What is the stupid black woman even arguing for? That blood thinning woman wouldn't need all that healthcare if she would lose some what, along with her fat ass husband.
This whole Tea Party/anti-obama agenda is just an EXCUSE for people who don't want to admit the awful truth. That is, that they simply DO NOT WANT A BLACK PRESIDENT. Socialism? Health Care? Unamerican? Those are the weakest excuses for rallying cries I've ever heard!
Socialism and government reform can be extremely beneficial. Have any of you tea-baggers been to Canada? We have socialist leanings AND universal health care. It is fucking AWESOME up here!
It's pretty obvious to anyone who doesn't have their head up their ass. Which, by the way, seems to be about a quarter of the American population. Seriously, what else could it possibly be? The man is seeing th U.S through a train wreck caused by the previous POTUS, he's trying to co-operate (a LOT) with the right-wingers, AND he invaded Pakistan to kill Johnny-Terrorist; something Bush couldn't do in all the time he was in office.
@DukeMachiavelli So locking them out and deliberately passing bills he knows they'll block is cooperating with them? Jamming a policy that would hurt the opposing party inside of a proposed under a guise as an aids bill is not uncommon. In fact, you would be all over this if the situation was reversed. You state Obama fixing the economy as if the economy doesn't stabilize on its own. If government had anything to do with recovery, why are government involved recessions the longest ones?
"WAAAH! I make minimum wage and now can't afford a surgery to save my life!" Cry me a fucking river. Not to sound like a cold-hearted prick, but that bitch should have thought about shit like that before she had a bunch of kids and let herself turn 40 while STILL WORKING MINIMUM WAGE JOBS. Plus, she just HAD to play the race card (or at least alluded to it). Give me a fucking break.
@kassan2491 I didn't inherit a fortune. I'm only 28 years old and managed to save and invest a lot of money while I served in the armed forces. I have no problem learning another language and moving if I feel the environment here isn't conducive to my prosperity. All I need to know to support my point is her own admission to having kids, to be 40 years old and to still be working minimum wage jobs, in spite of the many educational assistance government programs. She gets no sympathy from me.
I know quite a bit of whats in the bill and I think, if it does not work, it'll be because it didnt go far enough to socialize health INSURANCE not because it went too far.. It's pretty obvious you dont care about anyone less fortunate than yourself. You wont care until you are personally affected and this is why I call you people lizards.
@badmuffy of course you were but it is the right of everyone to have free speech.Why are they heartless?I am confused because they are concerned about thier money they earn and how it will be used in reference to this healthcare bill.
@computerwife I totally agree they have every right to express their views and protest. I just disagree that their money is being wasted on healthcare. They should be protesting the insane amount of money we spend on the military, corporate welfare etc.. Money spent on keeping people alive is never wasted..
@badmuffy do you know what is in the bill?In its entirety.This is correct,we are protesting complete and total gov.controlled healhcare that will never work as what is in place now does not function as it should.I know what you will respond but I will say anyway,I do not think it is my problem other people who cant manage.I work hard for what I have.I dont want to be penalized if i dont want to have this.and I do not.
@computerwife Yes the bill could be improved.. there needs to be a public option to control costs, the mandate should be gotten rid of, but it seems they are not protesting any of the actual problems with the bill. They are just protesting the idea of ANY bill that in any way controls corporate greed or subsidizes healthcare for the poor. To me this seems like anti social cold blooded lizard behavior..
@computerwife all these teabaggin women you see out here dont even have jobs theyre defending their husbands money. How many women do you know that have time to be at every rally?? Only housewives...those fat whores need to get off their fat asses and get a damn job like real american woman if youre so concerned about money
@kassan2491 i missed your comment somehow,you mean like the fat whining woman who was complaining. real american women plan to raise thier kids and stay at home i planned for that. there is nothing wrong with choosing to be a mom at home.I was for yrs.now i work part time but plan to be with my kids after school.i think it sad you do not respect womens choice to choose what they want.
the woman who spoke of slaves,and said big deal to the millions of jews being exterminated is a total moron she shows what a racist she is and now she comes back whining of her life,life is unfair,then you should of gone to college and get a higher education and not have kids if you cannot afford them,wait did she just say that the healthcare for poor african americans,why is he talking to her?shes unintelligent,i can hardly stand it,oh she plays the race card of course
"A little socialism" is what we have and it's inefficient and unsustainable.
And if that woman thinks she's entitled to government health-care because her ancestors were thralls, then why does she want everyone sucked in? And besides, thralldom was sanctioned by certain states; if any government is accountable, it's not the Federal.
So let me see if I have this right. The fat lady says her medicine "TO KEEP HER ALIVE" costs $1400 and she wants a solution.
Seems to me she has 2 choices. Get a job,or if need be a 2nd job, or DIE!
Doesn't seem to me to be a real hard decision.
That is whats wrong with the Recipient class in this country. They can't take care of themselves so they stand around demanding everyone else solve their problems for them.
@lou304 It's way easier to live in the nanny state, right? I'm not worried, I have my passport and plenty of money saved. I feel sorry for those without the option of leaving.
This is the result of Bill Ayres "social justice" agenda in the Chicago Public Schools. A complete ignorance of basic economic theory and a totally distorted version of World History. It is very sad...
@1776Rosco more to the point,not to be rude but perhaps if the woman who was complaining of $1400 should lose weight and maybe she wouldn"t have certian health issues which I am sure is connected.
RE: George W. Bush. I've been to almost every Tea Party in Chicago since early '09. George Bush is booed right along with Obama for his role in starting the bank bailouts. Just an FYI for the discussion here. Carry on.
What a f****ing joke. The secretary will tell the congressperson about your complaints. PUKE. What is she going to do put a postet on the corner of a piece of scribble paper. That would upset me. Talking to a GD secretary.
@krrrruptidsoless Society is ridiculous. When it comes together it is a clash of ignorance that accomplishes squat. Unorganized ineffective divided rants. With no answers. And they wonder why the government takes control without their approval. 15,000 different subjects being talked about and they want an answer to all of them. Quit breeding you ignorants until you solve the problems you have.
Good job. You created a 10-minute analysis based on the ramblings of some retarded black lady. Very few progressives would argue like she does or sound like her, so this is basically a strawman video.
the fact of the matter is some people just have to work harder to get to where they want to be than others. Our govt is suppose to promote welfare as stated in our constitution not provide welfare.
Let just crush more jobs and leave more people unemployed so everyone can get health care.Especially at a time when our country cant afford it.Very smart insights 25210 you are a genius,you should run for office. Oh and lets play the race card.All races had struggles yet its not us who felt those struggles its our ancestors.We live with our own choices,we have no one else to blame but ourselves.
She eats her own words. She wants health care but then when the guy suggested something else she said realistically it won't happen. Would it not be cheaper to give health care to the groups she stated rather than giving health care to everyone. And why should a nation in debt pay for something it cant afford. And the fact of the matter is our govt has been at war with country before the bush administration
Very little will change if this bill is passed. All it boils down to is a subsidy for insurance companies. They will get more money and more people will get health care (similar to food subsidies).
Nice ending with an African American president means that all is fine and dandy in the US. That says it all. How simple these protesters are. They should get off those 'socialist' public sidewalks and stay in their homes.
@25522010 : why don't you throw in the Department of Education, Department of Energy, and Environment. Let's also not forget the WW1, WW2s and the undeclared wars in Korea and Vietnam - the latter which nearly brought down the country, both socially and financially. Oh yeah, let's all thank the demo party.
Now, needlessly to say many of the programs you listed are about to go bankrupt or greatly contribute the fiscal ills of the country.
@TheLogicalPositivist WrF are you talking about Slavery has nothing to do with Socialism. Look at our current Socalized programs. The tyrany of the fire department needs to be stopped.....
The atrocities of the highway system enslave us all?? seriously that comment was no brighter than the "grievance-monger"
Taxation is everyone paying their fair share for the upkeep of the government, highways, fire depts, things that compensate us all.
Socialism is government assuming ownership of personal property and spreading the wealth. That is, forcing you to work without compensation. If the government forces me to work to pay for my deadbeat neighbor's insurance, that's slavery. It's also against the 13th Amendment.
You don't think a physically healthy workforce compensates us all? A lot of people can't work without transportation, that's why taxpayers pay for a public transportation option. It goes without saying, a lot of people can't work without basic healthcare either.
@11111110 You still need to pay for public transportation. As far as "physically healthy workforce" this doesn't justify robbing Peter to pay Paul. Especially when Paul can afford private insurance but chooses not to, is here illegally or breeds beyond his means.
@11111110 Then maybe you could argue that public transportation should be 100% rider-funded. On the other hand people who drive cars put more wear & tear on the roads and more pollution in the air so they should pay more for the roads. It all kinda averages out and no one is disproportionately taxed.
Maybe I should move to your town, I haven't paid less than a dollar to ride the CTA since the 70s.
If public transportation was 100% rider-funded, it would be a lot mroe expensive, and out of the budget for the people who NEED public transportation to function and work in society.
If they wanted a transportation service that was 100% rider-funded, they'd pay $20 for a cab.
@11111110 Oh c'mon! There's obviously an efficiency to buses and trains that makes them much less expensive per person than $20 cab fares. You know better than that.
Yes, they're "efficiency" comes from cutting quality.. As a result, people who use public transportation can't decide when or where they get dropped off and picked up. Plus they have to ride a dirty bus squeezed next to other people.
Fortunately, the role of public transportation isn't to provide high-quality service, but to provide the basic service that low-income citizens need to function in society
@11111110 A busload of people consumes less fuel and creates less traffic congestion than an equal number of people in cars. Hopping a train for $2 vs. paying for a car + downtown parking makes a lot of sense, regardless of your income. Most of the people on the buses I take are yuppies, it is by no means the domain of the poor and I ain't exactly a hobo.
@TheLogicalPositivist Socialism is not assuming personal property and spreading the wealth. A pure socialist system is one in which the government owns business. That is not forcing you to work without compensation You still get paid. That argument is just plain stupid. Take that weak ass argument to scotus and get laughed right out of the courthouse.
I have to know is the fire department slavery? It has a very similar history to healthcare. After all it started out as an insurance plan.
@nospacesallowed Socialism is *also* about government owning businesses and that's just what our Marxist president has been doing. So far as bringing it to SCOTUS, that is exactly what at least 12 states' attorney generals are planning to do with this unconstitutional law.
@TheLogicalPositivist The 12 states are not arguing on the 13th amendment grounds Let me ask you again is the fire department slavery? Should we each individually have to pay for fires being put out or is it for the public good to have fires out out?
@nospacesallowed You understand that fire department services are available to everyone, not just deadbeats, criminal trespassers and overbreeders, don't you? The fire department doesn't respond to a fire by committing arson to everyone else's house to "level out the playing field" as you leftists like to say.
@TheLogicalPositivist The fire department disproportionately favors those in poorer neighborhoods, including, deadbeats, criminal trespassers and overbreeders. It also favors those who make poor decisions. (smoking before bed, living in houses in poor condition. ect.) All legislation effects people differently, no legislation will effect everyone the same way.
I can't believe that woman actually thinks african slavery somehow makes her "more entitled" to something than the jewish woman, even when she brings up the holocaust.
I would think that if she can positively trace the history of her family back to the time of slavery, and positively establish that her ancestors were adversely affected, she would have some grounds to claim a degree of entitlement. I don't necessarily agree with the venue or the method, though. And I would say the exact same thing about the Jewish lady.
The people spoke in 2008. We won, end of fucken story. One term my ass. The good intelligent people of our country are taking over. So all you zombies go find a fucken cave. We are America.
To the black woman, you are still a slave only to this government.
"A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government."
I'd rather be a "slave" to my government than a slave to some arrogant, greedy corporate asshole that will use me and abuse me and then throw me away. And stop hiding behind the Framers in order to spread your idiotic, ignorant, anti-American BS, will you?
"In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men the great difficulty lies in this: You must first enable the government to control the governed, and in the next place, oblige it to control itself." Alexander Hamilton
Anti American? LOL! From a communist that is funny.
"What's wrong with a little socialism?" The problem is it leads to more and more socialism, and more power concentrated in the central government. Power corrupts. Socialism has been tried many, many times, and every time it has failed. People say it wasn't the idea, it was the leaders. That is true, but it also has to do with the leader principle. Power corrupts, and there is no exception to that rule.
Where was this Ann Leary fake when Bush and Cheney were in fact shredding the Constitution and looting the Treasury? The Democrats are doing NOTHING of the kind, but this hack apparently feels it's OK when right-wingers do it. Every day that goes by I become more and more convinced that all these teabaggers are a cancer to our Country that needs to be eradicated ASAP! They twist the truth, make up their own facts, and are just clueless as to what it means to be good citizens. SCREW THEM ALL!!
FDR & LBJ's liberal fiscal & war excesses pale in comparison. The way I see it, it's your ignorance that is a cancer to your country. I just don't understand why liberals don't want to study their own history.
Jesus, YOUR IGNORANCE knows no limit. I'm not a liberal, (not even a Democrat). I've been studying our Country's history for the past 20 years, the REAL history, not your skewed version of it. FDR's "war excesses"? Seriously? Would you rather be imprisoned in a concentration camp speaking German right now? I can guarantee you I know more about the REAL history of this Country than you've ever known in your entire, pathetic existence, sport. Get your head out of your ass, will you?
@armyveteran101st : no. I'm not Japanese or German, but I would definitely hate to be in FDR's concentration camp.
No, you don't - most liberals sadly have no long-term memory. Many even refuse to accept the fact that their most revered progressive president, LBJ, a deceitful war-monger, thrusted your country into an unnecessary war in Vietnam, resulting in 65+K death. It's funny how wars always become "necessary" when there's a demo president.
For a "professional student" you certainly have no fucking clue of what you're trying to talk about. Yes, LBJ deepened our involvement in Vietnam and ended up screwing that up, but Eisenhower is the one that initially sent military advisers to Vietnam. Furthermore, LBJ is one of the most successful Presidents regarding domestic policy, and that is a fact. Your bit about "necessary" wars is just foolish and absurd. What in hell is it that you're supposedly studying?
@armyveteran101st : completely no clue. The US involvement in Vietnam started under Truman, right after the WW2. He ignored Ho Chi Minh's plea for independence and helped French recolonize the country (it failed) - providing funding (as much as 80% since the French didn't have much way of financing the war) and military expertise. It continued under Eisenhower, who was known more for aversion toward any full foreign intervention and covert operations, but it wasn't until JFK + LBJ eventually ble
So, long story short, Democratic Presidents are evil according to you, right? What about Nixon, or Reagan's relentless assault on the poor and the working class, or his disdain for AIDS victims, or his systematic dismantling of our economic system? What about Bush Jr's push to shred the Constitution and use it as toilet paper? He is the true war-monger, and for you to pretend that isn't so is the height of hypocrisy. Stop your historical revisionism, bud. It makes you look rather unbalanced.
Of course not! Why would I do that when it is the truth? That you have been brainwashed and fooled by the right wing is a different matter altogether. Don't get me wrong; I'm not a Democrat and I think they have problems, but I would take them over the alternatives any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
@armyveteran101st : JFK + LBJ, both war mongers. At least, JFK learned to avoid confrontation with the Soviets and tone down his oversea ambition; nonetheless, Eisenhower had only 800 so-called advisors in South; there were 16+K so-called "advisors" by the time JFK was gone. In escalating the war there, LBJ did pretty much looted the Constitution and treasury for his war in Vietnam. His domestic policies (eg, the war on poverty, the Great Society) were constantly criticized by his own kind.
Are you one of those antiwar-no-matter-what morons? Why would you call JFK a "war monger"? You sound pretty extreme and radical to me, no objectivity whatsoever. Avoid confrontation? JFK stared the Soviets down, which was precisely the right way to handle them, as Reagan did later. The war on poverty and the Great Society were achievements, dude. Are you some kind of social ogre? Now Ike was a pretty decent President, but he was not perfect, as you're trying to make him out to be.
@armyveteran101st : LBJ welfare policies, until its repeal in early 1990's, were the main contributing factor to the rising high black crimes & teenage pregnancy rates in US - they both declined sharply after the reform; now, the lowest in nearly 40 years.
My background is in economics: even most liberals economists, including C. Romers, Obama's appointee, admit that LBJ's economic policies were very misguided and contributed greatly to the decline of US economy since 1960's.
You said all policies, not only welfare. Just like affirmative action, welfare failed to evolve with time, and it needed to be adjusted and reformed, just like affirmative action needs to be adjusted and reformed. I still think that LBJ showed great courage and great compassion in being so firmly in support of civil rights and health care, and in moving the corresponding pieces of legislation through Congress like he did. The guy is FAR from being as bad as Bush II or Nixon were.
@armyveteran101st : his policies were failures from the day one. One of the most prominent critic of his social policies was Patrick Moynian, who once worked as an undersecretary of labor under JFK and a member of vocal social critics, now known as "neoconservatives". Needless to say, he was instantly accused of being a racist and his warnings dismissed - the same way you are now trying to label me as a "KKK" (well, things don't change very much).
As I said, you're not being objective in the least. To call neocons "vocal social critics" is asinine. I'm not taking you seriously because of your apparent irrational radicalism. Get real and I'll take you seriously.
@armyveteran101st : ok, you have no idea who neoco nservatives are. Once trotskies, they mostly thrived as social critics under JFK + LBJ. They include prominent sociologist like Daniel Bell, Nathan Glazer, Irving Kristol..
Now, not knowing about the history of the movement is one thing, but to arrogantly dismiss it b/c it doesn't fit your view of the world is another. Grow up
You have some nerve talking about "my view of the world". These people you cite have skewed and twisted history and philosophy to match their own view of the world, and they used this to influence Bush in order to get him to commit crimes against the U.S. Constitution. I say again, give me a freaking break.
@armyveteran101st : ok, the neoconservative mvt didn't get much attention until recently - its history for the most part is still a pretty esoteric academic discussion. PBS however had an interesting program called "Arguing the World" years back. While the scope of the program is limited to their intellectual origin at CCNY circa 40-60s, it nonetheless provides insights into their mindset, history, etc.
These liberal democrats were later recruited by Reagan (j patrick) in mid-80s, the rest is
@armyveteran101st : history. Most don't associate warfare statism with modern liberalism, even in light of the fact that all the last major wars were all waged by the democrats, but Bush's bungling in the ME has more to do with the lefties influence in the party, than the conservative elements there, who are all but marginalized as "radical" or "extremist". That is also precisely why the wars will continue under Obama (or whoever gets elected next).
I don't know who indoctrinated you, but boy did they do a hell of a number on you, my friend! As far as knowledge of history, you are full of crap. You really think we "waged" WW1 and WW2? You've got your head so far up the GOP elephant's ass it's not even funny. How about Bush Jr, who did WAGE an elective, unnecessary war in Iraq? I'm wasting my time with you. You are way too brainwashed and mentally corrupted. Next thing you'll tell me is that the swine flu was created by liberals, right?
@armyveteran101st : tsk, tsk, more ad hominen. Do you have anything intellegent to say? Again, instead of backing up your responses with facts, you are dwelling on semantics and gotaches (let me guess, you went to the same school as michael moore; or never passed GED) No, douchebag, I'm referring to the last two major undeclared wars; though only a few ignorant liberal rednecks would question that Wilsons's international played an important role in Amercia's involvment in the WW1
@armyveteran101st : [correction: Wilson's internationalism] and the WW2, subsequently, inevitable outcome of the first.
The Repub party is no longer the party of A Licoln or Eisenhower, in the same way that the demo party no longer the party of Grover Cleveland or classical liberalism.
@armyveteran101st : And this has all to do with the growing lefties influence in both parties. Again, it's rather impossible to get through your thick skull that the founding members of neocons were once trotskies at CCNY. They were quite influential public intellectual figures (insiders) under JFK + LBJ. As their power declined in LBJ's (and later Carters's) botched liberal utopia, they defected to the repub party - starting with Jean Kirkpatrick at Reagan's invitation.
@armyveteran101st : despite conservatives' protest - Reagan dismissed the concern and responded that he too was a democrat once.
In another word, it should be no surprise to anyone that Bush's skyrocketing warfare / welfare spending had a lot do with the liberal influence in the party. Bush's idea of "world democracy" was likewise one of the main liberal idealism pioneered by Wilson, a forerunner of modern liberalism, and later by LBJ, his short-sighted liberal utopia.
@armyveteran101st : oh, let's not forget, since you brought it up: It was LBJ who, as the senate leader, stonewalled and diluted the 1957 Civil Rights Act, first in some 80 years. It should be no surprise that there were openly racists in both parties (eg, Thurmond being the most notorious), LBJ didn't want to alienate his southern constituents which would jeopardize his future political career (he was likewise known for his public opposition to previous efforts). Where did you go to school agai
Sounds like you've done your homework as far as LBJ is concerned, and I commend you for that. Yes, he was a politician, and he was an old school southerner, and that gives him more merit IMO. He was able to rise above his ideology and his prejudices and do something he knew would benefit the Country. You may not like the guy at all, but you have to at least give him that.
@armyveteran101st : objective? wow, am I the only one to see that none of your comments are backed by any cohesive historical, economical, political ideas? or they are poorly constructed logical fallacies (eg, false alternative/bifurcation, ad hominem - me, a KKK?, card-stacking, appeal to false authority / emotion, to name a few). You've already lost the debate here, much less being truthful.
Too bad, most liberals seem to suffer from the same disease.
@armyveteran101st : what makes you think that LBJ's policies were successful?
The US had most economically prosperous decade under Eisenhower, mostly due to the post WW2 boom and his non-intervention policies. It wasn't perfect, but in those days, education / medicine was quite affordable without any social programs, the low crime rates and declining poverty rates (especially among the black families once at 80% in 40's). Eisenhower pushed the 1957 Civil Rights Act, although he believed you
@armyveteran101st : I'm guessing that economic history isn't your forte. Oh yes, of course, the 50's were the most progressive decade in American history. Liberals don't like talking about this too much, but, despite the growing red fear, the US now was the de facto world's economic & political hegemon - US manufacturing accounting for nearly half of all the world's and enormous surpluses & debt reduction under Eisenhower. The decade also lifted many out of poverty and into the burgeoning middle
@armyveteran101st : class unseen in US history; so did the number of Americans getting college degrees & home ownerships. It was in fact so good that the Fed had to artificially induce two recessions to prevent economic overheating. Again, there wans't much crime to speak of; neither were there sick people dying on the streets. Yes, racism was very alive - as it is still today and the blacks lived in segregated communities, but they were making progress by leaps and bounds.
@armyveteran101st: Most importantly, they achieved all that without any gov't intervention. Eisenhower, likewise, wasn't known for his grand "vision" or "high idealism"; but what he did know mattered a lot - that his knowledge & power as prez was limited. In another word, there was no dire national crisis that necessitated LBJ's delusional grandios social engineering.
@armyveteran101st : although he didn't believe in legislating morality (he also directly intervened in LIttle Rock).
I don't know if I ever said "all", but all LBJ policies were quite delusional and impractical - declaring "wars" on persistent social problems that you can't win (the same goes for drug or terror); architected by white intellectuals and professional reformers who pretend to know how to run your life better. The US had two tumulus decades, a consesquence of LBJ's guns and butter
Putting your radical lack of objectivity aside, I'll say that I agree with you to an extent. However, just like Reagan, I think that the positive things LBJ did were of enormous importance, even if the bad outweighed the good in the end. I do think Reagan's war on drugs, Nixon's war on cancer, and Bush's war on terror are useless euphemisms used by different administrations to pretend that something is being done, when in reality nothing substantially important or even good is being done.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Exactly as I predicted, lil' fascist teaparty/Ron Paul supporters voted down the comments I left yesterday.
If you want to know why you should ignore or work against the tea partiers, please click the "view all" link below and do a find for my earlier comments.
@NoMoreBlatherDotCom : how about putting together thoughtful arguments against libertarianism backed by some cohesive historical, political, economical ideas?
Ron Paul is the opposite of fascism. Fascism is the government taking away your right for the good of the state, and Ron Paul supports individual liberty and freedom.
1. Yes libertarians realize we've had a mixed economy for decades, and usually lay the blame for our current situation on that exact lack of capitalism.
2. We don't live in a direct democracy for that specific reason.
3. "The probability that we may fail in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just."
4. Libertarians do not believe in forcing people to do things. But we are more than willing to defend against the use of coercive force. Thus, for instance forcing people not to steal is the exact opposite of tyranny
5. An early form of libertarianism was imposed on the federal government in 1776. There was no massive unrest, socialism took a century to start corrupting the system.
6. Would you also denounce the protests of the wars because they have been thus far ineffective?
Slavery was abolished in 1865...that's been 145 years, why does she speak as if it were yesterday? She should take a Quantum Leap to confront her historical oppressors...it wasn't me!
As for the fat white couple, eww. And yet I don't think people in America have been dying as a result of poor or unavailable or unaffordable health care and certainly not lack of food. There are federal/state subsidies to cover her needs long put in place.
@Deryntia : The tea party movement started in late 2007 in response to Ron Paul's campaign, to speak out against the wars, massive national debt and, later, wall street bailout. The mainstream media, for the most part, ignored them both until Obama got elected. Realizing that the mvt could be a potential threat to Obama, they all of a sudden started depicting it as a racist, white-supremist mvt.
Now where are all the liberals democrats who protested against the wars in Iraq?
1400 Dollars? A better solution? I have one , PAY FOR IT. This girls is in her late 20's probably? You mean to tell me over the course of her adult life she couldnt save 1400 dollars?! I want to see her credit card statements. There better not be ONE material expendature on it in the past five years. Can't get a night job? From the looks of it she spends a lot on food.
Since when was Bush a democrate? He looted our treasury and took away our rights! Why should the federal employees be entitled to a socialistic health plan and the rest not? Teabaggers need a cause but should understand it!
@billeybop : I don't think you have no idea what you are talking about. Bush is a repub, but it's rather well-known that his domestic / foreign policies were more or less influenced heavily by neoconservatives, who are essentially warfare/welfare liberals. I don't think anybody's denying his welfare / wafare spending went up dramatically, as did the size of the gov't, during his time.
Typical liberal nutjobs. Everything they want in life they feel other people should pay for them. They feel absolutely entitled to anything they want. Of course these cellar dwellers would think very differently if they paid the taxes that they take. Many of which get back any taxes they do pay and then some. Yes, they have lots of ideas how to get and spend other people's money. By threat of the IRS people are forced to pay these liberals way in life. Disgusting!
It is funny that most of the people that won't this bill to pass don't get that this is not going to be free!Most people think they are going to get free Dr.,But they are going to get taxed out the ass and that dumb ass that wont's Socialism need's to move the fuck out of the U.S.!
Answer to the question in the title: Nothing. Just look at Scandinavian countries, they're doing alright. For-profit healthcare is a failed model.
I am happy I live in a country with universal health care and free education. The debate Americans are having right now just doesn't make sense to Europeans. What are you afraid of? UHC makes sense on so many levels. Americans pay twice as much per capita on health care, yet have LESS to show it.
Too much of either capitalism or socialism is bad.
@kekemankek : I don't think you understand the history of socialism in recent world's history.
Those three Scandinavians countries's relative stability are "exceptions", not "norm". For every Norway, there are 30 other socialistic economies that failed, not just in the Eastern European block, but also in most of Sub-Saharan Africa and the most populous nations like India & China - where millions died of starvation or suffered low standard of living for decades.
@kekemankek : China is still run by the commies, but they believe in freer-market. In another word, the whole world, including your dear Scandinavian countries, have been gradually moving towards freer-market . The US, in contrast, is moving the other way (since 1960's).
Despite Americans's short memory, many still do remember the last liberal revolution under LBJ. It took two generations to undo many of his mistaken social revolution (eg. the welfare reforms under Clinton), but they are still
Seriously? Are you saying that the Civil Rights Act was a mistake? Are you a member of the KKK by any chance? Only they believe that, (along with many in the GOP). Are you a confused rightie with no access to legitimate, reputable history information?
@armyveteran101st : ok. you are responding to a totally different thread.
The logical fallacy you are employing here is called "strawman", "guilt by association". No, there were non KKK who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Goldwater, who supported the previous attempts in 1957, opposed it b/c of its intrusive nature - a violation of individual liberty.
That poor black lady can't even make a cohesive thought! Every time she was asked a question or someone tried to give her another solution, she'd go off on a tangent! TOTAL COOLAID DRINKER!
Shredding the constitution and raiding the treasury? Really? Where were these dimwits when the patriot act was passed? Where were these dimwits when a surplus was squandered into a decifit? Leading cause of bankruptcy is medical cost and the suggestion that we aren't paying for the uninsured going to the ER is eronious. Arguing procedural points when the retardicans have used them time and time again is ridiculous. Listening to the GOP is like swallowing bile.
@sidplicity : two wrongs make it a right, false causality.
If the mainstream media had paid more attention to Ron Paul, the tea party like mvt would have started much earlier - it took the internet, youtube, etc for him to be discovered. The mvt started in late 2007 in opposition to GOP's irresponsible fiscal/war policies.
If you are so concerned about bankruptcy, why can't you see that this ill-gotten programs will guarantee the bankruptcy of your nation?
What's wrong with a little socialism? how about food stamps, AFDC, welfare, medicaid, social security IOU's, head start, Low-income energy assistance, Lower income housing asst., Social Services (Title 20), Pell Grants, Low-rent public housing, School Lunch, etc........ what the hell are you doing protesting, you should be out there busting your ass so the entitled don't have to........ Damn righties, just shut up & work, the lefties are demandi......I mean depending on you.
What is the stupid black woman even arguing for? That blood thinning woman wouldn't need all that healthcare if she would lose some what, along with her fat ass husband.
mikeswanon8989 1 month ago
Wait, that woman's like 50 and apparently she and her kids only have jobs that pay minimum wage. Whose fault is that?
ShadowofaRoar 5 months ago
.
OUR POLITICIANS SHOULD BE STUDYING IN CANADA
.
Someideasandstuff 1 year ago
the black woman is a slave in her own mind.
leonarddaccardi 1 year ago
It's not an absurd question damn. Socialism isn't bad.
Subher0 1 year ago
whitey: "there was a holocaust and..."
blackie: "oh woo"
snap.
DrPracticleHat 1 year ago
Uncle lynched down south? She's full of crap. She's not old enough for that to be possible.
megagagnon1 1 year ago
maybe this woman should cut back on the cheese burgers and grease. that might cut down on the blood thinners that she needs!!!!
akruter 1 year ago
This whole Tea Party/anti-obama agenda is just an EXCUSE for people who don't want to admit the awful truth. That is, that they simply DO NOT WANT A BLACK PRESIDENT. Socialism? Health Care? Unamerican? Those are the weakest excuses for rallying cries I've ever heard!
Socialism and government reform can be extremely beneficial. Have any of you tea-baggers been to Canada? We have socialist leanings AND universal health care. It is fucking AWESOME up here!
DukeMachiavelli 1 year ago
@DukeMachiavelli The claim they're all automatically racist just for being against Obama is weaker than any of those excuses.
ShadowofaRoar 5 months ago
@ShadowofaRoar
It's pretty obvious to anyone who doesn't have their head up their ass. Which, by the way, seems to be about a quarter of the American population. Seriously, what else could it possibly be? The man is seeing th U.S through a train wreck caused by the previous POTUS, he's trying to co-operate (a LOT) with the right-wingers, AND he invaded Pakistan to kill Johnny-Terrorist; something Bush couldn't do in all the time he was in office.
DukeMachiavelli 5 months ago
@DukeMachiavelli So locking them out and deliberately passing bills he knows they'll block is cooperating with them? Jamming a policy that would hurt the opposing party inside of a proposed under a guise as an aids bill is not uncommon. In fact, you would be all over this if the situation was reversed. You state Obama fixing the economy as if the economy doesn't stabilize on its own. If government had anything to do with recovery, why are government involved recessions the longest ones?
ShadowofaRoar 3 months ago
A half Black President isn't good enough in my opinion. We need a Black President and a Black Vice President to make this country work right!
Sowell and Steele 2012!!!
ironbuttermilk 1 year ago
The problem here is everybody opposing this bill is pretty much saying screw the uninsured people.
vcourt777 1 year ago
@vcourt777 - So you're saying,.....screw everybody!!!! What an assclown!!
Mrcharliebobo 1 year ago
There is everything wrong with ANY AND ALL SOCIALISM.
RS1963 1 year ago
"WAAAH! I make minimum wage and now can't afford a surgery to save my life!" Cry me a fucking river. Not to sound like a cold-hearted prick, but that bitch should have thought about shit like that before she had a bunch of kids and let herself turn 40 while STILL WORKING MINIMUM WAGE JOBS. Plus, she just HAD to play the race card (or at least alluded to it). Give me a fucking break.
thoth81 1 year ago
@thoth81 yea becasue you know this woman right? shut your bitch mouth not everybody inherits fortunes you pussy
kassan2491 1 year ago
@kassan2491 I didn't inherit a fortune. I'm only 28 years old and managed to save and invest a lot of money while I served in the armed forces. I have no problem learning another language and moving if I feel the environment here isn't conducive to my prosperity. All I need to know to support my point is her own admission to having kids, to be 40 years old and to still be working minimum wage jobs, in spite of the many educational assistance government programs. She gets no sympathy from me.
thoth81 1 year ago
I know quite a bit of whats in the bill and I think, if it does not work, it'll be because it didnt go far enough to socialize health INSURANCE not because it went too far.. It's pretty obvious you dont care about anyone less fortunate than yourself. You wont care until you are personally affected and this is why I call you people lizards.
badmuffy 1 year ago
America should put these heartless slimeballs on a ship and push them off to sea where they can cannibilize each other.
badmuffy 1 year ago
@badmuffy Who are you referring to you?the protesters?
computerwife 1 year ago
@computerwife I was referring to the teabaggers of course.
badmuffy 1 year ago
@badmuffy of course you were but it is the right of everyone to have free speech.Why are they heartless?I am confused because they are concerned about thier money they earn and how it will be used in reference to this healthcare bill.
computerwife 1 year ago
@computerwife I totally agree they have every right to express their views and protest. I just disagree that their money is being wasted on healthcare. They should be protesting the insane amount of money we spend on the military, corporate welfare etc.. Money spent on keeping people alive is never wasted..
badmuffy 1 year ago
@badmuffy do you know what is in the bill?In its entirety.This is correct,we are protesting complete and total gov.controlled healhcare that will never work as what is in place now does not function as it should.I know what you will respond but I will say anyway,I do not think it is my problem other people who cant manage.I work hard for what I have.I dont want to be penalized if i dont want to have this.and I do not.
computerwife 1 year ago
@computerwife Yes the bill could be improved.. there needs to be a public option to control costs, the mandate should be gotten rid of, but it seems they are not protesting any of the actual problems with the bill. They are just protesting the idea of ANY bill that in any way controls corporate greed or subsidizes healthcare for the poor. To me this seems like anti social cold blooded lizard behavior..
badmuffy 1 year ago
@computerwife all these teabaggin women you see out here dont even have jobs theyre defending their husbands money. How many women do you know that have time to be at every rally?? Only housewives...those fat whores need to get off their fat asses and get a damn job like real american woman if youre so concerned about money
kassan2491 1 year ago
@kassan2491 i missed your comment somehow,you mean like the fat whining woman who was complaining. real american women plan to raise thier kids and stay at home i planned for that. there is nothing wrong with choosing to be a mom at home.I was for yrs.now i work part time but plan to be with my kids after school.i think it sad you do not respect womens choice to choose what they want.
computerwife 1 year ago
America should put these heartless slimeballs on a ship and push them off to sea where they can cannibilize each other.
badmuffy 1 year ago
the woman who spoke of slaves,and said big deal to the millions of jews being exterminated is a total moron she shows what a racist she is and now she comes back whining of her life,life is unfair,then you should of gone to college and get a higher education and not have kids if you cannot afford them,wait did she just say that the healthcare for poor african americans,why is he talking to her?shes unintelligent,i can hardly stand it,oh she plays the race card of course
computerwife 1 year ago
The Tea Party is the new KKK.
ssotelo 1 year ago
Passers by are upset
whiutecloud24 1 year ago
"A little socialism" is what we have and it's inefficient and unsustainable.
And if that woman thinks she's entitled to government health-care because her ancestors were thralls, then why does she want everyone sucked in? And besides, thralldom was sanctioned by certain states; if any government is accountable, it's not the Federal.
LeifRunenritzer 1 year ago
So let me see if I have this right. The fat lady says her medicine "TO KEEP HER ALIVE" costs $1400 and she wants a solution.
Seems to me she has 2 choices. Get a job,or if need be a 2nd job, or DIE!
Doesn't seem to me to be a real hard decision.
That is whats wrong with the Recipient class in this country. They can't take care of themselves so they stand around demanding everyone else solve their problems for them.
This country is doomed!
lou304 1 year ago
@lou304 It's way easier to live in the nanny state, right? I'm not worried, I have my passport and plenty of money saved. I feel sorry for those without the option of leaving.
thoth81 1 year ago
Comment removed
lou304 1 year ago
The sign that old lady is holding reads "Don't Ignore the Constution." Don't these people proofread their signs before going out and protesting?
Yyyyzyyy 1 year ago 4
jan schakowsky is a self hating jew!
ibilldavis 1 year ago
This is the result of Bill Ayres "social justice" agenda in the Chicago Public Schools. A complete ignorance of basic economic theory and a totally distorted version of World History. It is very sad...
eightieserin 1 year ago
"You don't know where I've been, where my people have been."
"You don't know where my people have been, there was a holocaust!"
I can't believe it. I actually laughed out loud.
nathpollen 1 year ago 2
And I love the response. "WOW! Whoopie! We were slaves for 400 years!"
Old white lady got owned.
themeelwoot 1 year ago
So who's fault was it they were slaves? Oh yeah, their black tribal leaders in Africa for selling them out. Check your real history.
Obama is accelerating the spending and the wars, how's that change working out for you?
Get a job and pay the $1400. out of pocket. Buy one less ipod or tv and video games for your kids and you could afford it.
1776Rosco 1 year ago
@1776Rosco more to the point,not to be rude but perhaps if the woman who was complaining of $1400 should lose weight and maybe she wouldn"t have certian health issues which I am sure is connected.
computerwife 1 year ago
RE: George W. Bush. I've been to almost every Tea Party in Chicago since early '09. George Bush is booed right along with Obama for his role in starting the bank bailouts. Just an FYI for the discussion here. Carry on.
TheLogicalPositivist 1 year ago
@TheLogicalPositivist
I'd like to see that. Just for my own sanity.
Although the bank bailouts were among the least repugnant things he did.
It created a deficit for a few months, at most, before all the money was paid back. Whoop-de-do.
11111110 1 year ago
What a f****ing joke. The secretary will tell the congressperson about your complaints. PUKE. What is she going to do put a postet on the corner of a piece of scribble paper. That would upset me. Talking to a GD secretary.
krrrruptidsoless 1 year ago
@krrrruptidsoless Society is ridiculous. When it comes together it is a clash of ignorance that accomplishes squat. Unorganized ineffective divided rants. With no answers. And they wonder why the government takes control without their approval. 15,000 different subjects being talked about and they want an answer to all of them. Quit breeding you ignorants until you solve the problems you have.
krrrruptidsoless 1 year ago
Where was this lady when Bush was looting the treasury?
Where was her outrage when KBR and Halliburton robbed the taxpayers blind and stole BILLIONS???
jensen1901 1 year ago
@jensen1901
Well, Bush was different.
See, he was a white president.
11111110 1 year ago
Wow that Black women going down playing the Holocaust
I am sick of slavery argument. Give up racist Bullshit
It wasn't Bush it was Clinton who required banks to lend to people who couldn't repay the loans
robm425 1 year ago
There is no such thing is a little socialism.
bigdogsdontbark 1 year ago
Silly monkeys. You're so predictable.
VlGGY 1 year ago
Oh god - It finally hit me -- Americans are a stupid people ! They are clueless , no matter what side of the fence they graze in ! !
rolynstone48 1 year ago
"There was a holocaust"
"Wow...whoopee! We were slaves for 400 years."
1. Holocaust at least 3 million dead Jews.
2. 1st slave in America = 1619. Slavery illegal across US = 1865. That's 246 years. Yeah 154 less than she claimed.
3. Slavery has nothing to do with healthcare. Most people in America living below the poverty line are white, that's a fact.
If you're gonna argue make a small point based on something intelligent.
Biswalt 1 year ago
Slavery. Worse than holocaust.
GanguGengu 1 year ago
Good job. You created a 10-minute analysis based on the ramblings of some retarded black lady. Very few progressives would argue like she does or sound like her, so this is basically a strawman video.
dookdawg214 1 year ago
the fact of the matter is some people just have to work harder to get to where they want to be than others. Our govt is suppose to promote welfare as stated in our constitution not provide welfare.
d2akai87 1 year ago
Let just crush more jobs and leave more people unemployed so everyone can get health care.Especially at a time when our country cant afford it.Very smart insights 25210 you are a genius,you should run for office. Oh and lets play the race card.All races had struggles yet its not us who felt those struggles its our ancestors.We live with our own choices,we have no one else to blame but ourselves.
d2akai87 1 year ago 2
She eats her own words. She wants health care but then when the guy suggested something else she said realistically it won't happen. Would it not be cheaper to give health care to the groups she stated rather than giving health care to everyone. And why should a nation in debt pay for something it cant afford. And the fact of the matter is our govt has been at war with country before the bush administration
d2akai87 1 year ago
Very little will change if this bill is passed. All it boils down to is a subsidy for insurance companies. They will get more money and more people will get health care (similar to food subsidies).
Theopolitical 1 year ago
Nice ending with an African American president means that all is fine and dandy in the US. That says it all. How simple these protesters are. They should get off those 'socialist' public sidewalks and stay in their homes.
25522010 1 year ago
I agree with the point that a physically healthy workforce compensates us all. Thankx 11111110!
America has had problems forever and the right wingers haven't done anything to help the common man.
Medicare? Thank a Democrat.
School Lunch Programs? Thank a Democrat.
Public Libraries? Thank a Democrat.
Minimum Wage? Thank a Democrat.
Employers insurance? Thank a Democrat.
Social Security? Thank a Democrat.
25522010 1 year ago
@25522010 : why don't you throw in the Department of Education, Department of Energy, and Environment. Let's also not forget the WW1, WW2s and the undeclared wars in Korea and Vietnam - the latter which nearly brought down the country, both socially and financially. Oh yeah, let's all thank the demo party.
Now, needlessly to say many of the programs you listed are about to go bankrupt or greatly contribute the fiscal ills of the country.
tooltalk 1 year ago
5:40 "they can afford it" meaning the rich paying to help pay for the poor...
gotitans999 1 year ago
And what did they say when Bush was oh I don't know actually looting the treasury and shredding the constitution?
nospacesallowed 1 year ago 2
That grievance-monger brought up slavery to support socialism? Socialism *is* slavery. Nitwit.
TheLogicalPositivist 1 year ago
Comment removed
nospacesallowed 1 year ago
@TheLogicalPositivist WrF are you talking about Slavery has nothing to do with Socialism. Look at our current Socalized programs. The tyrany of the fire department needs to be stopped.....
The atrocities of the highway system enslave us all?? seriously that comment was no brighter than the "grievance-monger"
nospacesallowed 1 year ago 2
You're confusing taxation with socialism.
Taxation is everyone paying their fair share for the upkeep of the government, highways, fire depts, things that compensate us all.
Socialism is government assuming ownership of personal property and spreading the wealth. That is, forcing you to work without compensation. If the government forces me to work to pay for my deadbeat neighbor's insurance, that's slavery. It's also against the 13th Amendment.
Socialism is slavery and theft.
TheLogicalPositivist 1 year ago
You don't think a physically healthy workforce compensates us all? A lot of people can't work without transportation, that's why taxpayers pay for a public transportation option. It goes without saying, a lot of people can't work without basic healthcare either.
11111110 1 year ago
@11111110 You still need to pay for public transportation. As far as "physically healthy workforce" this doesn't justify robbing Peter to pay Paul. Especially when Paul can afford private insurance but chooses not to, is here illegally or breeds beyond his means.
TheLogicalPositivist 1 year ago
@TheLogicalPositivist
Right, the people who actually use public transportation have to pay a small amount.
But the reason they only have to pay less than a dollar is because its taxpayer funded
Just like healthcare will be, and the postal service.
11111110 1 year ago
@11111110 Then maybe you could argue that public transportation should be 100% rider-funded. On the other hand people who drive cars put more wear & tear on the roads and more pollution in the air so they should pay more for the roads. It all kinda averages out and no one is disproportionately taxed.
Maybe I should move to your town, I haven't paid less than a dollar to ride the CTA since the 70s.
TheLogicalPositivist 1 year ago
@TheLogicalPositivist
If public transportation was 100% rider-funded, it would be a lot mroe expensive, and out of the budget for the people who NEED public transportation to function and work in society.
If they wanted a transportation service that was 100% rider-funded, they'd pay $20 for a cab.
11111110 1 year ago
@11111110 Oh c'mon! There's obviously an efficiency to buses and trains that makes them much less expensive per person than $20 cab fares. You know better than that.
TheLogicalPositivist 1 year ago
@TheLogicalPositivist
Yes, they're "efficiency" comes from cutting quality.. As a result, people who use public transportation can't decide when or where they get dropped off and picked up. Plus they have to ride a dirty bus squeezed next to other people.
Fortunately, the role of public transportation isn't to provide high-quality service, but to provide the basic service that low-income citizens need to function in society
11111110 1 year ago
@11111110 A busload of people consumes less fuel and creates less traffic congestion than an equal number of people in cars. Hopping a train for $2 vs. paying for a car + downtown parking makes a lot of sense, regardless of your income. Most of the people on the buses I take are yuppies, it is by no means the domain of the poor and I ain't exactly a hobo.
TheLogicalPositivist 1 year ago
@TheLogicalPositivist
Not really. Taking your own car to and fro is most of the time a lot faster and more efficient, if you can afford it.
11111110 1 year ago
@TheLogicalPositivist Socialism is not assuming personal property and spreading the wealth. A pure socialist system is one in which the government owns business. That is not forcing you to work without compensation You still get paid. That argument is just plain stupid. Take that weak ass argument to scotus and get laughed right out of the courthouse.
I have to know is the fire department slavery? It has a very similar history to healthcare. After all it started out as an insurance plan.
nospacesallowed 1 year ago
@nospacesallowed Socialism is *also* about government owning businesses and that's just what our Marxist president has been doing. So far as bringing it to SCOTUS, that is exactly what at least 12 states' attorney generals are planning to do with this unconstitutional law.
TheLogicalPositivist 1 year ago
@TheLogicalPositivist The 12 states are not arguing on the 13th amendment grounds Let me ask you again is the fire department slavery? Should we each individually have to pay for fires being put out or is it for the public good to have fires out out?
nospacesallowed 1 year ago
@nospacesallowed You understand that fire department services are available to everyone, not just deadbeats, criminal trespassers and overbreeders, don't you? The fire department doesn't respond to a fire by committing arson to everyone else's house to "level out the playing field" as you leftists like to say.
TheLogicalPositivist 1 year ago
@TheLogicalPositivist The fire department disproportionately favors those in poorer neighborhoods, including, deadbeats, criminal trespassers and overbreeders. It also favors those who make poor decisions. (smoking before bed, living in houses in poor condition. ect.) All legislation effects people differently, no legislation will effect everyone the same way.
nospacesallowed 1 year ago
I can't believe that woman actually thinks african slavery somehow makes her "more entitled" to something than the jewish woman, even when she brings up the holocaust.
Freethought42 1 year ago
I would think that if she can positively trace the history of her family back to the time of slavery, and positively establish that her ancestors were adversely affected, she would have some grounds to claim a degree of entitlement. I don't necessarily agree with the venue or the method, though. And I would say the exact same thing about the Jewish lady.
armyveteran101st 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The people spoke in 2008. We won, end of fucken story. One term my ass. The good intelligent people of our country are taking over. So all you zombies go find a fucken cave. We are America.
grg61458 1 year ago
To the black woman, you are still a slave only to this government.
"A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government."
--- Thomas Jefferson ----
designerofdreams70 1 year ago
I'd rather be a "slave" to my government than a slave to some arrogant, greedy corporate asshole that will use me and abuse me and then throw me away. And stop hiding behind the Framers in order to spread your idiotic, ignorant, anti-American BS, will you?
armyveteran101st 1 year ago
"In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men the great difficulty lies in this: You must first enable the government to control the governed, and in the next place, oblige it to control itself." Alexander Hamilton
Anti American? LOL! From a communist that is funny.
designerofdreams70 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st
anti-american BS...
Funny how much you sound like Bush.
"It's just a piece of paper"
Freethought42 1 year ago
How exactly do I sound like Bush? Care to elaborate?
armyveteran101st 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st
"And stop hiding behind the Framers in order to spread your idiotic, ignorant, anti-American BS, will you?"
Need a say more?
Someone doesn't agree with you, so their opinion is "Anti-American BS".
Give a little respect, get a little respect.
Even if you disagree.
Freethought42 1 year ago
"What's wrong with a little socialism?" The problem is it leads to more and more socialism, and more power concentrated in the central government. Power corrupts. Socialism has been tried many, many times, and every time it has failed. People say it wasn't the idea, it was the leaders. That is true, but it also has to do with the leader principle. Power corrupts, and there is no exception to that rule.
xp19375 1 year ago
they are loonies!!!! GOD strike them down!
bajalocom 1 year ago
Where was this Ann Leary fake when Bush and Cheney were in fact shredding the Constitution and looting the Treasury? The Democrats are doing NOTHING of the kind, but this hack apparently feels it's OK when right-wingers do it. Every day that goes by I become more and more convinced that all these teabaggers are a cancer to our Country that needs to be eradicated ASAP! They twist the truth, make up their own facts, and are just clueless as to what it means to be good citizens. SCREW THEM ALL!!
armyveteran101st 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : Jesus, liberals ignorance knows no limit.
"The Democrats are doing NOTHING of the kind,"
FDR & LBJ's liberal fiscal & war excesses pale in comparison. The way I see it, it's your ignorance that is a cancer to your country. I just don't understand why liberals don't want to study their own history.
tooltalk 1 year ago
Jesus, YOUR IGNORANCE knows no limit. I'm not a liberal, (not even a Democrat). I've been studying our Country's history for the past 20 years, the REAL history, not your skewed version of it. FDR's "war excesses"? Seriously? Would you rather be imprisoned in a concentration camp speaking German right now? I can guarantee you I know more about the REAL history of this Country than you've ever known in your entire, pathetic existence, sport. Get your head out of your ass, will you?
armyveteran101st 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : no. I'm not Japanese or German, but I would definitely hate to be in FDR's concentration camp.
No, you don't - most liberals sadly have no long-term memory. Many even refuse to accept the fact that their most revered progressive president, LBJ, a deceitful war-monger, thrusted your country into an unnecessary war in Vietnam, resulting in 65+K death. It's funny how wars always become "necessary" when there's a demo president.
tooltalk 1 year ago
For a "professional student" you certainly have no fucking clue of what you're trying to talk about. Yes, LBJ deepened our involvement in Vietnam and ended up screwing that up, but Eisenhower is the one that initially sent military advisers to Vietnam. Furthermore, LBJ is one of the most successful Presidents regarding domestic policy, and that is a fact. Your bit about "necessary" wars is just foolish and absurd. What in hell is it that you're supposedly studying?
armyveteran101st 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : completely no clue. The US involvement in Vietnam started under Truman, right after the WW2. He ignored Ho Chi Minh's plea for independence and helped French recolonize the country (it failed) - providing funding (as much as 80% since the French didn't have much way of financing the war) and military expertise. It continued under Eisenhower, who was known more for aversion toward any full foreign intervention and covert operations, but it wasn't until JFK + LBJ eventually ble
tooltalk 1 year ago
So, long story short, Democratic Presidents are evil according to you, right? What about Nixon, or Reagan's relentless assault on the poor and the working class, or his disdain for AIDS victims, or his systematic dismantling of our economic system? What about Bush Jr's push to shred the Constitution and use it as toilet paper? He is the true war-monger, and for you to pretend that isn't so is the height of hypocrisy. Stop your historical revisionism, bud. It makes you look rather unbalanced.
armyveteran101st 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : me, unbalanced?
"The Democrats are doing NOTHING of the kind,"
Are you ready to retract your comment?
tooltalk 1 year ago
Of course not! Why would I do that when it is the truth? That you have been brainwashed and fooled by the right wing is a different matter altogether. Don't get me wrong; I'm not a Democrat and I think they have problems, but I would take them over the alternatives any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
armyveteran101st 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : JFK + LBJ, both war mongers. At least, JFK learned to avoid confrontation with the Soviets and tone down his oversea ambition; nonetheless, Eisenhower had only 800 so-called advisors in South; there were 16+K so-called "advisors" by the time JFK was gone. In escalating the war there, LBJ did pretty much looted the Constitution and treasury for his war in Vietnam. His domestic policies (eg, the war on poverty, the Great Society) were constantly criticized by his own kind.
tooltalk 1 year ago
Are you one of those antiwar-no-matter-what morons? Why would you call JFK a "war monger"? You sound pretty extreme and radical to me, no objectivity whatsoever. Avoid confrontation? JFK stared the Soviets down, which was precisely the right way to handle them, as Reagan did later. The war on poverty and the Great Society were achievements, dude. Are you some kind of social ogre? Now Ike was a pretty decent President, but he was not perfect, as you're trying to make him out to be.
armyveteran101st 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : where the hell did you study US history again?
tooltalk 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : LBJ welfare policies, until its repeal in early 1990's, were the main contributing factor to the rising high black crimes & teenage pregnancy rates in US - they both declined sharply after the reform; now, the lowest in nearly 40 years.
My background is in economics: even most liberals economists, including C. Romers, Obama's appointee, admit that LBJ's economic policies were very misguided and contributed greatly to the decline of US economy since 1960's.
tooltalk 1 year ago
You said all policies, not only welfare. Just like affirmative action, welfare failed to evolve with time, and it needed to be adjusted and reformed, just like affirmative action needs to be adjusted and reformed. I still think that LBJ showed great courage and great compassion in being so firmly in support of civil rights and health care, and in moving the corresponding pieces of legislation through Congress like he did. The guy is FAR from being as bad as Bush II or Nixon were.
armyveteran101st 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : his policies were failures from the day one. One of the most prominent critic of his social policies was Patrick Moynian, who once worked as an undersecretary of labor under JFK and a member of vocal social critics, now known as "neoconservatives". Needless to say, he was instantly accused of being a racist and his warnings dismissed - the same way you are now trying to label me as a "KKK" (well, things don't change very much).
tooltalk 1 year ago
As I said, you're not being objective in the least. To call neocons "vocal social critics" is asinine. I'm not taking you seriously because of your apparent irrational radicalism. Get real and I'll take you seriously.
armyveteran101st 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : ok, you have no idea who neoco nservatives are. Once trotskies, they mostly thrived as social critics under JFK + LBJ. They include prominent sociologist like Daniel Bell, Nathan Glazer, Irving Kristol..
Now, not knowing about the history of the movement is one thing, but to arrogantly dismiss it b/c it doesn't fit your view of the world is another. Grow up
tooltalk 1 year ago
You have some nerve talking about "my view of the world". These people you cite have skewed and twisted history and philosophy to match their own view of the world, and they used this to influence Bush in order to get him to commit crimes against the U.S. Constitution. I say again, give me a freaking break.
armyveteran101st 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : ok, the neoconservative mvt didn't get much attention until recently - its history for the most part is still a pretty esoteric academic discussion. PBS however had an interesting program called "Arguing the World" years back. While the scope of the program is limited to their intellectual origin at CCNY circa 40-60s, it nonetheless provides insights into their mindset, history, etc.
These liberal democrats were later recruited by Reagan (j patrick) in mid-80s, the rest is
tooltalk 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : history. Most don't associate warfare statism with modern liberalism, even in light of the fact that all the last major wars were all waged by the democrats, but Bush's bungling in the ME has more to do with the lefties influence in the party, than the conservative elements there, who are all but marginalized as "radical" or "extremist". That is also precisely why the wars will continue under Obama (or whoever gets elected next).
tooltalk 1 year ago
I don't know who indoctrinated you, but boy did they do a hell of a number on you, my friend! As far as knowledge of history, you are full of crap. You really think we "waged" WW1 and WW2? You've got your head so far up the GOP elephant's ass it's not even funny. How about Bush Jr, who did WAGE an elective, unnecessary war in Iraq? I'm wasting my time with you. You are way too brainwashed and mentally corrupted. Next thing you'll tell me is that the swine flu was created by liberals, right?
armyveteran101st 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : tsk, tsk, more ad hominen. Do you have anything intellegent to say? Again, instead of backing up your responses with facts, you are dwelling on semantics and gotaches (let me guess, you went to the same school as michael moore; or never passed GED) No, douchebag, I'm referring to the last two major undeclared wars; though only a few ignorant liberal rednecks would question that Wilsons's international played an important role in Amercia's involvment in the WW1
tooltalk 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : [correction: Wilson's internationalism] and the WW2, subsequently, inevitable outcome of the first.
The Repub party is no longer the party of A Licoln or Eisenhower, in the same way that the demo party no longer the party of Grover Cleveland or classical liberalism.
tooltalk 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : And this has all to do with the growing lefties influence in both parties. Again, it's rather impossible to get through your thick skull that the founding members of neocons were once trotskies at CCNY. They were quite influential public intellectual figures (insiders) under JFK + LBJ. As their power declined in LBJ's (and later Carters's) botched liberal utopia, they defected to the repub party - starting with Jean Kirkpatrick at Reagan's invitation.
tooltalk 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : despite conservatives' protest - Reagan dismissed the concern and responded that he too was a democrat once.
In another word, it should be no surprise to anyone that Bush's skyrocketing warfare / welfare spending had a lot do with the liberal influence in the party. Bush's idea of "world democracy" was likewise one of the main liberal idealism pioneered by Wilson, a forerunner of modern liberalism, and later by LBJ, his short-sighted liberal utopia.
tooltalk 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : oh, let's not forget, since you brought it up: It was LBJ who, as the senate leader, stonewalled and diluted the 1957 Civil Rights Act, first in some 80 years. It should be no surprise that there were openly racists in both parties (eg, Thurmond being the most notorious), LBJ didn't want to alienate his southern constituents which would jeopardize his future political career (he was likewise known for his public opposition to previous efforts). Where did you go to school agai
tooltalk 1 year ago
Sounds like you've done your homework as far as LBJ is concerned, and I commend you for that. Yes, he was a politician, and he was an old school southerner, and that gives him more merit IMO. He was able to rise above his ideology and his prejudices and do something he knew would benefit the Country. You may not like the guy at all, but you have to at least give him that.
armyveteran101st 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : objective? wow, am I the only one to see that none of your comments are backed by any cohesive historical, economical, political ideas? or they are poorly constructed logical fallacies (eg, false alternative/bifurcation, ad hominem - me, a KKK?, card-stacking, appeal to false authority / emotion, to name a few). You've already lost the debate here, much less being truthful.
Too bad, most liberals seem to suffer from the same disease.
tooltalk 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : what makes you think that LBJ's policies were successful?
The US had most economically prosperous decade under Eisenhower, mostly due to the post WW2 boom and his non-intervention policies. It wasn't perfect, but in those days, education / medicine was quite affordable without any social programs, the low crime rates and declining poverty rates (especially among the black families once at 80% in 40's). Eisenhower pushed the 1957 Civil Rights Act, although he believed you
tooltalk 1 year ago
More historical revisionism, bud. Give me a break. You ought to know that you just can't go around spreading your own personal version of the facts.
armyveteran101st 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : I'm guessing that economic history isn't your forte. Oh yes, of course, the 50's were the most progressive decade in American history. Liberals don't like talking about this too much, but, despite the growing red fear, the US now was the de facto world's economic & political hegemon - US manufacturing accounting for nearly half of all the world's and enormous surpluses & debt reduction under Eisenhower. The decade also lifted many out of poverty and into the burgeoning middle
tooltalk 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : class unseen in US history; so did the number of Americans getting college degrees & home ownerships. It was in fact so good that the Fed had to artificially induce two recessions to prevent economic overheating. Again, there wans't much crime to speak of; neither were there sick people dying on the streets. Yes, racism was very alive - as it is still today and the blacks lived in segregated communities, but they were making progress by leaps and bounds.
tooltalk 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st: Most importantly, they achieved all that without any gov't intervention. Eisenhower, likewise, wasn't known for his grand "vision" or "high idealism"; but what he did know mattered a lot - that his knowledge & power as prez was limited. In another word, there was no dire national crisis that necessitated LBJ's delusional grandios social engineering.
tooltalk 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : although he didn't believe in legislating morality (he also directly intervened in LIttle Rock).
I don't know if I ever said "all", but all LBJ policies were quite delusional and impractical - declaring "wars" on persistent social problems that you can't win (the same goes for drug or terror); architected by white intellectuals and professional reformers who pretend to know how to run your life better. The US had two tumulus decades, a consesquence of LBJ's guns and butter
tooltalk 1 year ago
Putting your radical lack of objectivity aside, I'll say that I agree with you to an extent. However, just like Reagan, I think that the positive things LBJ did were of enormous importance, even if the bad outweighed the good in the end. I do think Reagan's war on drugs, Nixon's war on cancer, and Bush's war on terror are useless euphemisms used by different administrations to pretend that something is being done, when in reality nothing substantially important or even good is being done.
armyveteran101st 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Exactly as I predicted, lil' fascist teaparty/Ron Paul supporters voted down the comments I left yesterday.
If you want to know why you should ignore or work against the tea partiers, please click the "view all" link below and do a find for my earlier comments.
NoMoreBlatherDotCom 1 year ago
@NoMoreBlatherDotCom : how about putting together thoughtful arguments against libertarianism backed by some cohesive historical, political, economical ideas?
tooltalk 1 year ago
Ron Paul is the opposite of fascism. Fascism is the government taking away your right for the good of the state, and Ron Paul supports individual liberty and freedom.
xp19375 1 year ago
@NoMoreBlatherDotCom
1. Yes libertarians realize we've had a mixed economy for decades, and usually lay the blame for our current situation on that exact lack of capitalism.
2. We don't live in a direct democracy for that specific reason.
3. "The probability that we may fail in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just."
-Lincoln
Freethought42 1 year ago
4. Libertarians do not believe in forcing people to do things. But we are more than willing to defend against the use of coercive force. Thus, for instance forcing people not to steal is the exact opposite of tyranny
5. An early form of libertarianism was imposed on the federal government in 1776. There was no massive unrest, socialism took a century to start corrupting the system.
6. Would you also denounce the protests of the wars because they have been thus far ineffective?
Freethought42 1 year ago
7. Another insult very clever
8. Yes, I will take the time to correct you.
Freethought42 1 year ago
Slavery was abolished in 1865...that's been 145 years, why does she speak as if it were yesterday? She should take a Quantum Leap to confront her historical oppressors...it wasn't me!
As for the fat white couple, eww. And yet I don't think people in America have been dying as a result of poor or unavailable or unaffordable health care and certainly not lack of food. There are federal/state subsidies to cover her needs long put in place.
They want to be spoon fed and the spoon!
EquivocallyAbsurd 1 year ago 2
that black chick is stooooooooooooopid
be4unvme 1 year ago
@Deryntia : The tea party movement started in late 2007 in response to Ron Paul's campaign, to speak out against the wars, massive national debt and, later, wall street bailout. The mainstream media, for the most part, ignored them both until Obama got elected. Realizing that the mvt could be a potential threat to Obama, they all of a sudden started depicting it as a racist, white-supremist mvt.
Now where are all the liberals democrats who protested against the wars in Iraq?
tooltalk 1 year ago 2
I guess the socialists got their way today...America as we knew it to be will be gone when Obamadenijad signs the bill. Cry for your nation, America!
dovie2blue 1 year ago
1400 Dollars? A better solution? I have one , PAY FOR IT. This girls is in her late 20's probably? You mean to tell me over the course of her adult life she couldnt save 1400 dollars?! I want to see her credit card statements. There better not be ONE material expendature on it in the past five years. Can't get a night job? From the looks of it she spends a lot on food.
fdny9682 1 year ago 2
Tell that black lady obama did not write this health care bill.
clash360 1 year ago
That black women has tunnel vision on life.
martinaoe2 1 year ago
Since when was Bush a democrate? He looted our treasury and took away our rights! Why should the federal employees be entitled to a socialistic health plan and the rest not? Teabaggers need a cause but should understand it!
billeybop 1 year ago
@billeybop : I don't think you have no idea what you are talking about. Bush is a repub, but it's rather well-known that his domestic / foreign policies were more or less influenced heavily by neoconservatives, who are essentially warfare/welfare liberals. I don't think anybody's denying his welfare / wafare spending went up dramatically, as did the size of the gov't, during his time.
tooltalk 1 year ago
Typical liberal nutjobs. Everything they want in life they feel other people should pay for them. They feel absolutely entitled to anything they want. Of course these cellar dwellers would think very differently if they paid the taxes that they take. Many of which get back any taxes they do pay and then some. Yes, they have lots of ideas how to get and spend other people's money. By threat of the IRS people are forced to pay these liberals way in life. Disgusting!
aSingleDallasGuy 1 year ago
Breaking news! That wacky black woman is Obama's new Health Czar!
MaxLibertas 1 year ago
It is funny that most of the people that won't this bill to pass don't get that this is not going to be free!Most people think they are going to get free Dr.,But they are going to get taxed out the ass and that dumb ass that wont's Socialism need's to move the fuck out of the U.S.!
killergames187 1 year ago
The Republicans have embarrassed our coutry with this war for oil.
MrMrbobblehead 1 year ago
@MrMrbobblehead : how about Obama's continuation of the war for oil? Is that also embarrassing for you liberals?
tooltalk 1 year ago
Answer to the question in the title: Nothing. Just look at Scandinavian countries, they're doing alright. For-profit healthcare is a failed model.
I am happy I live in a country with universal health care and free education. The debate Americans are having right now just doesn't make sense to Europeans. What are you afraid of? UHC makes sense on so many levels. Americans pay twice as much per capita on health care, yet have LESS to show it.
Too much of either capitalism or socialism is bad.
kekemankek 1 year ago
Yes, we should just lie down and go to sleep...be peaceful...give up our guns...trust that the government will take care of us...you fool.
dovie2blue 1 year ago
@kekemankek : I don't think you understand the history of socialism in recent world's history.
Those three Scandinavians countries's relative stability are "exceptions", not "norm". For every Norway, there are 30 other socialistic economies that failed, not just in the Eastern European block, but also in most of Sub-Saharan Africa and the most populous nations like India & China - where millions died of starvation or suffered low standard of living for decades.
tooltalk 1 year ago
@kekemankek : China is still run by the commies, but they believe in freer-market. In another word, the whole world, including your dear Scandinavian countries, have been gradually moving towards freer-market . The US, in contrast, is moving the other way (since 1960's).
Despite Americans's short memory, many still do remember the last liberal revolution under LBJ. It took two generations to undo many of his mistaken social revolution (eg. the welfare reforms under Clinton), but they are still
tooltalk 1 year ago
Seriously? Are you saying that the Civil Rights Act was a mistake? Are you a member of the KKK by any chance? Only they believe that, (along with many in the GOP). Are you a confused rightie with no access to legitimate, reputable history information?
armyveteran101st 1 year ago
@armyveteran101st : ok. you are responding to a totally different thread.
The logical fallacy you are employing here is called "strawman", "guilt by association". No, there were non KKK who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Goldwater, who supported the previous attempts in 1957, opposed it b/c of its intrusive nature - a violation of individual liberty.
tooltalk 1 year ago
If you don't like socialism, get the hell off my sidewalk.
PerryLogan 1 year ago
That poor black lady can't even make a cohesive thought! Every time she was asked a question or someone tried to give her another solution, she'd go off on a tangent! TOTAL COOLAID DRINKER!
dane7902 1 year ago
400 years??? I'm PRETTY sure that our country hasn't even been around that long!
"Whoopy" about the Holocaust??? Seven million slaughtered and all she can say is "Whoopy"???
STOP DRINKING THE COOLAID LADY!
dane7902 1 year ago
Shredding the constitution and raiding the treasury? Really? Where were these dimwits when the patriot act was passed? Where were these dimwits when a surplus was squandered into a decifit? Leading cause of bankruptcy is medical cost and the suggestion that we aren't paying for the uninsured going to the ER is eronious. Arguing procedural points when the retardicans have used them time and time again is ridiculous. Listening to the GOP is like swallowing bile.
sidplicity 1 year ago
@sidplicity : two wrongs make it a right, false causality.
If the mainstream media had paid more attention to Ron Paul, the tea party like mvt would have started much earlier - it took the internet, youtube, etc for him to be discovered. The mvt started in late 2007 in opposition to GOP's irresponsible fiscal/war policies.
If you are so concerned about bankruptcy, why can't you see that this ill-gotten programs will guarantee the bankruptcy of your nation?
tooltalk 1 year ago
What's wrong with a little socialism? how about food stamps, AFDC, welfare, medicaid, social security IOU's, head start, Low-income energy assistance, Lower income housing asst., Social Services (Title 20), Pell Grants, Low-rent public housing, School Lunch, etc........ what the hell are you doing protesting, you should be out there busting your ass so the entitled don't have to........ Damn righties, just shut up & work, the lefties are demandi......I mean depending on you.
davidpark68 1 year ago 3
She is lying about making minimum wage, her weave alone cost about 500 dollars and her clothing cost about the same.
Trenaway 1 year ago 2