'I very much enjoy working for' Obama, Gates says

[jillio]

At least you're willing to admit you don't consider all angles, although how do you know it's all just lies and misrepresentations if you don't even know what they're saying? That is, unless you redefine a lie as "anything that goes against my agenda".

As an opponent, let me demonstrate what "considering all angles" looks like. Just focusing on health care reform, I'll quickly argue the pro-ObamaCare case.


Of course that's not everything, but that covers most of the main points. I don't agree with all that, but I do understand it. I least I know what I'm rejecting and why.

Now, if you actually want to hold yourself to your own standard that you expect from the opposition, here's three articles that explain some of the reasons for our opposition, just on the issue of health care. This is no way covers all of our points. You don't have to agree with all the points, but it's not unreasonable to ask that you understand them.

Impossible Promises: Obama says his health care plan will cut costs and increase patient choice. It won't. - Reason Magazine
Charles Krauthammer - Preventive Care Isn't the Magic Bullet for Health Care Costs - washingtonpost.com
Third party payment in health care (part 3): Technology drives cost growth|KeithHennessey.com

And just so you don't think we have no solutions, Keith Hennessey has a nice succinct list of alternative reform solutions.

Hennessey?s health care reform plan, v2|KeithHennessey.com

Misinterpretation on your part...or deliberate attempt to twist words. Who knows which? I did not say I did not know what they are saying. I know very well what they are saying. What I said was, they have not managed to convince the majority that they have valid and sustainable points. Comments like "Get the government out of health care, but don't touch my Medicare!", walking around with offensive images on signs, fear based on something that does not exist, but has been perpetrated by lying entertainers, and dressing up in Halloween costumes is the image they are intentionally displaying. If they want to be taken seriously, they need to engage in intelligent and serious discussion of the issues instead of acting like a bunch of lunatics.

I have considered both sides. I simply find the Teabaggers to be totally without merit, and dangerously ill informed and ignorant.

 

[jillio]

That quote has been attributed to them by politicians and liberals trying to ridicule them. I have not seen anyone make that point directly. Being worried about lowered Medicare benefits is not the same as not knowing that Medicare comes from the government. Taking an argument and twisting the nuance out of it is a straw man by definition.

And have you ever seen any large protest without at least a few offensive signs and people wearing costumes? How many liberal causes would be invalidated by such a standard?

Now, can you actually list any of the intelligent and well-informed points that the opposition is actually making, and not just crap made up by Democrat politicians?

It has been attributed to them because they have been caught on camera numerous times making such statements. No need to "attribute."

 

[darkdog]

Gee, then perhaps you shouldn't have answered "And, no I can't. I am too distracted by their ignorance, lies, and misrepresentations" when asked if you could list some of the intelligent and well-informed points. That doesn't require much misinterpretation or twisting- it's pretty direct. If you really meant that you're capable but don't want to, why not prove it? And do you really think those articles I posted are written in a lunatic fashion? Do you really want me to show you how lunatic your side can be at protests? Do you think I, who have attended two Tea Party protests, don't have a grasp on what your side is saying? Oh, so many questions!

By the way, I find it odd that you would talk about "teabaggers" using offensive signs while referring to them with crude sexual term which would be inappropriate to define here. So much for engaging in serious discussion.

 

[darkdog]

It has been attributed to them because they have been caught on camera numerous times making such statements. No need to "attribute."

Sure such videos exist . Let me guess, they're embedded in HR 3200, right?

 

[jillio]

Gee, then perhaps you shouldn't have answered "And, no I can't. I am too distracted by their ignorance, lies, and misrepresentations" when asked if you could list some of the intelligent and well-informed points. That doesn't require much misinterpretation or twisting- it's pretty direct. If you really meant that you're capable but don't want to, why not prove it? And do you really think those articles I posted are written in a lunatic fashion? Do you really want me to show you how lunatic your side can be at protests? Do you think I, who have attended two Tea Party protests, don't have a grasp on what your side is saying? Oh, so many questions!

By the way, I find it odd that you would talk about "teabaggers" using offensive signs while referring to them with crude sexual term which would be inappropriate to define here. So much for engaging in serious discussion.

And I stand by my statement. I can't list any intelligent and well-informed posts because on the off chance they have even made a single one, it has been obscured by their circus like antics.

If you are looking for credibility for attending a Teabaggers rally, you are looking in the wrong place. Which sign were you carrying? The one that protrays Obama as a witch doctor, or the one that portrays him as Hitler? Or perhaps you had the one innaccurately crying about socialism and Marxism.

Teabaggers is the name they have coined for themselves. Obviously they didn't think that one all the way through, either.

 

[jillio]

Sure such videos exist . Let me guess, they're embedded in HR 3200, right?

They have been all over the news. Try watching something other than Faux News for a change, and you will see them. Direct quotes have been in several newspapers, as well.

My, but denial is a strong defense mechanism.

 

[darkdog]

And I stand by my statement. I can't list any intelligent and well-informed posts because on the off chance they have even made a single one, it has been obscured by their circus like antics.

Awesome. Now I have something definitive to rub your face in next time you accuse people like me of not being willing to look at all sides. Serious, intelligent arguments are there. I provided links to several of them and there are many more where they came from.

If you are looking for credibility for attending a Teabaggers rally, you are looking in the wrong place. Which sign were you carrying? The one that protrays Obama as a witch doctor, or the one that portrays him as Hitler? Or perhaps you had the one innaccurately crying about socialism and Marxism.

I didn't bring the witch doctor sign because that idiot is not me. I didn't bring the Obama-Hitler sign because I am not a leftist LaRouche Democrat. My sign said nothing about socialism or Marxism because I think statism is a more accurate word. My sign had a graph of future projected debts from the GAO and a list of the ticking fiscal time bombs.

Are you saying I should never get active and attend a rally unless I can be sure I agree with every single sign there? You know the probability of that is about zero, right? Do you hold yourself to that same standard?

Guess what? I also didn't like the few birther signs I saw, but most of the signs were reasonable and most of the people were normal concerned citizens.

Teabaggers is the name they have coined for themselves. Obviously they didn't think that one all the way through, either.

Wrong. It was the media who coined it.

They have been all over the news. Try watching something other than Faux News for a change, and you will see them. Direct quotes have been in several newspapers, as well.

My, but denial is a strong defense mechanism.

I'm invoking the first law of jillio: If jillio says something's there, it's not there. I usually don't bluff like that, but with you, I feel very comfortable doing so. Please, oh please, don't provide a link and put egg on my face!

Anyway, I'm out of here unless you want to provide me with something of substance and not just more jillioisms.

Sincerely,
darkdog

P.S. I rarely watch Fox News.

 

[kokonut]

Duly impressed with DD's rational thinking rather than to make constant excuses hand over fist on not wanting to follow through. We know bad acting when we see one.

 

[Reba]

Back in April:
MSNBC: The Place for Low-Brow 'Teabag' Humor

 

[deafskeptic]

Back in April:
MSNBC: The Place for Low-Brow 'Teabag' Humor

When I first heard the word "teabaggers", I wondered what World of Warcraft PVP (Player vs Player; you kill the other player's characters) had to do with politics. In WoW, teabagging is often done after you kill someone. Teabagging isn't something I do. I just leave corpses where they are and I don't camp them unless they're very annoying.

 

[Reba]

When I first heard the word "teabaggers", I wondered what World of Warcraft PVP (Player vs Player; you kill the other player's characters) had to do with politics. In WoW, teabagging is often done after you kill someone. Teabagging isn't something I do. I just leave corpses where they are and I don't camp them unless they're very annoying.

Until I read about it in AD, and then looked it up, I never before heard that sexual term used. It's not something that is included in my daily conversations or experience.

But for those who did know its raunchy meaning, why do they continue to use it? (Not really a question for you specifically.)

 

[deafskeptic]

Until I read about it in AD, and then looked it up, I never before heard that sexual term used. It's not something that is included in my daily conversations or experience.

But for those who did know its raunchy meaning, why do they continue to use it? (Not really a question for you specifically.)

Beats me.

 

[Beowulf]

Until I read about it in AD, and then looked it up, I never before heard that sexual term used. It's not something that is included in my daily conversations or experience.

But for those who did know its raunchy meaning, why do they continue to use it? (Not really a question for you specifically.)

Its raunchy meeting is a new one for me. I guess I am not in the culture of which it means putting one's testicles into the face or mouth. Sounds pretty gay to me, though it was David Shuster's opinion.
He went on to say "They want to give President Obama a strong tongue-lashing and lick government spending--spending they did not oppose when they were under presidents Bush and Reagan. They oppose Mr. Obama's tax rates-which will be lower for most of them-and they oppose the tax increases Mr. Obama is imposing on the rich, whose taxes will skyrocket to a rate about 10 percent less than it was under Reagan. That's teabagging in a nutshell."

Personally, I can think of teabaggers without sexual connotations.

 

[jillio]

Its raunchy meeting is a new one for me. I guess I am not in the culture of which it means putting one's testicles into the face or mouth. Sounds pretty gay to me, though it was David Shuster's opinion.
He went on to say "They want to give President Obama a strong tongue-lashing and lick government spending--spending they did not oppose when they were under presidents Bush and Reagan. They oppose Mr. Obama's tax rates-which will be lower for most of them-and they oppose the tax increases Mr. Obama is imposing on the rich, whose taxes will skyrocket to a rate about 10 percent less than it was under Reagan. That's teabagging in a nutshell."

Personally, I can think of teabaggers without sexual connotations.

As can I. Like many words in the English langauge, there are multiple meanings and contexts.

 

[jillio]

Awesome. Now I have something definitive to rub your face in next time you accuse people like me of not being willing to look at all sides. Serious, intelligent arguments are there. I provided links to several of them and there are many more where they came from.

Oh? How many Obama rallies have you attended?
I didn't bring the witch doctor sign because that idiot is not me. I didn't bring the Obama-Hitler sign because I am not a leftist LaRouche Democrat. My sign said nothing about socialism or Marxism because I think statism is a more accurate word. My sign had a graph of future projected debts from the GAO and a list of the ticking fiscal time bombs.

And I'm sure it made quite the impact.:cool2:

Are you saying I should never get active and attend a rally unless I can be sure I agree with every single sign there? You know the probability of that is about zero, right? Do you hold yourself to that same standard?

Nope, not what I'm saying at all. You really should stop assuming you know something you don't.
Guess what? I also didn't like the few birther signs I saw, but most of the signs were reasonable and most of the people were normal concerned citizens.

Guess what? They are being drowned out by the circus freaks.


Wrong. It was the media who coined it.


I'm invoking the first law of jillio: If jillio says something's there, it's not there. I usually don't bluff like that, but with you, I feel very comfortable doing so. Please, oh please, don't provide a link and put egg on my face!

Google is your friend. I have no interest in doing your homework for you.

Anyway, I'm out of here unless you want to provide me with something of substance and not just more jillioisms.

Sincerely,
darkdog

P.S. I rarely watch Fox News.

It would appear that you rarely watch any news.