Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Health Care Insanity; Glad We Have Medicare
Topic Started: Dec 23 2013, 06:15 AM (800 Views)
campingken
No Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
If the words "I'm from the government and I'm here to help" frighten you then you would shoo off the National Guard and hire private rescuers. Don't ever dial 9-11...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Banandangees
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]

That would be fiscally foolish for me to hire out to someone to pay for something I've already paid someone else to do. See, you libs just don't get the concept of fiscal conservatism. You depend too much on the money tree.

But notice, I (we) didn't have to contract out to Canada for the service of "National Guard." Someone long before Obama decided to keep that service in house. That's why Obamacare is already operating far in the red in owed services, he thought it wise to contract the software services out to foreigners and they sabotaged him, and will probably keep the software inaccessible until Obama approves the Keystone Pipeline so they can sell their slug oil by passing it through MR land rather than worry the folks in BC over possible leaks. Only problem for Obama is, he doesn't want to make that decision until after the mid-terms, because he knows that he will be even further "disgruntlizing" voters and he needs the House and Senate to completely socialize the US into "Greeceland."

See how complicated and confusing the world has become since Obama and the far left wingers have come into power?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mountainrivers
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Banandangees
Dec 24 2013, 10:46 AM
That would be fiscally foolish for me to hire out to someone to pay for something I've already paid someone else to do. See, you libs just don't get the concept of fiscal conservatism. You depend too much on the money tree.

But notice, I (we) didn't have to contract out to Canada for the service of "National Guard." Someone long before Obama decided to keep that service in house. That's why Obamacare is already operating far in the red in owed services, he thought it wise to contract the software services out to foreigners and they sabotaged him, and will probably keep the software inaccessible until Obama approves the Keystone Pipeline so they can sell their slug oil by passing it through MR land rather than worry the folks in BC over possible leaks. Only problem for Obama is, he doesn't want to make that decision until after the mid-terms, because he knows that he will be even further "disgruntlizing" voters and he needs the House and Senate to completely socialize the US into "Greeceland."

See how complicated and confusing the world has become since Obama and the far left wingers have come into power?
"you libs just don't get the concept of fiscal conservatism"

No, wrong again. We just have a different view of what fiscal conservatism is. You cons think that fiscal conservatism means depriving needy people of assistance, not doing things that help the whole country, and making certain that the ultra wealthy don't have to pay a tax rate equal to or above that of the less wealthy. Your concept would result in the US becoming a third world country, imo. Cons think that it's perfectly fine to spend billions on wars and un-needed weapons systems. Libs think we should take care of our people first, build and maintain infrastructure and only engage in wars if they are absolutely necessary. Liberal progressives believe that the country should progress in every endeavor, whereas, cons want to maintain the status quo. Where would we be if we never progressed? Stuck in the 17th century, I think.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Banandangees
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Mountainrivers
Dec 24 2013, 10:36 PM
Banandangees
Dec 24 2013, 10:46 AM
That would be fiscally foolish for me to hire out to someone to pay for something I've already paid someone else to do. See, you libs just don't get the concept of fiscal conservatism. You depend too much on the money tree.

But notice, I (we) didn't have to contract out to Canada for the service of "National Guard." Someone long before Obama decided to keep that service in house. That's why Obamacare is already operating far in the red in owed services, he thought it wise to contract the software services out to foreigners and they sabotaged him, and will probably keep the software inaccessible until Obama approves the Keystone Pipeline so they can sell their slug oil by passing it through MR land rather than worry the folks in BC over possible leaks. Only problem for Obama is, he doesn't want to make that decision until after the mid-terms, because he knows that he will be even further "disgruntlizing" voters and he needs the House and Senate to completely socialize the US into "Greeceland."

See how complicated and confusing the world has become since Obama and the far left wingers have come into power?
"you libs just don't get the concept of fiscal conservatism"

No, wrong again. We just have a different view of what fiscal conservatism is. You cons think that fiscal conservatism means depriving needy people of assistance, not doing things that help the whole country, and making certain that the ultra wealthy don't have to pay a tax rate equal to or above that of the less wealthy. Your concept would result in the US becoming a third world country, imo. Cons think that it's perfectly fine to spend billions on wars and un-needed weapons systems. Libs think we should take care of our people first, build and maintain infrastructure and only engage in wars if they are absolutely necessary. Liberal progressives believe that the country should progress in every endeavor, whereas, cons want to maintain the status quo. Where would we be if we never progressed? Stuck in the 17th century, I think.

:smile: A "multiple fu" analysis, worthy of an honorary PhD degree awarded from the School of Multiple Fu.

Merry Christmas and a prosperous and healthy new year to you MR, my friend.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mountainrivers
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Banandangees
Dec 25 2013, 01:46 AM
Mountainrivers
Dec 24 2013, 10:36 PM
Banandangees
Dec 24 2013, 10:46 AM
That would be fiscally foolish for me to hire out to someone to pay for something I've already paid someone else to do. See, you libs just don't get the concept of fiscal conservatism. You depend too much on the money tree.

But notice, I (we) didn't have to contract out to Canada for the service of "National Guard." Someone long before Obama decided to keep that service in house. That's why Obamacare is already operating far in the red in owed services, he thought it wise to contract the software services out to foreigners and they sabotaged him, and will probably keep the software inaccessible until Obama approves the Keystone Pipeline so they can sell their slug oil by passing it through MR land rather than worry the folks in BC over possible leaks. Only problem for Obama is, he doesn't want to make that decision until after the mid-terms, because he knows that he will be even further "disgruntlizing" voters and he needs the House and Senate to completely socialize the US into "Greeceland."

See how complicated and confusing the world has become since Obama and the far left wingers have come into power?
"you libs just don't get the concept of fiscal conservatism"

No, wrong again. We just have a different view of what fiscal conservatism is. You cons think that fiscal conservatism means depriving needy people of assistance, not doing things that help the whole country, and making certain that the ultra wealthy don't have to pay a tax rate equal to or above that of the less wealthy. Your concept would result in the US becoming a third world country, imo. Cons think that it's perfectly fine to spend billions on wars and un-needed weapons systems. Libs think we should take care of our people first, build and maintain infrastructure and only engage in wars if they are absolutely necessary. Liberal progressives believe that the country should progress in every endeavor, whereas, cons want to maintain the status quo. Where would we be if we never progressed? Stuck in the 17th century, I think.

:smile: A "multiple fu" analysis, worthy of an honorary PhD degree awarded from the School of Multiple Fu.

Merry Christmas and a prosperous and healthy new year to you MR, my friend.
I figured you would agree with me. :teeth:

And a very Merry Christmas to you, too. With friends like you, I feel very fortunate despite our differences.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
campingken
No Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Ban,

Why not explain to us libs the con version of "fiscal conservatism. The last time cons were in power we saw, tax cuts that were more wealthy than middle class friendly, (2) unfunded wars, and unfunded prescription medication assistance.

People who quote Reagan crack me up. Would you tremble in fear if your wife had a heart attack and call 9-11 or would you call a private ambulance staffed by "paramedics" without training standards?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tomdrobin
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Neutral
Dec 23 2013, 11:30 PM
I would also like to ask them why they did not mention Faux news.
Faux is a major player in the con. Vilifying dems and libs, playing off peoples fears and prejudices to gain support for policies that benefit the wealthy and corporate interests and screwing everyone else. You should be outraged not singing their praises.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
LOL There you go, a thread isn't complete without some lib bashing the leader in cable news.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Considering how badly they lie to their public, FOX doesn't get bashed nearly enough.

The fact that they're leading in whatever they're doing (it certainly isn't news) just shows how many Gullibles there are out there.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Now of course a canook stealthily bashes this country.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis