Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Mon Jul 28, 2014 9:51 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 119 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Obligatory Obamacare thread 
Author Message
Second Unit Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:07 pm
Posts: 377
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
p604 wrote:
roastbeef_ajus wrote:

Why should the liberal hippy fuckheads in California and New York have more say about this country than any other area?


Because there are more of them.


They are spreading at an alarming rate.


Fri Nov 22, 2013 1:40 pm
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:21 pm
Posts: 567
Location: Milwaukee, WI (USA)
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
p604 wrote:
roastbeef_ajus wrote:

Why should the liberal hippy fuckheads in California and New York have more say about this country than any other area?


Because there are more of them.



American governance is rife with examples of protecting the minority from the excesses of the majority. I don't know why you would think the electoral college should be exempt from this concept.


Fri Nov 22, 2013 1:47 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2012 9:17 am
Posts: 228
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
Johnny Larue wrote:
p604 wrote:
roastbeef_ajus wrote:

Why should the liberal hippy fuckheads in California and New York have more say about this country than any other area?


Because there are more of them.



American governance is rife with examples of protecting the minority from the excesses of the majority. I don't know why you would think the electoral college should be exempt from this concept.


"The needs of the many outway the needs of the few".


Fri Nov 22, 2013 1:56 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3371
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
roastbeef_ajus wrote:
p604 wrote:


CasualDad wrote:
Not really. One of the intents of the electoral college was to try and prevent large urban areas from permanently controlling national politics.



I doin't know if I aggree with this idea. If large urban area which contain the most amount of people have greater conrol of their own country, wouldn't that be a better reflection of the people on the whole being represented


CasualDad wrote:
As it is, it is possible to become president by winning only the 11 most populous states; giving those states the most influence.



I am not asying that you aggree with this but does that not contradict your first point. If the electoral college wants to prevent large urban areas from contolling national politics why should they allow 11 states to do that same very thing.



This line of thinking goes back to the Civil War. What most people don't understand, especially if they're not from this country, is that the Civil War was not fought over slavery. It was fought because the southern states felt they had no representation anymore; they felt they had no more say in what the federal government did. (I'm sure Vex or somebody will get in here and try to say otherwise...maybe he failed to take that class in his college).

Why should the liberal hippy fuckheads in California and New York have more say about this country than any other area?

Insulting liberals again? Oh yeah you're REAL intelligent! :roll: :lol:
Why should Conservative puppets get unlimited spending via people like the Koch Brothers?


Last edited by Vexer on Fri Nov 22, 2013 2:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Fri Nov 22, 2013 2:20 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3371
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
roastbeef_ajus wrote:
roastbeef_ajus wrote:
It was fought because the southern states felt they had no representation anymore; they felt they had no more say in what the federal government did.


So am I right or wrong?

Everything single thing you've said in this thread is flat-out wrong, and resorting to name-calling does not make you look any better nor does it strengthen any of your arguments, so I don't really see what you aim to accomplish by insulting people.


Fri Nov 22, 2013 2:26 pm
Profile
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:37 am
Posts: 988
Location: Laurel, MD
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
I'm socially liberal but fiscally conservative. Phrases like "liberal hippy doucher" have long since stopped irking me. Same thing with conservative labels like "teabagger" and "gun-nut," amongst others. It's all just noise.

_________________
https://www.facebook.com/ken.rossman.5


Fri Nov 22, 2013 3:17 pm
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:21 pm
Posts: 567
Location: Milwaukee, WI (USA)
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
p604 wrote:
Johnny Larue wrote:
American governance is rife with examples of protecting the minority from the excesses of the majority. I don't know why you would think the electoral college should be exempt from this concept.


"The needs of the many outway the needs of the few".


While I agree with the sentiment, the key word in your quote is "needs". And the key word in my statement is "excesses". The two concepts do not coincide.


Fri Nov 22, 2013 3:49 pm
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:21 pm
Posts: 567
Location: Milwaukee, WI (USA)
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
Ken wrote:
roastbeef_ajus wrote:
What most people don't understand, especially if they're not from this country, is that the Civil War was not fought over slavery. It was fought because the southern states felt they had no representation anymore; they felt they had no more say in what the federal government did. (I'm sure Vex or somebody will get in here and try to say otherwise...maybe he failed to take that class in his college).

Did you know that several of the Confederate States issued declarations as to why they were seceding from the Union? Obviously you didn't... but you do now!

Georgia:
* objects to the northern states for enacting laws to allow slaves to stay in northern territory as freemen
- 1. an objection very much concerned with continuing the institution of slavery
- 2. an objection directly concerned with upholding the federal government's power to limit the laws of individual states
- 3. an objection very much opposed to the preservation of rights of individual states
- this is couched in language that alternately refers to slaves as fugitives from labor and as lost property
* the text of this one is big and blocky, but just CTRL+F "slave"

South Carolina:
* like Georgia, SC objects to the northern states harboring slaves instead of returning them
* accuses northern states of educating slaves who remained in the south and inciting them to rebel

Texas:
* credits whites with the establishment of American civilization and expressly denies all credit to African slaves
* describes blacks as "inferior" and "dependent" and that they could not benefit from or tolerate any other condition
* describes slavery as mutually beneficial to slavemasters and slaves
* invokes the authority of God to justify the right to keep Africans enslaved

Mississippi:
* Seriously, just read the whole thing. It's an easy breezy read and it's really, really awful.

-

I will reiterate that these are all official declarations issued by these states to express their reasoning for seceding from the Union, and by extension their reasoning for opposing the northern states in the Civil War.

Then there's this here speech delivered by Alexander Stephens, who, as we all know because we're really smart about our history, was Vice President of the Confederate States.
* "Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas [see below]; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition."
* the ideas he talks of opposing here are the ideas held by most Revolution-era Americans that slavery was temporary and should soon pass from existence
* and pay close attention to the part where he outright said the Confederacy was founded upon the idea that Africans are naturally subservient and that slavery should be held in perpetuity.

-

At this point, just so nobody's forgotten, I'll repeat what you said:

roastbeef_ajus wrote:
What most people don't understand, especially if they're not from this country, is that the Civil War was not fought over slavery. It was fought because the southern states felt they had no representation anymore; they felt they had no more say in what the federal government did. (I'm sure Vex or somebody will get in here and try to say otherwise...maybe he failed to take that class in his college).

Technically, I think the Civil War was fought because the South attempted to secede. One of the reasons (and a big one to be sure) for that secession was the issue of slavery. But fundamentally the war was about preserving the Union versus the Confederates wanting more self-determination.

“My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.” -Abraham Lincoln


Fri Nov 22, 2013 4:25 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
The south cared about the self-determination of states insofar as it allowed the slavery gravy train to continue without interference from the north. If the federal government had guaranteed them that one thing and brought the hammer down on the north, the southern states would have been on that teat in a second, at the expense of the self-determination of northern states.

Let's not split hairs. If the war started over secession and slavery was cited a great many times by secessionists in their reasoning, we can say well within the margins of reason that the south fought to keep slavery. We certainly can't say within the margins of reason that the war didn't have anything to do with slavery, nor can we rightly browbeat others for suggesting that it did. One opinion is vastly more informed than the other.

As for Lincoln, it wouldn't be the first time that something an American president says doesn't match what he does.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Fri Nov 22, 2013 6:39 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:04 pm
Posts: 1666
Location: New Hampshire
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
roastbeef_ajus wrote:

What most people don't understand, especially if they're not from this country, is that the Civil War was not fought over slavery.


You really, really need to read more books and pull yourself away from the Fox and talk radio. Seriously.

What you see here is the primary reason why I don't take American conservatism seriously. It's not the radical, reactionary politics; it's the ignorance and unwillingness to to accept basic knowledge, basic history, basic science, even the most common forms of intelligent thought.

Like Ken said, the Civil War was most certainly fought over slavery. If one wants to get technical, it was about economics. Southern states resented the northern abolitionists and several pro-abolition policies, because the way to economic advancement in the South was owning slaves. So yes, it was about economics, but the issue was slavery. Call me a hippy liberal fuckhead if you wish, but you're not entitled to your own facts.

_________________
Death is pretty final
I'm collecting vinyl
I'm gonna DJ at the end of the world.


Fri Nov 22, 2013 7:02 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3371
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
Now this is what I call hilarious-John Boehner, the person who brought the whole nation to a standstill over the ACA, ended up signing up for it, talk about ironic:

http://www.salon.com/2013/11/22/whoops_obamacare_turns_out_to_be_great_deal_for_boehner/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=obama&utm_content=2+-+this+report&utm_campaign=em13_x_ACA_20131122_eh_ttacaactives&source=em13_x_ACA_20131122_eh_ttacaactives


Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:04 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:07 pm
Posts: 377
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
Vexer wrote:
Now this is what I call hilarious-John Boehner, the person who brought the whole nation to a standstill over the ACA, ended up signing up for it, talk about ironic:

http://www.salon.com/2013/11/22/whoops_obamacare_turns_out_to_be_great_deal_for_boehner/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=obama&utm_content=2+-+this+report&utm_campaign=em13_x_ACA_20131122_eh_ttacaactives&source=em13_x_ACA_20131122_eh_ttacaactives


Did you even read the article?

"As speaker of the House, Boehner is technically exempt from the requirement, but in order to avoid accusations of special treatment (i.e., because of politics) he decided to take the plunge, too. And he wants you to know how difficult it was."


Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:12 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3371
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
roastbeef_ajus wrote:
Vexer wrote:
Now this is what I call hilarious-John Boehner, the person who brought the whole nation to a standstill over the ACA, ended up signing up for it, talk about ironic:

http://www.salon.com/2013/11/22/whoops_obamacare_turns_out_to_be_great_deal_for_boehner/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=obama&utm_content=2+-+this+report&utm_campaign=em13_x_ACA_20131122_eh_ttacaactives&source=em13_x_ACA_20131122_eh_ttacaactives


Did you even read the article?

"As speaker of the House, Boehner is technically exempt from the requirement, but in order to avoid accusations of special treatment (i.e., because of politics) he decided to take the plunge, too. And he wants you to know how difficult it was."
Yes, and it's still hilarious. If he was trying to make an example of how "bad" the ACA was, he failed miserably.


Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:30 pm
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:21 pm
Posts: 567
Location: Milwaukee, WI (USA)
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
Ken wrote:
The south cared about the self-determination of states insofar as it allowed the slavery gravy train to continue without interference from the north. If the federal government had guaranteed them that one thing and brought the hammer down on the north, the southern states would have been on that teat in a second, at the expense of the self-determination of northern states.


Not necessarily true. The Corwin Amendment, the abandoned 13th Amendment to the Constitution which guaranteed the rights of the Southern states to continue with slavery, passed the Congress as the Southern states were mulling secession. It passed with the support of Buchanan and when Lincoln came in he remarked in his inaugural:
"I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution—which amendment, however, I have not seen—has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service....holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable."

Now, there is no guarantee that the amendment would have survived the 3/4 of the state legislatures, but the "teat" had been offered and the Southern states didn't bite...er...take it.

I am not saying there is NO correlation between the Civil War and slavery, but that the issues ran deeper and further afield. It would be like saying that the Revolutionary War was a war over taxation when many rather think it was a broader war of "liberty."


Last edited by Johnny Larue on Sat Nov 23, 2013 12:58 am, edited 1 time in total.



Fri Nov 22, 2013 10:27 pm
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:21 pm
Posts: 567
Location: Milwaukee, WI (USA)
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
Vexer wrote:
roastbeef_ajus wrote:
Vexer wrote:
Now this is what I call hilarious-John Boehner, the person who brought the whole nation to a standstill over the ACA, ended up signing up for it, talk about ironic:

http://www.salon.com/2013/11/22/whoops_obamacare_turns_out_to_be_great_deal_for_boehner/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=obama&utm_content=2+-+this+report&utm_campaign=em13_x_ACA_20131122_eh_ttacaactives&source=em13_x_ACA_20131122_eh_ttacaactives


Did you even read the article?

"As speaker of the House, Boehner is technically exempt from the requirement, but in order to avoid accusations of special treatment (i.e., because of politics) he decided to take the plunge, too. And he wants you to know how difficult it was."
Yes, and it's still hilarious. If he was trying to make an example of how "bad" the ACA was, he failed miserably.


Hardly. The numbers quoted are from a hit piece article based on what this blogger entered into the system and how he interpreted it. Who knows what he entered? He did admit to perjury and seemed to find that to be a laugh.

Here....try this one from the staff of one of the mental midgits from my home state. The staff of this Democratic Congresswoman are crying in their soup over the newly inflated premiums they're finding under Obamacare (even with the government contribution).

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/11/o ... z2lOAk3QKi

Really, Vex. When the primary sources you cite are left-wing hack sites like Salon.com (all the while decrying Fox News), you're not doing the discourse any favors.


Fri Nov 22, 2013 10:39 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am
Posts: 2384
Location: Lancashire, England.
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
I could be naughty here and say that a basis for your civil war was that the South was populated by the unruly decendants of Celts and Northern Brits (like me, namely drunkards, barbarians, cut throats, tribesmen and guttersnipes); whilst the North (with significant exceptions albeit) took its cultural stock from sucessful southern Brits, Germans and Scandanavians.

The ultimate proxy War.

_________________
... because I'm a wild animal


Mon Nov 25, 2013 4:53 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
Slander!* Our country is populated by real 'Muricans. And our south is populated by even realer 'Muricans.

_
*Well, libel.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Mon Nov 25, 2013 6:47 pm
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 6:19 pm
Posts: 601
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
NotHughGrant wrote:
I could be naughty here and say that a basis for your civil war was that the South was populated by the unruly decendants of Celts and Northern Brits (like me, namely drunkards, barbarians, cut throats, tribesmen and guttersnipes)...


We drunken Irishmen do enjoy a good fight. I hear the same about those Scottish men except that they are better fighters. Sounds like a reasonable explanation to me. :mrgreen:


Mon Nov 25, 2013 7:44 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am
Posts: 2384
Location: Lancashire, England.
Post Re: Obligatory Obamacare thread
I grew up on a 60% Scottish council estate in Lancashire, where the only people the Scots hated more than each other were the English.

_________________
... because I'm a wild animal


Tue Nov 26, 2013 1:01 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 119 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr