NATION

PASSWORD

Wis. G.O.P Receiving Death Threats. No Call for Civility?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

Should Democratic Party Leaders call for civility in wake of Wis. death threats?

Yes.
101
59%
Maybe.
12
7%
No.
58
34%
 
Total votes : 171

User avatar
Buurdland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 641
Founded: Feb 28, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Buurdland » Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:49 pm

Revolutopia wrote:Where are you getting the idea that Healthcare reform bypassed the Senate? Only, thing I have read about it was that it was passed through budget reconciliation, meaning it only need 51 votes and the Republicans could not continue to filibuster the passage. You know the same tactics Republicans used to pass the Bush Tax Cuts back in 2001.


I was speaking in reverse, it passed in the Senate, not the House. The House passed it through the budget reconciliation, though the House is based on population meaning if indeed it was 51 votes that is less then an eighth of the House voting for it! Either way a bill cannot be passed in the Senate first than the House and become law, thus the lawsuits.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WhkMznIKBc&feature=player_embedded

"The greatest troll of our generation."
- The Sun
☆☆☆☆☆

"You'll never look at trolling the same way again"
- The Times
☆☆☆☆☆

"Truly sets the standard for trolling in the new decade"
- The Guardian
☆☆☆☆

User avatar
Kari-Kazzir
Attaché
 
Posts: 82
Founded: Apr 16, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Kari-Kazzir » Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:51 pm

Government workers don't deserve collective bargaining, they already get enough pay, plenty of sick days, vacation time, and a great retirement plan. The private sector actually needs to collectivley bargain because they aren't getting paid by the government to begin with. These men and women need to stop being so selfish, they work for the government- they get more than their share.

User avatar
Genivar
Minister
 
Posts: 2737
Founded: Feb 11, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Genivar » Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:55 pm

Kari-Kazzir wrote:Government workers don't deserve collective bargaining, they already get enough pay, plenty of sick days, vacation time, and a great retirement plan. The private sector actually needs to collectivley bargain because they aren't getting paid by the government to begin with. These men and women need to stop being so selfish, they work for the government- they get more than their share.

:palm:
They got all those things BECAUSE they had collective bargaining.
In case of forum argument, I'm on the side of the Socialists.
I am a far-left social libertarian.
Left: 8.33, Libertarian: 5.52

Come share the fruits of my labor, and we will share the burdens of your toil.

“I’m sorry if my atheism offends you. But guess what – your religious wars, jihads, crusades, inquisitions, censoring of free speech, brainwashing of children, murdering of albinos, forcing girls into underage marriages, female genital mutilation, stoning, pederasty, homophobia, and rejection of science and reason offends me. So I guess we’re even.” - Mike Treder

User avatar
Gun Manufacturers
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9394
Founded: Jan 23, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Gun Manufacturers » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:00 pm

Kari-Kazzir wrote:Government workers don't deserve collective bargaining, they already get enough pay, plenty of sick days, vacation time, and a great retirement plan. The private sector actually needs to collectivley bargain because they aren't getting paid by the government to begin with. These men and women need to stop being so selfish, they work for the government- they get more than their share.


I'm a federal employee (postal worker), and I get no sick days, vacation time, retirement, or health insurance. This is all because my job (Rural Carrier Associate) is not considered a career position.
Any accident you can walk away from is one I can laugh at.

DOJ's interpretation of the 2nd Amendment: http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/fi ... -p0126.pdf

Natapoc wrote:...You should post more in here so I don't seem like the extremist...


Auraelius wrote:If you take the the TITANIC, and remove the letters T, T, and one of the I's, and add the letters C,O,S,P,R, and Y you get CONSPIRACY. oOooOooooOOOooooOOOOOOoooooooo


Maineiacs wrote:Give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish and he'll sit in a boat and get drunk all day.


Luw wrote:Politics is like having two handfuls of shit - one that smells bad and one that looks bad - and having to decide which one to put in your mouth.

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43029
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Grave_n_idle » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:02 pm

Buurdland wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:
Your logic... isn't.

The representatives are democratically elected, but that doesn't mean any given bill is going to be voted on democratically, since party politics is obviously going to figure into it.

For example - 60% of Americans favour a public option. If the bill creation/amendment process were truly democratic (apart from it being a horrible confusion, all the time), then politicians would not be voting along partisan lines, or trading favours - they'd be giving majority support to a public option.

But that's not the way it works, and most Americans understand that when they vote. They accept that they democratically elect (fairly democratically, at least) representatives who may or may not act democratically themselves.


Actually when the bill passed the support for it was polled as below 40% according to MSNBC, who tend to have a liberal bias. The fact that it skipped the Senate makes it almost exactly like the incident in Wisconsin, only this time an entire section of the Legislator has no say on if it passed or not. The Democrats had no say on if the bill passed or not, well the same went for the Senate with Obamacare. Which is worse, denying an opposing party a chance to vote on a bill or denying both your own party and the opposing party a chance to vote?


60% of Americans favour a public option. That's present tense, I'm not talking about ancient history. That's why I also mentioned 'amendment' in the context, after I mentioned the bill's creation. If the process were democratic, Republicans wouldn't be acting obstructive over what they are calling Obamacare, along party lines - they would be pushing for the public option that almost a supermajority want.

I feel like I've basically said that all before. How odd.

Regarding the Wisconsin situation, and how it compares to the healthcare option - politicians playing politics. Not sure what your complaint is. Unless you complained when Republicans were stringing Democrats along with filibuster games, you should have no real complaints about Democrats using whatever tricks are currently at their disposal.

Me - I wanted up-or-down votes both times... but I can see why politicians would play with whatever tools are at their disposal to get or block certain results.
Last edited by Grave_n_idle on Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
WASSER IST LEBEN

User avatar
Buurdland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 641
Founded: Feb 28, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Buurdland » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:06 pm

Grave_n_idle wrote:
Buurdland wrote:
Actually when the bill passed the support for it was polled as below 40% according to MSNBC, who tend to have a liberal bias. The fact that it skipped the Senate makes it almost exactly like the incident in Wisconsin, only this time an entire section of the Legislator has no say on if it passed or not. The Democrats had no say on if the bill passed or not, well the same went for the Senate with Obamacare. Which is worse, denying an opposing party a chance to vote on a bill or denying both your own party and the opposing party a chance to vote?


60% of Americans favour a public option. That's present tense, I'm not talking about ancient history. That's why I also mentioned 'amendment' in the context, after I mentioned the bill's creation. If the process were democratic, Republicans wouldn't be acting obstructive over what they are calling Obamacare, along party lines - they would be pushing for the public option that almost a supermajority want.

I feel like I've basically said that all before. How odd.

Regarding the Wisconsin situation, and how it compares to the healthcare option - politicians playing politics. Not sure what your complaint is. Unless you complained when Republicans were stringing Democrats along with filibuster games, you should have no real complaints about Democrats using whatever tricks are currently at their disposal.

Me - I wanted up-or-down votes both times... but I can see why politicians would play with whatever tools are at their disposal to get or block certain results.


My complaint is that Liberals are trying to act like what the Republicans was so horrible when they do the same. As you said politicians play politics, scapegoating one side to gain publicity only makes your side a bunch of hypocritic masks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WhkMznIKBc&feature=player_embedded

"The greatest troll of our generation."
- The Sun
☆☆☆☆☆

"You'll never look at trolling the same way again"
- The Times
☆☆☆☆☆

"Truly sets the standard for trolling in the new decade"
- The Guardian
☆☆☆☆

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43029
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Grave_n_idle » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:07 pm

Kari-Kazzir wrote:Government workers don't deserve collective bargaining, they already get enough pay, plenty of sick days, vacation time, and a great retirement plan. The private sector actually needs to collectivley bargain because they aren't getting paid by the government to begin with. These men and women need to stop being so selfish, they work for the government- they get more than their share.


Since when does 'they get more than their share' matter?

The top 1% of Americans hold 38% of the wealth. They have 'more than their share', don't they?

Are you going to redistribute the wealth of the rich? Or just support keeping the middle classes down?
WASSER IST LEBEN

User avatar
Kari-Kazzir
Attaché
 
Posts: 82
Founded: Apr 16, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Kari-Kazzir » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:12 pm

Gun Manufacturers wrote:
Kari-Kazzir wrote:Government workers don't deserve collective bargaining, they already get enough pay, plenty of sick days, vacation time, and a great retirement plan. The private sector actually needs to collectivley bargain because they aren't getting paid by the government to begin with. These men and women need to stop being so selfish, they work for the government- they get more than their share.


I'm a federal employee (postal worker), and I get no sick days, vacation time, retirement, or health insurance. This is all because my job (Rural Carrier Associate) is not considered a career position.
We're talking about teacher's here.

User avatar
Kari-Kazzir
Attaché
 
Posts: 82
Founded: Apr 16, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Kari-Kazzir » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:14 pm

Genivar wrote:
Kari-Kazzir wrote:Government workers don't deserve collective bargaining, they already get enough pay, plenty of sick days, vacation time, and a great retirement plan. The private sector actually needs to collectivley bargain because they aren't getting paid by the government to begin with. These men and women need to stop being so selfish, they work for the government- they get more than their share.

:palm:
They got all those things BECAUSE they had collective bargaining.
No, they work for the government and they all vote to the left. That's their collective bargaining. Whenever a politician talks about reducing funding for education, people flip out and play the victim to ensure educators are paid more, this has nothing to do with their ability to work. When you work for the state itself you have nothing to answer to, the private sector answers to the state. This is why they have the right to collectively bargain, so they can make a decent wage. Workers that are covered by the government always make a decent wage, they're idiots to ask for even more.

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43029
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Grave_n_idle » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:15 pm

Buurdland wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:
60% of Americans favour a public option. That's present tense, I'm not talking about ancient history. That's why I also mentioned 'amendment' in the context, after I mentioned the bill's creation. If the process were democratic, Republicans wouldn't be acting obstructive over what they are calling Obamacare, along party lines - they would be pushing for the public option that almost a supermajority want.

I feel like I've basically said that all before. How odd.

Regarding the Wisconsin situation, and how it compares to the healthcare option - politicians playing politics. Not sure what your complaint is. Unless you complained when Republicans were stringing Democrats along with filibuster games, you should have no real complaints about Democrats using whatever tricks are currently at their disposal.

Me - I wanted up-or-down votes both times... but I can see why politicians would play with whatever tools are at their disposal to get or block certain results.


My complaint is that Liberals are trying to act like what the Republicans was so horrible when they do the same. As you said politicians play politics, scapegoating one side to gain publicity only makes your side a bunch of hypocritic masks.


America needs healthcare reform. The massive majority supports some form of healthcare reform. The democratic thing, then - is to reform healthcare,

Republicans blocked healthcare reform rather than participate. They had the chance to give input, they demanded concessions (like the loss of the public option), and got their way... and STILL acted undemocratically, by voting along party lines to oppose.

I don't have a problem with them using 'tricks'. I have problems with them placing partisanship before need, and opposing the democratic will of the people.

In the case of Wisconsin, Walker is acting autocratically and unilaterally - not democratically. There is no consensus, nor has it been shown to be the will of the people. Opposing autocratic draconian powerplay with the same sort of tricks is not hypocritical. Because the situations are not the same.

You might as well argue that a girl who screams when she's being raped, but doesn't scream when she consents, is being hypocritical.
WASSER IST LEBEN

User avatar
Revolutopia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5741
Founded: May 25, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Revolutopia » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:16 pm

Kari-Kazzir wrote:Government workers don't deserve collective bargaining, they already get enough pay, plenty of sick days, vacation time, and a great retirement plan. The private sector actually needs to collectivley bargain because they aren't getting paid by the government to begin with. These men and women need to stop being so selfish, they work for the government- they get more than their share.


Careful comrade, you are sounding a little socialist in determining what benefits and pay individuals deserve.
The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.-FDR

Economic Left/Right: -3.12|Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.49

Who is Tom Joad?

User avatar
Tsa-la-gi Nation
Minister
 
Posts: 2823
Founded: Aug 19, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tsa-la-gi Nation » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:17 pm

Kari-Kazzir wrote:Government workers don't deserve collective bargaining, they already get enough pay, plenty of sick days, vacation time, and a great retirement plan. The private sector actually needs to collectivley bargain because they aren't getting paid by the government to begin with. These men and women need to stop being so selfish, they work for the government- they get more than their share.

Complete & utter BS. Government workers all have no strike clauses, pay taxes, & can't run for office while employed by the government. Why should a person who choses to serve their government & community accept less rights that a non government worker? Why can't police & firefighters collectively bargin for the type of equipment that keeps them safe? Why can't teachers collectively bargin for manageable classroom sizes that helps keep them focused on our children's well being & learning enviroment? Killing the collective bargining rights for public sector workers isn't going to make room for collective bargining for private sector workers; It's just going to make it even harder for those workers to organize by taking membership away from unions that make organizing possible. What is selfish is looking to a fellow working class american & thinking "Hey, he has a middleclass income. It's getting harder to find a middle class income for the average joe so lets take away his middle class income instead of finding a way for more average joes to get a middle class income as well". This is the most backward thinking that the american public has fell for in a long time. It's nothing less than disgusting. It makes me think that we are turning into what the USSR stood for years ago, or at least what we were told they stood for.

User avatar
Buurdland
Diplomat
 
Posts: 641
Founded: Feb 28, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Buurdland » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:21 pm

Grave_n_idle wrote:
Buurdland wrote:
My complaint is that Liberals are trying to act like what the Republicans was so horrible when they do the same. As you said politicians play politics, scapegoating one side to gain publicity only makes your side a bunch of hypocritic masks.


America needs healthcare reform. The massive majority supports some form of healthcare reform. The democratic thing, then - is to reform healthcare,

Republicans blocked healthcare reform rather than participate. They had the chance to give input, they demanded concessions (like the loss of the public option), and got their way... and STILL acted undemocratically, by voting along party lines to oppose.

I don't have a problem with them using 'tricks'. I have problems with them placing partisanship before need, and opposing the democratic will of the people.

In the case of Wisconsin, Walker is acting autocratically and unilaterally - not democratically. There is no consensus, nor has it been shown to be the will of the people. Opposing autocratic draconian powerplay with the same sort of tricks is not hypocritical. Because the situations are not the same.

You might as well argue that a girl who screams when she's being raped, but doesn't scream when she consents, is being hypocritical.


If I recall right the Republicans agreed with reform but not the way Obama and his cronies wanted it. Dems also played partisan. Again double fault.

As for Walker being autocratic, where is the proof that the MAJORITY of Wisconsin did not support at least weakening the unions? They have dealt with strikes during the recession, which started a lot earlier in the midwest, and many are fed up with unions I would assume.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WhkMznIKBc&feature=player_embedded

"The greatest troll of our generation."
- The Sun
☆☆☆☆☆

"You'll never look at trolling the same way again"
- The Times
☆☆☆☆☆

"Truly sets the standard for trolling in the new decade"
- The Guardian
☆☆☆☆

User avatar
Revolutopia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5741
Founded: May 25, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Revolutopia » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:24 pm

Buurdland wrote:As for Walker being autocratic, where is the proof that the MAJORITY of Wisconsin did not support at least weakening the unions? They have dealt with strikes during the recession, which started a lot earlier in the midwest, and many are fed up with unions I would assume.


I am going to guess the poll after poll showing majority support for the Union in the fight over collective bargaining shows that majority does not support Walker.
The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.-FDR

Economic Left/Right: -3.12|Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.49

Who is Tom Joad?

User avatar
The Imperial Shard
Envoy
 
Posts: 265
Founded: Dec 28, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby The Imperial Shard » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:25 pm

Tokyoni wrote:
Revolutopia wrote:
Just a quick look over your page I can tell that you are a supporter of North Korea, so how can you really condem the U.S for civil rights violations when the the DPRK is a thousand times worse. But, I digress on topic calling for death on anyone is stupid.


No, I'd argue the US is far worse. Undeniably, objectively so.

It has the largest prison industry both in total numbers and per capita of any nation on the planet, disproportionately targeting racial minorities therein.

How many wars has the United States started in the past 60 years? How many has the DPRK?

How many CIA actions abroad has the US undertaken to undercut a democratic regime or support a dictator?

How many civilians has the US slaughtered and tortured in its imperialist ambitions?

Any rational, thinking person who supports the policy of such a nation against one struggling for liberation against imperialism is, in a word, evil.


You know, I once thought as you do. Luckily, I grew out of it.

Anyhow, on topic - truly, this shouldn't come as a revelation to many. Given the current, heated, political climate we're in, death threats should be old news by now.

Does it make them right? Oh course not, teacher.

Stop giving it attention, and deal with those who sent the emails. Problem solved.
"Even when men league themselves mightily together to promote tolerance and peace on earth, they are likely to be violently intolerant toward those not of a like mind."
- Eric Hoffer.

User avatar
Avenio
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11113
Founded: Feb 08, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Avenio » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:25 pm

Buurdland wrote:As for Walker being autocratic, where is the proof that the MAJORITY of Wisconsin did not support at least weakening the unions?


There's some right here;

Rasmussen Reports wrote:Most Wisconsin voters oppose efforts to weaken collective bargaining rights for union workers but a plurality are supportive of significant pay cuts for state workers. Governor Scott Walker is struggling in the court of public opinion, but how badly he is struggling depends upon how the issue is presented. There is also an interesting gap between the views of private and public sector union families.

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Wisconsin voters shows that just 39% favor weakening collective bargaining rights and 52% are opposed. At the same time, 44% support a 10% pay cut for all state workers. Thirty-eight percent (38%) are opposed. That’s partly because 27% of Wisconsin voters believe state workers are paid too much and 16% believe they are paid too little. Forty-nine percent (49%) believe the pay of state workers is about right. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

User avatar
Tsa-la-gi Nation
Minister
 
Posts: 2823
Founded: Aug 19, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tsa-la-gi Nation » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:26 pm

Kari-Kazzir wrote:
Genivar wrote: :palm:
They got all those things BECAUSE they had collective bargaining.
No, they work for the government and they all vote to the left. That's their collective bargaining. Whenever a politician talks about reducing funding for education, people flip out and play the victim to ensure educators are paid more, this has nothing to do with their ability to work. When you work for the state itself you have nothing to answer to, the private sector answers to the state. This is why they have the right to collectively bargain, so they can make a decent wage. Workers that are covered by the government always make a decent wage, they're idiots to ask for even more.

http://www.apwu.org/about/history.htm
here is a good example of just how wrong you are.

Edit: opps, wrong link :lol: fixed
Last edited by Tsa-la-gi Nation on Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43029
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Grave_n_idle » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:27 pm

Buurdland wrote:If I recall right the Republicans agreed with reform but not the way Obama and his cronies wanted it.


You remember the healthcare reform option the Republicans offered? You remember they kept bitching about how they weren't being given time for alternatives? You remember that their bluff was called, and they were asked to present their alternative, and Boehner and company waved a couple-of-dozen page folder around? You remember that it later came out the pages were blank?

Republicans weren't interested in reform - they were interested in being SEEN to be interested in reform.

And, apparently, you bought it.

Buurdland wrote:Dems also played partisan. Again double fault.


Actually, no - Dems were split on the issue. Republicans voted down party lines.

Buurdland wrote:As for Walker being autocratic, where is the proof that the MAJORITY of Wisconsin did not support at least weakening the unions?


Not only irrelevant, but also nonsense. You don't have to prove a negative. If you think Walker is acting democratically, show me the numbers.

Buurdland wrote:They have dealt with strikes during the recession, which started a lot earlier in the midwest, and many are fed up with unions I would assume.


Your assumptions are of no interest to anyone but yourself. Get yourself a show like Beck, and you can get people to mindlessly parrot them for you, but they still won't actually replace facts.
WASSER IST LEBEN

User avatar
Revolutopia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5741
Founded: May 25, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Revolutopia » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:35 pm

Grave_n_idle wrote:You remember the healthcare reform option the Republicans offered? You remember they kept bitching about how they weren't being given time for alternatives? You remember that their bluff was called, and they were asked to present their alternative, and Boehner and company waved a couple-of-dozen page folder around? You remember that it later came out the pages were blank?

Republicans weren't interested in reform - they were interested in being SEEN to be interested in reform.


I really think next year Obama needs to pull a Truman and call on the Republicans to present their complete proposal to enact Healthcare reform to country. Specifically one that addresses all the issues that people support in his proposed reforms, i.e no dropping for preexisting conditions, but still respecting patient and states rights. As honestly I doubt the Republicans having any such plan thus leading to fumble on their point as hey hastily a bill together or have to admit to the public they have no ideas.
The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.-FDR

Economic Left/Right: -3.12|Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.49

Who is Tom Joad?

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43029
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Grave_n_idle » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:37 pm

Revolutopia wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:You remember the healthcare reform option the Republicans offered? You remember they kept bitching about how they weren't being given time for alternatives? You remember that their bluff was called, and they were asked to present their alternative, and Boehner and company waved a couple-of-dozen page folder around? You remember that it later came out the pages were blank?

Republicans weren't interested in reform - they were interested in being SEEN to be interested in reform.


I really think next year Obama needs to pull a Truman and call on the Republicans to present their complete proposal to enact Healthcare reform to country. Specifically one that addresses all the issues that people support in his proposed reforms, i.e no dropping for preexisting conditions, but still respecting patient and states rights. As honestly I doubt the Republicans having any such plan thus leading to fumble on their point as hey hastily a bill together or have to admit to the public they have no ideas.


I still think that - while it was bad politics - Alan Grayson had it right when he said that the Republican healthcare reform plan was 'don't get sick' and if you do get sick, 'die quickly'.
WASSER IST LEBEN

User avatar
Luciratus
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1727
Founded: Apr 01, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Luciratus » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:46 pm

Grave_n_idle wrote:
Revolutopia wrote:
I really think next year Obama needs to pull a Truman and call on the Republicans to present their complete proposal to enact Healthcare reform to country. Specifically one that addresses all the issues that people support in his proposed reforms, i.e no dropping for preexisting conditions, but still respecting patient and states rights. As honestly I doubt the Republicans having any such plan thus leading to fumble on their point as hey hastily a bill together or have to admit to the public they have no ideas.


I still think that - while it was bad politics - Alan Grayson had it right when he said that the Republican healthcare reform plan was 'don't get sick' and if you do get sick, 'die quickly'.

Bullshit and Alan Grayson is an ass. :p The Republicans preffered a less centralized style of reform- such as making the existing systems more accessible and putting more funds into those programs (at least that is what they asserted). To suggest that they wanted to do nothing (especially when they made suggestions that merely differed from the Democratic plan) is asinine.
Stop the killing! Free Libya!
Please, help Japan and Oceania in any manner possible. Pray or hope for their safety and health.
I am a Grammar Nazi. As such, I prefer posts that are comprehensible.
Cannot think of a name wrote:
Mosasauria wrote:War is a necessary evil. True peace is impossible.
As long as we tell ourselves the first sentence, the second one will always be true.

The Blaatschapen wrote:
Cameroi wrote:And I still say, 9 out of 10 fetuses would rather be aborted then be born unwanted.

Did you poll those fetuses on their opinion?

Ezekiel Bardoff (dictator)
Yavid Biram (chairman)
Yashua Mithridates (two terms)
Alistaire Hawthorne (current)

Factbook

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43029
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Grave_n_idle » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:55 pm

Luciratus wrote:...The Republicans preffered a less centralized style of reform...


Less centralised is one way of putting it. "Partisanly blocking ANY reform, whilst offering nothing" would be a more accurate way to phrase it, I think.
WASSER IST LEBEN

User avatar
Revolutopia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5741
Founded: May 25, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Revolutopia » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:56 pm

Luciratus wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:
I still think that - while it was bad politics - Alan Grayson had it right when he said that the Republican healthcare reform plan was 'don't get sick' and if you do get sick, 'die quickly'.

Bullshit and Alan Grayson is an ass. :p The Republicans preffered a less centralized style of reform- such as making the existing systems more accessible and putting more funds into those programs (at least that is what they asserted). To suggest that they wanted to do nothing (especially when they made suggestions that merely differed from the Democratic plan) is asinine.


Really, is that why they basically sat in the back and bitched while suggesting almost nothing to the debate. Besides, of course suggesting lower taxes and less regulations as how that is the perfect idea to lower costs and give people better coverage.
The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.-FDR

Economic Left/Right: -3.12|Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.49

Who is Tom Joad?

User avatar
Luciratus
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1727
Founded: Apr 01, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Luciratus » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:58 pm

Tsa-la-gi Nation wrote:Absolulety not. Walker & his Nazis went way too far & extreme action breeds extreme action. They went for the juggular & they got their bloody victory & now they will get nothing done that will require any democrats support in their state. As a national side effect, they may have awaken what is left of the US labor movement. Government service workers are almost all AFL-CIO. This includes teachers, police, firefighters, postal workers, & so on. Imagine all those workers on a national strike. Sure it's illegal for government service workers to strike, but these people see attacks on collective bargining as an attack on their civil rights.

These people believe that right to work states are backwards throwback economic systems that go back to the days of near feudalism. What's next? Let's take away child labor laws, or overtime pay for over 40 hours of work. It doesn't matter if you agree with this point of view, as long as you understand that american workers fought & in some cases died for these rights. The Wisconsin Nazis should have known that union workers still remember this & hold these rights dear.

When Ronald Reagan died I believe that the air traffic controllers that supported him & then got fired by him, had every right to pick up a glass & toast to his death, cheering the worms to get fat on his rotting flesh. By god, every union worker in this country has the same right the day Walker dies as soon as he signs his USSRish bill into law. May his life be short & full of torment & upon his death, may the homeless use his gravesite as a latrine.

I am ashamed to see this country become a country that seeks to take away the standard of living of middle class workers. I thought we were the county that looked to the workers not doing as well & tried to figure out how to get them into the middle class, not the county that looks to the workers doing well & knock them out of middle class wages. Growing up, I was taught that's the sort of thing the USSR would do & that's why we needed to stand up to them.

Walker & his Nazis has done nothing but inspired me to make my union meetings for the 1st time in years & reminded me that rights are never given, they must be fought for. The fight maybe with words, protest, civil disobedience, arms or any combination of the listed. It's Walkers governing without any desire of concensus that is completey uncivil to say the least. More than likely the death threats are just an outlet for anger not felt of the like in years, but these Nazis will reap what they sow.

How incoherent and invoking of Godwin's Law. :lol: Likewise, a universal strike in the United States would paralyze the economy and possibly threaten the stability of the nation. This would be pernicious to everybody. Are the public-sector unions willing to deprive people- including themselves- of basic necessary services for the right to bargain collectively (which isn't universal and not always necessary given the policies of some state governments) and keep all the perks they have. If the GOP has promised cuts, why shouldn't they cut from everything that is not necessary? The military, healthcare, federal and state employees, ect. Likewise, the style of economic policy an individual should pursue is based partly on the portion of the business cycle in which the economy is currently placed. There are two primary forms of economic policy demand-side and supply-side. One most be utilized at all times.
Stop the killing! Free Libya!
Please, help Japan and Oceania in any manner possible. Pray or hope for their safety and health.
I am a Grammar Nazi. As such, I prefer posts that are comprehensible.
Cannot think of a name wrote:
Mosasauria wrote:War is a necessary evil. True peace is impossible.
As long as we tell ourselves the first sentence, the second one will always be true.

The Blaatschapen wrote:
Cameroi wrote:And I still say, 9 out of 10 fetuses would rather be aborted then be born unwanted.

Did you poll those fetuses on their opinion?

Ezekiel Bardoff (dictator)
Yavid Biram (chairman)
Yashua Mithridates (two terms)
Alistaire Hawthorne (current)

Factbook

User avatar
Luciratus
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1727
Founded: Apr 01, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Luciratus » Thu Mar 10, 2011 10:02 pm

Grave_n_idle wrote:
Luciratus wrote:...The Republicans preffered a less centralized style of reform...


Less centralised is one way of putting it. "Partisanly blocking ANY reform, whilst offering nothing" would be a more accurate way to phrase it, I think.

Would you vote for a law which overtly compromised your values? The Republicans preffer less government when possible- and frankly I usually tend to agree with them. I believe some reform was required but not necessarily the reform that was passed. Furthermore, it doesn't seem as though anybody was pleased by the bill that was passed, so I suppose it was a good compromise. :lol:
Stop the killing! Free Libya!
Please, help Japan and Oceania in any manner possible. Pray or hope for their safety and health.
I am a Grammar Nazi. As such, I prefer posts that are comprehensible.
Cannot think of a name wrote:
Mosasauria wrote:War is a necessary evil. True peace is impossible.
As long as we tell ourselves the first sentence, the second one will always be true.

The Blaatschapen wrote:
Cameroi wrote:And I still say, 9 out of 10 fetuses would rather be aborted then be born unwanted.

Did you poll those fetuses on their opinion?

Ezekiel Bardoff (dictator)
Yavid Biram (chairman)
Yashua Mithridates (two terms)
Alistaire Hawthorne (current)

Factbook

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bunker 51, Candanadium, Hurdergaryp, Ifreann, Miami Shores, Ostroeuropa, Salandriagado, Shamhnan Insir, The Nihilistic view, The States of Balloon, Totally Not OEP, Zurkerx

Advertisement

Remove ads