srinath wrote on 03/21/13 at 15:24:53:Republicons dont believe in no freedom, they believe in the freedom to let the guy die if he had no insurance, of course you have the freedom to not have insurance ... yea so that is a freedom.
That is a pretty broad brush assertion based on a caricature of fiscal conservatism. The point we are trying to make is it is better to have several choices of quality coverage than to have junk coverage forced upon us. Suppose your Obamacare panel decides that you knew the risks when you got on the motorcycle and witholds treatment to ration the care to someone else? Now that care will be rationed on a triage basis I sure hope none of us fall within the "expendable" category.
Quote:They believe in the freedom to get shot if you happen to not notice someone about to shoot you, you need to carry @ all times to be protected and guns need to be sold without any checks.
Conservatives and Republicans have always maintined that it is better to enforce the laws already in place than to make more unenforceable laws. The Constitution is there to protect Liberty, not public safety. If you want public safety then I suggest a safer country such as North Korea or Iran or even Syria if you live in the pro Assad side of town.
Quote:They believe in the freedom to go broke and hock everything you got if you got unemployed.
Again, the whole story has been missed. If businesses weren't saddled with the costs of massive regulatory burdens, taxes, fees, assessments, and long term unemployment claims then there would be enough jobs so that people wouldn't need long term unemployment. It's the system that creates the environment where people go broke.
Quote:And Saddam hussein and Al Quaida were at logger heads before we poked our noses in there. Not all muslims will work together ... its a bigger dividing line between the 2 types of muslims saddam hussein and Bin laden were, its like putting a southern baptist and roman catholic in 1 group. Al Quaida camps in Iraq - you listening to Rush Limbaugh ? and even so, do you know if it was saddam hussein who authorised it, or was it to attack some part of husseins establishment ?
I listen to snippets of Rush a few times a year. Unfortunately, his show is on during work hours so I never get to hear him. I just read a lot, apply critical thinking and try to keep an open mind.
I bet you if the army of satan were headed our way the Catholic and the Baptist could overcome some phylosophical differences for the time being.
Quote:WMD against his own people ? you sure ? or are you loosely calling any weapon that can kill more than 2 people a WMD ? he used chemical weapons against the kurds, and parts of Iran - but we were told he had nuclear weapons buddy, by Cheney ...
How about up to 5,000 Kurds in just one attack in Halabja? Joe Wilson told you he had nuclear weapons, it was Bush who relayed intelligence reports that Saddam was investigating purchasing yellow cake uranium. Remember how Joe Wilson railed against words no one ever said to make himself famous?
Quote:And good you're getting our history from Argo ... I thought you may be getting it from a unreliable source.
Nay, what I was sharing was the story that was the basis for the movie Argo to make the point that there is much classified information that we won't learn for many more years but what we do know for certain is pretty darning as it is.