1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

SCOTUS: ObamaCare Decision

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by YankeeFan, Jun 20, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Armchair_QB

    Armchair_QB Well-Known Member

    Good fucking Lord.
     
  2. waterytart

    waterytart Active Member

    If you hooked up the board's conservatives to a polygraph and asked them "Do you want to impoverish the American middle class" and "Do you want poor people to die," I would assume both answers would be No. And that y'all would pass.

    You still support policies whose inevitable result is a huge increase in the absolute numbers of poor people and a higher percentage of those people dying from poverty-related causes. Your ability to lie to yourselves won't change that.
     
  3. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    Let's talk about lying to yourself ... on second thought, let's not.

    Because clearly the only way one can demonstrate anything other than callous indifference to the plight of the poor (or those who might become poor) is by supporting this or that expansion of the role of government.
     
  4. da man

    da man Well-Known Member

    For all the bitching I've seen about the "right-wing screech machine," no one does vilification and demonization better than the Democrats.
     
  5. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member

    . . . with multiple good reasons.
     
  6. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member


    . . . and everyone who's paid in for 20+ plus would immediately become a guerilla, esp. regardind SS.
    Assholes like Romney and Ryan want to go stealth, avoiding specifics to the greatest degree possible, for all the obvious delineated reasons . . .
     
  7. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member

    I don't blame him for stepping down, but it was nice to have someone on the SCOTUS who DIDN'T go to Harvard or Yale.
     
  8. RedSmithClone

    RedSmithClone Active Member

    If the mandate is crossed out, how does the rest stay in play? Isn't the mandate the heart of the plan financially and policy-wise?
     
  9. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member

    Sure seems that way . . .
     
  10. RickStain

    RickStain Well-Known Member

    Liberals, right now, are supporting policies that will impoverish future generations in the same way with the same consequences.
     
  11. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    Such as?
     
  12. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member

    SS can be tweaked modestly (in terms of age(s) of eligiblity for certain levels, and a slight raise in the annual earnings subject to the tax involved) so as to be good for a long, long time. It would be so do-able, it isn't funny -- but the adults aren't in charge of the GOP. Right now, barring a Grand Bargain, it doesn't matter, because the '10 nutjobs don't want to give an inch while pretending that Ryan is a straight shooter and Norquest is coherent. The Dems shouldn't have to be forced to negotiate at gunpoint with blackmailers.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page