Amy Coney Barrett
mtierney said:
GL2 said:
Of course she can't. Classic FOX bullsiht. Change the channel, mtierney.
Why do CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS, etc work hard every day, day in and day out, to denigrate Trump and stir the pot of ridicule for all things conservative? Biden should have it in the bag by now. Yet, Fox News is to be feared.
Give us ONE example of Trump being denigrated that he didn't deserve.
Here's something for reference
https://www.mcsweeneys.net/columns/reasons-why-donald-trump-is-unfit-to-be-president
It is quite interesting that someone who has such strong opinions can only seem to express them through cartoons drawn by others and cat memes.
mtierney said:
Knowledge is power...
If only you had the slightest bit . . .
Democratic Socialism doesn't guarantee equal outcomes; it gives everyone an equal base to start from: a free education, public health care, labor protections, great public transit, freedom from fear of the police, a fair judicial system, etc. Amazing how this has to be explained when it can be easily found with a little research.
dave said:
Democratic Socialism doesn't guarantee equal outcomes; it gives everyone an equal base to start from: a free education, public health care, labor protections, great public transit, freedom from fear of the police, a fair judicial system, etc. Amazing how this has to be explained when it can be easily found with a little research.
well, you know, some people are impervious to facts.
jimmurphy said:
It is quite interesting that someone who has such strong opinions can only seem to express them through cartoons drawn by others and cat memes.
Sometimes, a picture is worth a thousand words. Bloviating the same message must even tire out the boys club.
As far as cat memes go, this feline is a star — no verbiage required.
dave said:
Democratic Socialism doesn't guarantee equal outcomes; it gives everyone an equal base to start from: a free education, public health care, labor protections, great public transit, freedom from fear of the police, a fair judicial system, etc. Amazing how this has to be explained when it can be easily found with a little research.
Like in Hong Kong? Seems your description left out free speech.
mtierney said:
dave said:
Democratic Socialism doesn't guarantee equal outcomes; it gives everyone an equal base to start from: a free education, public health care, labor protections, great public transit, freedom from fear of the police, a fair judicial system, etc. Amazing how this has to be explained when it can be easily found with a little research.
Like in Hong Kong? Seems your description left out free speech.
yeah, good point.
and where's the right to bear arms? huh? huh?
mtierney said:
GL2 said:
Of course she can't. Classic FOX bullsiht. Change the channel, mtierney.
Why do CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS, etc work hard every day, day in and day out, to denigrate Trump and stir the pot of ridicule for all things conservative? Biden should have it in the bag by now. Yet, Fox News is to be feared.
You're serious? Probably for the same reason 98% of the world's scientists are climate change believers; and believers in evolution; and believers in the dangers of Covid19. The overwhelming evidence in the reality-based world suggests he's a dangerous threat to the nation and world.
And Fox? Because they amplify and reinforce his brand of dangerous authoritarianism. Because the idiots with the guns at polling places, and the cynics in the Senate aiding and abetting the evil are given unchallenged voice there. (The House GOP is another story: most are Louis Gohmert/Jim Jordan types who should be pitied along with constituencies which elect them for their ignorance.)
Other than those reasons, I can't imagine why the sources you name, along with the most respected newspapers, historians, and academics in the country conspire against this evil bastard.
How else do you account for this great conspiracy?
mtierney said:
denigrate Trump and stir the pot of ridicule for all things conservative?
How dare you put Trump and conservative in the same sentence?
mtierney said:
dave said:
Democratic Socialism doesn't guarantee equal outcomes; it gives everyone an equal base to start from: a free education, public health care, labor protections, great public transit, freedom from fear of the police, a fair judicial system, etc. Amazing how this has to be explained when it can be easily found with a little research.
Like in Hong Kong? Seems your description left out free speech.
If the response is "Like in Hong Kong" then you don't know what "Democratic Socialism" actually is.
[Edited to add] And here's an editorial about Pope Francis's new encyclical Fratelli Tutti, relevant to this discussion. An excerpt:
It's important to be clear what democratic socialism is not: It is not synonymous with Marxism, nor is it the socialism of authoritarian regimes like China or the former Soviet Union, which were not democracies.
Democratic socialist policies call for the government to provide basic services, such as health care and education, for all its citizens — not necessarily that the government need own or control all aspects of such services.
Although antithetical to the rugged individualism upon which the mythology of the United States was built, democratic socialism's concern for the common good is not antithetical to our Christian and Catholic faith. It was part of the way Jesus' disciples and the early church lived, as described in the Act of the Apostles; it was and is part of how religious communities of men and women have operated; and it is the motivation of some current religious communities, such as — in an ironic twist — the "covenanted community" of the Republican-nominated prospective Supreme Court justice nominee Amy Coney Barrett.
mtierney said:
Like in Hong Kong? Seems your description left out free speech.
Free speech is widely practiced in these countries.,,you are so brainwashed not even a softener added to your rinse cycle can save your brain from the hardening toxins emanating from Fox News. I really pity people like you.
mtierney said:
Like in Hong Kong? Seems your description left out free speech.
The bloviating boys’ club lifts its heavy head from the pillow just enough to thank you.
Before I STFU, as no one gets my goat like mtierney (not since pennboy2), I wonder, mtierney, what do you make of the overwhelming opposition you cited earlier? No media sources other than Murdoch sources (Post, Fox, WSJ) seem to agree with the DJT line.
What's their deal? Are they conspiring against America? To what end(s)?
Moreover, here we are, patriotic Americans all, and our major sources of con. politics is run by a f'ing Australian octogenarian most noted for tittie tabloids in the UK, the really ridiculous crap that drives princes from their shores - no, not ridski; Harry.
OK, I'm probably gonna get worse as election season draws to a most consequential close. God help us all...except for the Trumpsters.
Jaytee said:
mtierney said:
Like in Hong Kong? Seems your description left out free speech.
Free speech is widely practiced in these countries.,,you are so brainwashed not even a softener added to your rinse cycle can save your brain from the hardening toxins emanating from Fox News. I really pity people like you.
Wait, Hitler introduced Universal Healthcare in Germany? That puts the GOP to the right of Hitler?
basil said:
Wait, Hitler introduced Universal Healthcare in Germany?
No.
GL2 said:
Before I STFU, as no one gets my goat like mtierney (not since pennboy2), I wonder, mtierney, what do you make of the overwhelming opposition you cited earlier? No media sources other than Murdoch sources (Post, Fox, WSJ) seem to agree with the DJT line.
What's their deal? Are they conspiring against America? To what end(s)?
Didn't the WSJ actually endorse Biden this year?
DaveSchmidt said:
basil said:
Wait, Hitler introduced Universal Healthcare in Germany?
No.
Well, it seems the Nazi's made healthcare insurance mandatory in 1941, at least according to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_People%27s_Welfare
I'd say that mandatory healthcare insurance = universal healthcare, no?
basil said:
Well, it seems the Nazi's made healthcare insurance mandatory in 1941, at least according to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_People%27s_Welfare
I'd say that mandatory healthcare insurance = universal healthcare, no?
If I had a deutschmark for every “it seems” and “at least according to” Wikipedia ...
ridski said:
mtierney said:
denigrate Trump and stir the pot of ridicule for all things conservative?
How dare you put Trump and conservative in the same sentence?
https://democracyjournal.org/magazine/49/whats-left-of-the-right/
Steve said:
GL2 said:
Before I STFU, as no one gets my goat like mtierney (not since pennboy2), I wonder, mtierney, what do you make of the overwhelming opposition you cited earlier? No media sources other than Murdoch sources (Post, Fox, WSJ) seem to agree with the DJT line.
What's their deal? Are they conspiring against America? To what end(s)?
Didn't the WSJ actually endorse Biden this year?
”The Wall Street Journal hasn’t endorsed a presidential candidate since 1928—Hoover—and we aren’t about to change this year. But we do try to sum up the risks and promise of the candidates every four years, and we’ll start today with the contradictory candidacy of Joe Biden...”
GL2 said:
”The Wall Street Journal hasn’t endorsed a presidential candidate since 1928—Hoover—..”
And ... that's where I stopped reading
mtierney said:
Like in Hong Kong? Seems your description left out free speech.
OK, I'll add it. We have free speech up to the point of advocating secession from China. I happen to agree that Hong Kong is part of China and have yet to meet anyone who does. Most nations have similar laws on the books. Nowhere is 100% ideal, but we're getting single digit daily Covid-19 cases, all from inbound flights, all quarantined and monitored daily. We have almost no crime and never had to completely shut down businesses because everyone wore masks without being told to.
basil said:
And ... that's where I stopped reading
That was a mistake when you cited Wikipedia’s article on National Socialist People’s Welfare. Yes, it says German health insurance “was not decreed mandatory until 1941,” but if you read the footnoted source, the passage in the book was about pension reform. The 1941 insurance mandate applied to pensioners.
This act was only one, and not the last, in a century’s worth of expansions of Germany’s national health insurance, which Bismarck introduced in 1883. When you say Hitler introduced it, you promote a talking point of opponents of universal health care in the United States, who like to attach the idea to the Nazis as a way of undermining it.
The Lancet has a good article about the German system. A relevant excerpt:
Statutory health insurance coverage was gradually expanded further to include unemployed workers by 1918 (after World War 1), non-earning wives and daughters by 1919, all primary dependants by 1930, and people who have retired by 1941. Insurance became mandatory for farmers in 1972, for disabled persons and students in 1975, and for artists in 1981. In 1987, statutory health insurance was mandatory for 76% of the population.
Interestingly, the chart that Jaytee copied also dates Germany’s universal health care to 1941. My suspicion is that whoever created the chart, which doesn’t list its sources (beware), picked it up from Wikipedia. When primary sources go unchecked, which is common, bad information spreads.
DaveSchmidt said:
basil said:
And ... that's where I stopped reading
That was a mistake when you cited Wikipedia’s article on National Socialist People’s Welfare. Yes, it says German health insurance “was not decreed mandatory until 1941,” but if you read the footnoted source, the passage in the book was about pension reform. The 1941 insurance mandate applied to pensioners.
This act was only one, and not the last, in a century’s worth of expansions of Germany’s national health insurance, which Bismarck introduced in 1883. When you say Hitler introduced it, you promote a talking point of opponents of universal health care in the United States, who like to attach the idea to the Nazis as a way of undermining it.
The Lancet has a good article about the German system. A relevant excerpt:
Statutory health insurance coverage was gradually expanded further to include unemployed workers by 1918 (after World War 1), non-earning wives and daughters by 1919, all primary dependants by 1930, and people who have retired by 1941. Insurance became mandatory for farmers in 1972, for disabled persons and students in 1975, and for artists in 1981. In 1987, statutory health insurance was mandatory for 76% of the population.Interestingly, the chart that Jaytee copied also dates Germany’s universal health care to 1941. My suspicion is that whoever created the chart, which doesn’t list its sources (beware), picked it up from Wikipedia. When primary sources go unchecked, which is common, bad information spreads.
My initial comment was based on Jaytee's chart. I don't know where that came from, or how they decided to date Germany's UH to 1941. I just thought it was interesting.
As you said, Germany's system dates back to Bismarck in the 1880's, and then was improved / expanded upon ever since, by people all over the spectrum, including Nazi's.
Wasn't sure which thread I wanted to place this on so I may repeat it elsewhere. Face the Nation's Margaret Brennan missed an obvious opportunity when questioning Ronna McDaniel. Asking why many women are no longer supporting Trump, McDaniel argued and sited the appointment of Supreme Court Justices, including Barrett as something that has brought women back. At least ask the question about a woman's right to chose. Why did Brennan back off? The tip toeing around the topic is maddening.
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
Why do CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS, etc work hard every day, day in and day out, to denigrate Trump and stir the pot of ridicule for all things conservative? Biden should have it in the bag by now. Yet, Fox News is to be feared.