eliminate all defense spending and still ring up a $600 billion dollar deficit.

The bottom line is that we can't balance the budget by cutting discretionary spending. That isn't even the problem. Any solution that doesn't address (and deeply cut) mandatory entitlement spending is no solution at all.

how they're applicable on an enemy that consists primarily of small cells spread throughout the world

And what about tomorrow when our enemy doesn't consist of small cells spread throughout the world? We geared down drastically in the 90s and then, when the Iraq War rolled around in 2003, we didn't have the necessary force for an effective postwar stabilization mission.

It's better to have a big army and not need it then need one and not have it. Just look at the pathetic Euros. They ran out of bombs on a fucking pipsqueak like Mo Qadaffy in Lybia.

Truman · Post by **Truman** » Sat Jun 30, 2012 9:34 pm

KC Scott wrote:
Truman wrote:
KC Scott wrote:We have the largest prison population per capita beacuse we have more criminals and we do a better job catching them. We probably don't have an argument there
Oh, I don’t know, Scott. We’ve always been a violent society by nature. Be that an extension of the “rugged individualism” that helped forge this country, or an inherent reaction to protect our property rights, one of the cornerstones of our nation’s founding. Regardless, fuck with someone, chances are he’s gonna fuck you back.
What? Are you still on a bender from last night?

Scott: The Sky is Blue
Tru: It only Blue beacuse our Founding Fathers declared in the Constitution we would have blue skies o'er amber waves of grain

Do we need to send a Haz-Mat Rescue Team to your house, Scott? Either your meth lab just blew up…

Or you just melted down.

I suppose we could thrash this thing out civilly, and allow you to make yourself look stupid. Or we could go all One Board-style, where we could allow both of us to make you look stupid. Since the outcome is already predetermined, I don’t care either way.

Whole buncha assumptions and quick conclusions being made up in this bitch. Thought you’da learnt that lesson by now after 20 + years in sales. Or did I just make an “assumption” too? Regardless, here’s hoping your business acumen is better than your debating skills.

KC Scott wrote:
Truman wrote:
KC Scott wrote:Take your pick between abortion,
That isn’t necessarily a “Christian” issue. It is a “legal-taking-of-a-human-life” issue. You don’t have to be a Christian to find homocide reprehensible.
No, it's a moral issue now.

Actually, it isn’t. Read on:

KC Scott wrote:The legal issue was decided quite a while ago by SCOTUS. Roe v. Wade out front should have told ya.
Now it's just a group of you cross bearing simpletons trying to enforce your beliefs on other people.

Decided?

Really?

Then why do forty states presently outlaw abortion in the 3rd trimester except when necessary to protect the mother’s life or health? Dumbass. So much for your legally decided issue.

KC Scott wrote:Now it's just a group of you cross bearing simpletons trying to enforce your beliefs on other people.
And the one thing you won't answer here is how you rationalize making the poor have babies that you don't want to assist with food or health care.

Quit eating the meth-boogers out of your nose and pay attention, dickhead: I HATE the hypocrisy of the law. My take all along has been that it’s either OK to kill a baby up to the moment of his or her birth, or it isn’t. And none of this 1st trimester-restriction crap either.

This country needs to decide once and for all, one way or another whether it’s OK to kill human life in the womb – which by definition, is what constitutes a baby, believe it or not – or it isn’t. If we as a country decide that it IS OK to kill babies in the womb – then so be it. There should be NO timelines, NO restrictions. It’s just an unviable bit of protoplasm, right? No more trying thugs for capital murder in the event a pregnant mother is killed and her ~~baby~~, errrr fetus buys the farm too.

But if we DO decide that a 2nd trimester baby is, well, human life… Then we already have laws on the books to deal with it as well.

KC Scott wrote:
Truman wrote:
KC Scott wrote:contraception
Ah, so the Government SHOULD have the power to mandate that a employer, insurance company or pharmacist provide such a benefit even if it completely compromises their religious beliefs?
Yea, Fuck their religous beliefs and yours. Thanks for making my point again on Religion trying to dictate how everyone should live their lives

Actually, thank YOU for making mine. And go fuck yourself while you’re at it. What part of "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." do you struggle with?

Still non-plussed? Lemme dumb it down for you so that even you can follow along: The state cannot dictate religious convictions. This isn’t Mormon polygamy. It isn’t even Sharia. It’s a whole tenet of many religion’s beliefs. How the hell do you think we got smoke lodges in Federal prisons?

KC Scott wrote:
Truman wrote:
KC Scott wrote:the fags
I’m assuming that’s a reference to gay marriage. Regardless, 32 states have put the issue to a vote of the people, and guess how many have passed such a resolution? So all those folks who voted against gay marriage are Christians?
Why in the fuck would you or anyone not directly affected by it care? It's the perfect example of the Religous Right pushing a moral issue to distract our average simplton voter from the real problems in this country. Your either blind or just towing a party line.

Well, there’s that, or you could just be flat wrong. Again. One-of-the-three.

Who said I DID care? What I DO care about is the Will of the People. What I care about is judicial activism legislating morality from the bench. It’s for the People to decide. Period. Had all 32 states voted to allow gay marriage, I’d be fine with that as well. You’re right: The way folks live has zero impact on me. Got enough issues of my own without getting after those of others. But how we freely govern ourselves actually does impact me. As well as you, Brainiac.

KC Scott wrote:Too bad as I'd always considered you far more intelligent than your showing in this thread

Too bad your take crumbled under the assumption that I’m a Christer. My running argument with you all along has been based upon making sport of your enlightened bigotry and ignorance of the Constitution. You want a Testimonial? PM poptart. Might want to slide that intelligence card back in the deck where it might do you some good later, Scott.

KC Scott wrote:Fuck the Left too. They've fucked this country by trying to turn it into a handout state where gaming the system is far preferable to actually working to get out of the system.Instead of making the poor go through job training we handed out stacks of food stamps and section 8 housing. Instead of hiring the best man for the job we had to hire the right color or gender thanks to affirmative action. Regarding the enviornment - It's probable, if there wasn't some oversite, we'd have cities glowing Chernoboy or more deserted like Time Beach. But fuck silly shit like carbon credits or telling all the fat, drunken smokers they're killing themselves. I say let 'em - their useless fucking people anyway. It's also why I support legalizing and giving away all the drugs the dopers can shoot smoke or snort. Within 6 months the problem would be gone beacuse most of them would be dead.

I’ll rack most of this take. I think seeing our cities regularly reduced to smoldering Chernobyls is a bit of a stretch, but it’s a good rant anyway. The more people who smoke; the more people who eat themselves to shutyomouth-like proportions; and the more people who drink themselves to (apparently) Trumonian capacities ultimately die earlier and are actually less of a burden long-term to the system.

KC Scott wrote:On the budget there's mandatory spending and discretionary - 2010 Defense was 60% of Discretionary - in 2011 it was 52%

Nice chart. And thanks for the bolds. Now which part of 2011’s 48% discretionary spending was Congress constitutionally obliged to fund again?

KC Scott wrote:
Truman wrote:
KC Scott wrote:Who exactly is the enemy these days? The towelheads? Seems like we're spending quite a bit on something that the intellegence communtiy seems to have a pretty good handle on since the restraints were taken off them.
So we take our foot off the gas, allow them to re-group, and watch them take out the Freedom Tower in five years? Now, THERE’s a plan.
You totally ignored the point yet made it for me all in the same sound bite sentence. Remeber, you're not talking to kcpaul here.

No, but your posts read like a FAT fucking RETARD wrote them for you. Answer the question, Claire: Of all that spending, discretionary or otherwise, which of programs are specifically authorized by the United States Constitution?

KC Scott wrote:9-11 wasn't a military failure - it was an intellegence failure. You do understand the difference don't you? Disposing Sadam didn't make that Mssion Complete and dealing with al queda cells doen't take a carrier fleet.

Question is, do YOU understand from whose budget Intelligence might just be funded? If you said Defense, then you would be correct. But if that fail of a “take” is any indication, you didn’t know that either.

BTW, not only are carrier fleets designed to deal with carrier-sized threats, their mission is to portray American domination and strength in far-away ports. Tell me you knew.

KC Scott wrote:
Truman wrote:
KC Scott wrote:While you're at it explain why we're still protecting the world? I don't seem to recall that being in the Constitution either
“Provide for the common defence” is not a provision written into the Constitution to plant French hedgerows along our northern border. Most reasonable people would argue that we deploy our armed forces to protect our nation’s interests – as well as those of our allies. Simply enough, “protecting the world,” as you put it, protects us. And that implicitly IS in the Constitution.
Why can't our allies protect themselves? Like the man Said we spend more on defense than the next 26 countries combined - 25 of which are allies. More to the point - spending half that amount on things like rebuilding the infrastructure to make America a better place to do business or biotech research which may give us something to export besides iphones sure seems like a better use of our tax dollars

“Simply enough, ‘protecting the world,’ as you put it, protects us. And that implicitly IS in the Constitution.”

Second time I’ve posted it. Call me if you would like me to actually read it to you, since the comp-thingie has completely raced over your head. BTW, there’s a trillion dollars in new taxes we could easily dedicate towards infrastructure, instead of the rat-hole for which it is currently slated. It’s called “Obamacare.”

KC Scott wrote:Can't wait to see you deal with the C&P UBB nightmare it will take to respond to this - given the state of your hangover and all

Thanks for the out, and I appreciate your concern. Unfortunately, you have only your own inherent stupidity to fall back on. Just imagine how badly you would’ve just been thrashed had I been stone sober.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sun Jul 01, 2012 3:00 am

poptart wrote:What has made America the greatest country is the fact that we have sent (by FAR) the most missionaries out to the rest of the world.

Speaking of which...

I have a younger cousin who goes on these spring break mission trips to various impoverished places around the world. They are funded in large part by donations rounded up by the Christian university that he attends. The first time I got their letter in the mail asking for some coin to send him to Honduras to do "god's work," I decided to be a good cousin and cut 'em a check. Good kid, but ultimately a clueless sheep who was raised in a vacuum. It makes me chuckle that his parents would never risk the horrors of placing him in public school, yet will open up the checkbook and fly him to some Third World shithole so he can accomplish ultimately nothing sustainable, 'cept littering Facebook with pics of rocking on my dime.

Since then, I have received multiple letters from the university asking for more donations. Shit, you do one good deed for a blood relative, and now these assholes are spamming my mail box more than Valpak.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Sun Jul 01, 2012 3:08 am

Mgo wrote:I decided to be a good cousin and cut 'em a check

We're like, message board fliends and everything, right?

And I'm over here in Slant Korea.

When do you cut me a check?

TIA, bro'!

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sun Jul 01, 2012 4:01 am

Get a real job and stop begging for handouts.

Damn libtards.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Sun Jul 01, 2012 9:41 am

Jsc wrote:When almost half of our country thinks God created man in our present form within the past 10,000 years, and does not believe in evolution, yeah that is a problem and we are not going to score at the top of science polls.

When more than half the country believes the ridiculous pdf file Barry passed out is actually a copy of his birth certificate, it'll be a wonder if we can ever score at the top of anything again.

America truly is fuct.