PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues Right-Wing Publicly Masturbates Over Coup Fantasy


orange
09-30-2009, 05:18 PM
Obama Risks a Domestic Military ‘Intervention’
Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:35 AM
By: John L. Perry


There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America’s military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the
“Obama problem.” Don’t dismiss it as unrealistic.

America isn’t the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened
doesn’t mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through
military eyes:
Officers swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Unlike enlisted
personnel, they do not swear to “obey the orders of the president of the United States.”
Top military officers can see the Constitution they are sworn to defend being trampled as American institutions and enterprises are nationalized.
They can see that Americans are increasingly alarmed that this nation, under President Barack Obama, may not even be recognizable as America by the 2012 election, in which he will surely seek continuation in office.
They can see that the economy — ravaged by deficits, taxes, unemployment, and impending inflation — is financially reliant on foreign lender governments.
They can see this president waging undeclared war on the intelligence community, without whose rigorous and independent functions the armed services are rendered blind in an ever-more hostile world overseas and at home.
They can see the dismantling of defenses against missiles targeted at this nation by avowed enemies, even as America’s troop strength is allowed to sag.
They can see the horror of major warfare erupting simultaneously in two, and possibly three, far-flung theaters before America can react in time.
They can see the nation’s safety and their own military establishments and honor placed in jeopardy as never before.

So, if you are one of those observant military professionals, what do you do?

Wait until this president bungles into losing the war in Afghanistan, and Pakistan’s arsenal of nuclear bombs
falls into the hands of militant Islam?

Wait until Israel is forced to launch air strikes on Iran’s nuclear-bomb plants, and the Middle East explodes,
destabilizing or subjugating the Free World?

What happens if the generals Obama sent to win the Afghan war are told by this president (who now says, “I’m
not interested in victory”) that they will be denied troops they must have to win? Do they follow orders they
cannot carry out, consistent with their oath of duty? Do they resign en masse?

Or do they soldier on, hoping the 2010 congressional elections will reverse the situation? Do they dare gamble
the national survival on such political whims?

Anyone who imagines that those thoughts are not weighing heavily on the intellect and conscience of America’s
military leadership is lost in a fool’s fog.

Will the day come when patriotic general and flag officers sit down with the president, or with those who control
him, and work out the national equivalent of a “family intervention,” with some form of limited, shared
responsibility?

Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do
the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would
replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars. Having bonded with his twin teleprompters, the
president would be detailed for ceremonial speech-making.

Military intervention is what Obama’s exponentially accelerating agenda for “fundamental change” toward a
Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama’s radical ideal is not acceptable
or reversible.

Unthinkable? Then think up an alternative, non-violent solution to the Obama problem. Just don’t shrug and say,
“We can always worry about that later.”

In the 2008 election, that was the wistful, self-indulgent, indifferent reliance on abnegation of personal
responsibility that has sunk the nation into this morass.

John L. Perry, a prize-winning newspaper editor and writer who served on White House staffs of two
presidents, is a regular columnist for Newsmax.com.

http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/pdf/newsmax-20090929-perry_coup.pdf

BucEyedPea
09-30-2009, 05:26 PM
I do not support it as it would be a very bad precedent for this country.

Even if the 2000 Election was like a Banana Republic.
Even if Bush waged war on our intel community regarding Iraq.
Even if Bush didn't declare war when starting an aggressive war.
Even if I do not support the nationalizations and other unConstitutional acts.

I do think most Americans are not happy with the direction of this country under both Obama and Bush....but a coup would be a blow to our republic. There would have to be a few more communist moves made by Obama before I could even think about such support. Because to have a coup leads us into uncertain waters and I just don't want to go there.

Scarey, scarey times. I don't know if I said it here or elsewhere, or if it was Paul, but mention was made a war will be started which will take our attention off of where we're heading and the bad economy.

petegz28
09-30-2009, 05:29 PM
I do not support it as it would be a very bad precedent for this country.
Even if the 2000 Election was like a Banana Republic.
Even if Bush waged war on our intel community regarding Iraq.
Even if Bush didn't declare war when starting an aggressive war.
Even I do not support the nationalizations and other unConstitutional acts.

I do think most Americans are not happy with the direction of this country under both Obama and Bush....but a coup would be a blow to our republic. There would have to be a few more communist moves made by Obama before I could even think about such support. Because to have a coup leads us into uncertain waters and I just don't want to go there.

Scarey, scarey times.

Then again, a coup might send a message to our leaders to get their fucking act together cause the people are sick of their shit.

orange
09-30-2009, 05:29 PM
Obama Facebook Poll: "Should Obama Be Killed?" Pulled From Site, Secret Service
First Posted: 09-28-09 11:48 AM | Updated: 09-30-09 06:01 PM

A poll was posted on Facebook asking users to vote "should Obama be killed?"

The responses include: "yes," "maybe," "if he cuts my health care," and "no."

http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/107688/original.jpg

Over 730 people had taken the poll, which was later removed from Facebook. The poll is now being probed by the Secret Service, reports the Associated Press. Read more about the investigation here.

Included on the list of the top 100 most popular polls on Facebook was a poll responding to the "should Obama be killed" query, and which asked users to vote, "Should the creator of 'should Obama be killed' be arrested?"



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/28/obama-facebook-poll-asks_n_301860.html

orange
09-30-2009, 05:30 PM
The poll is now being probed by the Secret Service, reports the Associated Press.

Those of you who voted - enjoy the heat.

BucEyedPea
09-30-2009, 05:31 PM
Yeah, well they should investigate that it's their job BUT a real coup would have to have some inside govt support particularly with the military. That's not going to happen with some facebook person behind a keyboard. That was a really stupid move.

BucEyedPea
09-30-2009, 05:35 PM
Then again, a coup might send a message to our leaders to get their ****ing act together cause the people are sick of their shit.

Yeah, but think of it like the calls for a Con-Con being called. It sounds good BUT it could wind up in a runaway convention that also destroys the good things in our Constitution too , never to be gained back. That's the risk.

Gotta stop Obama and the next fake choice and then vote them out. A coup would be pulled off by some insiders with the military....and may not necessarily a move by the folks. That would be a revolution if done by the folks.

Huffmeister
09-30-2009, 05:39 PM
Over 730 people had taken the poll, which was later removed from Facebook. The poll is now being probed by the Secret Service, reports the Associated Press. Read more about the investigation here.
That reminds me... anyone seen jAZ around lately?


[j/k]

petegz28
09-30-2009, 05:40 PM
Yeah, but think of it like the calls for a Con-Con being called. It sounds good BUT it could wind up in a runaway convention that also destroys the good things in our Constitution too , never to be gained back. That's the risk.

Gotta stop Obama and the next fake and then vote them out. A coup would be pulled off by some insiders with the military....and may not necessarily a move by the folks. That would be a revolution if done by the folks.

Unless the people support the coup

BigRedChief
09-30-2009, 05:44 PM
Then again, a coup might send a message to our leaders to get their ****ing act together cause the people are sick of their shit.so now a military coup is on the table, maybe we need one to "wake up" Washington? Listen to yourself.

Are we some tin horn 3rd world country? Are we not a democracy that settles disputes via the ballot box?

So now we have made the jump from calling the President a Nazi, Facist to we need a military coup. jeezzz you guys are over the line on this.

The military tries to interfere with civilian rule in the slighest there would be American blood in the streets. We would never recover from something like that.

petegz28
09-30-2009, 05:48 PM
so now a military coup is on the table, maybe we need one to "wake up" Washington? Listen to yourself.

Are we some tin horn 3rd world country? Are we not a democracy that settles disputes via the ballot box?

So now we have made the jump from calling the President a Nazi, Facist to we need a military coup. jeezzz you guys are over the line on this.

The military tries to interfere with civilian rule in the slighest there would be American blood in the streets. We would never recover from something like that.

I think you're getting just a touch ahead of yourself there, big guy. And no, we are not a democracy and the ballot box seems to mean little anymore.

BucEyedPea
09-30-2009, 06:08 PM
Unless the people support the coup

How would be know though? It had better replace our standard Constitution and not some temporary junta or some such.

banyon
09-30-2009, 06:24 PM
I think you're getting just a touch ahead of yourself there, big guy. And no, we are not a democracy and the ballot box seems to mean little anymore.

You don't think Obama was elected?

sportsman1
09-30-2009, 06:24 PM
The ballot box doesn't mean Sh*t. Especially when the propaganda, and such runs so deep that people have no sense of realism. I'm not saying a coup.. but something has to change drastically in our culture.

BucEyedPea
09-30-2009, 06:43 PM
The ballot box not meaning anything simply means we're not getting what we think we're getting when the marketing of candidates is based on lies.
Or only getting the lesser of two evils based on who the Establishment trots out for choices. Lol!

BucEyedPea
09-30-2009, 07:00 PM
I'd rather go the route of invoking the Tenth Amendment and start nullifying Federal Laws as unConstitutional at the state level. Then escalate that to peaceful refusal to participate and secede. Let the dirty Feds fight the people if they want.

blaise
09-30-2009, 07:12 PM
The right-wing does this, huh? I must have missed all the meetings.

petegz28
09-30-2009, 07:13 PM
You don't think Obama was elected?

Oh I think he was elected. Legally? Who knows anymore???

Calcountry
09-30-2009, 07:21 PM
You don't think Obama was elected?He was elected, fair and square.

What has he done with it?

Calcountry
09-30-2009, 07:24 PM
I'd rather go the route of invoking the Tenth Amendment and start nullifying Federal Laws as unConstitutional at the state level. Then escalate that to peaceful refusal to participate and seceded. Let the dirty Feds fight the people if they want.At least there, you have some voice of authority speaking on your behalf, the governor of hypothetical state(s).

We need a clear speaking conservative to take hold of the Republican party, speak clearly against Obama's Marxist Socialist agenda, and defeat him at the ballot box.

mlyonsd
09-30-2009, 07:25 PM
Unless the people support the coup

Shhh. Our Lord Cheney hasn't given the word yet. Don't let on what's coming.

patteeu
09-30-2009, 07:26 PM
Obama continues to be bad for the country. I hate to say it, but I told you so.

AndChiefs
09-30-2009, 07:26 PM
You don't think Obama was elected?

Obama was certainly elected....however he was elected in a republic not a democracy.

blaise
09-30-2009, 07:27 PM
Interesting how banyon questioned the generalization that Hollywood supported Polanski, but he has no problem with the thread title here.

banyon
09-30-2009, 07:48 PM
Obama was certainly elected....however he was elected in a republic not a democracy.

*groan*

http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2009/6/7/128888649601014172.jpg

banyon
09-30-2009, 07:49 PM
Oh I think he was elected. Legally? Who knows anymore???

Uh, everyone, except the looney bin?

petegz28
09-30-2009, 07:52 PM
Uh, everyone, except the looney bin?

Riiiiggghhhhtttt

orange
09-30-2009, 07:53 PM
The right-wing does this, huh? I must have missed all the meetings.

Interesting how banyon questioned the generalization that Hollywood supported Polanski, but he has no problem with the thread title here.

This was published on Newsmax as an everyday article and drew hundreds of responses - before it was pulled down.

Yes, public masturbation.

As for the "coup fantasy" - what else to call it? The idea that the military is anti-Obama exists ONLY in the imagination. Every point that Perry listed is his own idiotic interpretation based on the belief that Teabaggers speak for the other 98% of America.

The idea that the military is anti-constitution is not only a fantasy but an insulting bullshit fantasy. Gates and the Joint Chiefs should demand an apology.

AndChiefs
09-30-2009, 08:00 PM
*groan*

http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2009/6/7/128888649601014172.jpg

Hey I'm not a Repub...but a facts a fact and anyone that thinks we live in a democracy is being misled. Frankly, I'm glad we don't. A democracy is too easy for the majority to keep down a minority.

banyon
09-30-2009, 08:06 PM
Hey I'm not a Repub...but a facts a fact and anyone that thinks we live in a democracy is being misled. Frankly, I'm glad we don't. A democracy is too easy for the majority to keep down a minority.

We live in a republican representative democracy.

One is a subset of the broader category.

It's like owning a Chevrolet S-10 and saying "I don't own a truck". Yes you do, you own a Chevrolet truck.

banyon
09-30-2009, 08:07 PM
Riiiiggghhhhtttt

Yes, that's right.

What credible source thinks this election was fraudulent?

RINGLEADER
09-30-2009, 08:34 PM
More distraction.

I find it odd that it's always the hard left on this board that posts this kind of thing...

dirk digler
09-30-2009, 08:37 PM
More distraction.

I find it odd that it's always the hard left on this board that posts this kind of thing...

You're kidding right? All I have read on this board for the last 3-4 months is one big distraction like Obama can't speak to school children because he is brainwashing kids or the whole Olympic BS or that he is not a natural born citizen.

Give me a fucking break

RINGLEADER
09-30-2009, 08:44 PM
You're kidding right? All I have read on this board for the last 3-4 months is one big distraction like Obama can't speak to school children because he is brainwashing kids or the whole Olympic BS or that he is not a natural born citizen.

Give me a ****ing break


I think I've agreed with you on those examples. Though the fact that the administration has backed off on several issues related to the education department overstepping its bounds in support of Obama advocacy at least gives some credence to those complaints. But they are stupid distractions too.

It's always the hard left posting about how this right-wing group or that right-wing group is plotting a coup or wants to harm Obama. That stuff is just stupid and frankly if a military coup was attempted I'd imagine the vast majority of America would support the president 100%, myself included.

RJ
09-30-2009, 08:46 PM
More distraction.

I find it odd that it's always the hard left on this board that posts this kind of thing...



Dude!!

orange
09-30-2009, 08:48 PM
It's always the hard left posting about how this right-wing group or that right-wing group is plotting a coup or wants to harm Obama. That stuff is just stupid and frankly if a military coup was attempted I'd imagine the vast majority of America would support the president 100%, myself included.

:)

Then again, a coup might send a message to our leaders to get their ****ing act together cause the people are sick of their shit.

BucEyedPea
09-30-2009, 08:51 PM
At least there, you have some voice of authority speaking on your behalf, the governor of hypothetical state(s).

We need a clear speaking conservative to take hold of the Republican party, speak clearly against Obama's Marxist Socialist agenda, and defeat him at the ballot box.

Well of course the latter is the preferred and the ideal....but in the meantime I'd go the Tenth, since we don't call elections here anytime we want.

dirk digler
09-30-2009, 08:51 PM
I think I've agreed with you on those examples. Though the fact that the administration has backed off on several issues related to the education department overstepping its bounds in support of Obama advocacy at least gives some credence to those complaints. But they are stupid distractions too.

It's always the hard left posting about how this right-wing group or that right-wing group is plotting a coup or wants to harm Obama. That stuff is just stupid and frankly if a military coup was attempted I'd imagine the vast majority of America would support the president 100%, myself included.

Fair enough.

RINGLEADER
09-30-2009, 08:52 PM
:)


That's funny.

Doesn't address the point but it is funny...

orange
09-30-2009, 08:55 PM
That's funny.

Doesn't address the point but it is funny...

Okay, how about this...

If TacoJohn, for example, were to post a Poll about how many Planeteers want to secede, that would be a distraction by your definition, right?

So TacoJohn, then, would be one of the hard left by your definition. Do I have that right?

InChiefsHell
09-30-2009, 08:55 PM
I think there would have to be a lot more than what we've seen for this...this "nuclear Option" of a coup. I can't imagine a situation where I would support such an action. That's not America, any more than Obama's vision is not America.

I hope the stupid Republicans get their crap together and defeat this thing in 2010 and again in 2012. I firmly believe that Obama will derail this country and make it unrecognizable by the time my son is in college. And if this "coup" ever happened, it would also make America unrecognizable...

The people need to make the real change, fuck these politicians.

orange
09-30-2009, 08:58 PM
Okay, how about this...

If TacoJohn, for example, were to post a Poll about how many Planeteers want to secede, that would be a distraction by you definition, right?

So TacoJohn, then, would be one of the hard left by your definition. Do I have that right?

And I suppose KILLER_CLOWN must also be hard left when he puts up the latest birther nonsense. :hmmm:


... And of course, John L. Perry - the author - hard left as they come, no doubt!

ILChief
09-30-2009, 09:00 PM
Obama was certainly elected....however he was elected in a republic not a democracy.

well, a democracy would be over 50% of the popular vote and he accomplished that was well.

RINGLEADER
09-30-2009, 09:02 PM
And I suppose KILLER_CLOWN must also be hard left when he puts up the latest birther nonsense. :hmmm:


... And of course, John L. Perry - the author - hard left as they come, no doubt!


I think you know the difference between people threatening violence against the president and someone questioning his birth record but again, FTR, I have never understood the birth certificate stuff.

RINGLEADER
09-30-2009, 09:03 PM
well, a democracy would be over 50% of the popular vote and he accomplished that was well.

Yeah, I'm not sure how anyone can challenge the legitimacy of Obama's election. His ideas and leadership, sure. But not the election.

BucEyedPea
09-30-2009, 09:10 PM
I think there would have to be a lot more than what we've seen for this...this "nuclear Option" of a coup. I can't imagine a situation where I would support such an action. That's not America, any more than Obama's vision is not America.

I hope the stupid Republicans get their crap together and defeat this thing in 2010 and again in 2012. I firmly believe that Obama will derail this country and make it unrecognizable by the time my son is in college. And if this "coup" ever happened, it would also make America unrecognizable...

The people need to make the real change, **** these politicians.

I know one thing, I don't want one party rule especially with the choices we get. It'd be nice to just get an R- majority congress and just let this Marxist sit up there getting nothing done domestically. We're legislatively superior. ( except all those Czars worry me) The thing is Obama has enjoyed the excessive power grab Bush left him with no sign of rolling much back. I think he's slightly better than an R, current crop, on FP. I can hold out that long.

BigRedChief
09-30-2009, 09:16 PM
Yeah, I'm not sure how anyone can challenge the legitimacy of Obama's election. His ideas and leadership, sure. But not the election.No chit. You can say he sucks, his polices are worst evah but he was legitamately elected. You don't like it? Organize and vote him out and those that agree with him.

Pitt Gorilla
09-30-2009, 09:18 PM
Oh I think he was elected. Legally? Who knows anymore???http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_azimCSzqNnc/ShDhoT3nj2I/AAAAAAAABao/skbCIebntQM/s400/its-a-conspiracy.jpg

BucEyedPea
09-30-2009, 09:21 PM
Heckling from the Peanut Gallery is here!

banyon
09-30-2009, 09:23 PM
Heckling from the Peanut Gallery is here!

It's nice of you to announce your entry into the forum this way.

Taco John
09-30-2009, 09:23 PM
I don't think a domestic military intervention is imminent at all. I wouldn't be suprised, however, to see a states rights revolt should any form of socialized medicine get passed. That to me, is a no-brainer effect to a cause. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

blaise
09-30-2009, 09:25 PM
This was published on Newsmax as an everyday article and drew hundreds of responses - before it was pulled down.

Yes, public masturbation.

As for the "coup fantasy" - what else to call it? The idea that the military is anti-Obama exists ONLY in the imagination. Every point that Perry listed is his own idiotic interpretation based on the belief that Teabaggers speak for the other 98% of America.

The idea that the military is anti-constitution is not only a fantasy but an insulting bullshit fantasy. Gates and the Joint Chiefs should demand an apology.

I wasn't referring to the "coup fantasy". I was referring to your generalization that the "right-wing" is publicly maturbating over this, so your response to my second quote is irrelevant.
As far as the fist quote of mine you posted- who cares if it drew hundreds of responses on newsmax? It's not the "right-wing" publicly masturbating over this. That would be like me linking to an article from the Denver Post and saying all of Colorado is masturbating over it.
You're just trying to make some mass generalization of the right wing based on a few idiots. But that seems to be your belief, some pollyanna notion that all things right are sinister and all things left and good.

banyon
09-30-2009, 09:39 PM
I don't think a domestic military intervention is imminent at all. I wouldn't be suprised, however, to see a states rights revolt should any form of socialized medicine get passed. That to me, is a no-brainer effect to a cause. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

You gave us medicine!!! RAHRRR! HULK SMASH!

headsnap
09-30-2009, 09:43 PM
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_azimCSzqNnc/ShDhoT3nj2I/AAAAAAAABao/skbCIebntQM/s400/its-a-conspiracy.jpg

that was not how I expected jAZ to make his appearance in this thread... :eek:

Taco John
09-30-2009, 09:45 PM
You gave us medicine!!! RAHRRR! HULK SMASH!

its what they're taking away that is the concern.

You're going to have to accept that we live in America, not Europe.

banyon
09-30-2009, 09:47 PM
its what they're taking away that is the concern.

You're going to have to accept that we live in America, not Europe.

I think you're going to have to accept that history dictates that revolts haven't been led by the wealthy and comfortable for quite some time.

Taco John
09-30-2009, 09:55 PM
I think you're going to have to accept that history dictates that revolts haven't been led by the wealthy and comfortable for quite some time.


Ah the out of touch liberal. Only rich people could possibly be against socialized medicine.

You looked at any polls lately?

RINGLEADER
09-30-2009, 09:55 PM
I think you're going to have to accept that history dictates that revolts haven't been led by the wealthy and comfortable for quite some time.

While putting the term "revolt" in its proper non-coup perspective, I find it mildly interesting that it is the group that is against the public hand-out that is rallying to the cause this time.

Hopefully Obama will overrule the Senate and live up to his campaign promise of going line-by-line through the bill instead of pushing it through as quickly as possible.

RINGLEADER
09-30-2009, 09:56 PM
Ah the out of touch liberal. Only rich people could possibly be against socialized medicine.

You looked at any polls lately?

Great minds...

Taco John
09-30-2009, 09:58 PM
Also, a states rights revolt isn't a rich or poor thing. It's an American thing. There are no class boundaries where states rights are concerned.

RJ
09-30-2009, 09:58 PM
Ah the out of touch liberal. Only rich people could possibly be against socialized medicine.

You looked at any polls lately?


I haven't.

What do they say?

Taco John
09-30-2009, 09:59 PM
I haven't.

What do they say?


That any form of socialized medicine would have to pass against the will of the people.

banyon
09-30-2009, 10:03 PM
Ah the out of touch liberal. Only rich people could possibly be against socialized medicine.

You looked at any polls lately?

Not any with demographic info. Do you have those?

banyon
09-30-2009, 10:05 PM
Great minds...

You guys want to lay some money on this revolution thing?

I'll give you 50 to 1 odds.

Taco John
09-30-2009, 10:05 PM
Not any with demographic info. Do you have those?

That would partly explain why you're so out of touch...

here you go... (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform)

banyon
09-30-2009, 10:06 PM
That would partly explain why you're so out of touch...

here you go... (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform)

Sorry I wasn't more specific, I thought it was obvious though we were talking about income.

RJ
09-30-2009, 10:07 PM
That any form of socialized medicine would have to pass against the will of the people.


I'm missing your point.

How does that mean that poor people are against any form of socialized medicine?

Taking a wild guess, I'd think that poor people would be strongly in favor of socialized medicine.

Taco John
09-30-2009, 10:09 PM
You guys want to lay some money on this revolution thing?

I'll give you 50 to 1 odds.


Revolution is a strong word. I said States Rights Revolt.

Those are great odds.

Sure. I'll put $100 on those odds that if health care reform passes that has a public option that looks to force private companies out of business, no less than 5 states pass resolutions to censure the federal government and will begin a power struggle between the state and federal level.

AndChiefs
09-30-2009, 10:12 PM
Yeah, I'm not sure how anyone can challenge the legitimacy of Obama's election. His ideas and leadership, sure. But not the election.

I don't know how anyone could challenge it either...but he still wasn't elected by the people...he was elected by the electoral college.

Taco John
09-30-2009, 10:12 PM
I'm missing your point.

How does that mean that poor people are against any form of socialized medicine?

Taking a wild guess, I'd think that poor people would be strongly in favor of socialized medicine.


Even poor people enjoy liberty. Tell a poor person that they either buy insurance, or get put in prison and fined - how excited do you think they're going to be about socialized medicine then?

petegz28
09-30-2009, 10:13 PM
I'm missing your point.

How does that mean that poor people are against any form of socialized medicine?

Taking a wild guess, I'd think that poor people would be strongly in favor of socialized medicine.

You know, people, especially people on the Left, love to tout the word "democracy". Only they hate it when democracy works against them. As in, the will of the people in a democracy is the majority of the people.

RJ
09-30-2009, 10:14 PM
I don't know how anyone could challenge it either...but he still wasn't elected by the people...he was elected by the electoral college.

Fucking college guys.

banyon
09-30-2009, 10:16 PM
Revolution is a strong word. I said States Rights Revolt.

Those are great odds.

Sure. I'll put $100 on those odds that if health care reform passes that has a public option that looks to force private companies out of business, no less than 5 states pass resolutions to censure the federal government and will begin a power struggle between the state and federal level.

ooh censure!

Well, that's a hell of a revolt you got going on there. What's next? A letter to the government's parents?

ROFL

I don't think you're prepared to make a bet about a real revolt, just a semantic one.

RJ
09-30-2009, 10:17 PM
Even poor people enjoy liberty. Tell a poor person that they either buy insurance, or get put in prison and fined - how excited do you think they're going to be about socialized medicine then?


TJ, I'm not trying to argue with you, but what the hell does that mean?

All I'm saying is that most poor people wouldn't be against socialized medicine. Hell, the majority of them are already on it. Do you think many poor people have their own health coverage?

banyon
09-30-2009, 10:17 PM
Even poor people enjoy liberty. Tell a poor person that they either buy insurance, or get put in prison and fined - how excited do you think they're going to be about socialized medicine then?

So, are we going to get that polling data broken down by income?

RJ
09-30-2009, 10:18 PM
You know, people, especially people on the Left, love to tout the word "democracy". Only they hate it when democracy works against them. As in, the will of the people in a democracy is the majority of the people.


Can you explain that in such a way that a simple minded man like myself might understand?

petegz28
09-30-2009, 10:19 PM
TJ, I'm not trying to argue with you, but what the hell does that mean?

All I'm saying is that most poor people wouldn't be against socialized medicine. Hell, the majority of them are already on it. Do you think many poor people have their own health coverage?

I'd bet you a lot of those "poor people" have I-pods, ell phones, X-box, internet, cable TV, etc, etc.

petegz28
09-30-2009, 10:20 PM
Can you explain that in such a way that a simple minded man like myself might understand?

Sure! Democracy is great as long as you find yourself in the majority and thus on the same side as the People's will.

RJ
09-30-2009, 10:23 PM
I'd bet you a lot of those "poor people" have I-pods, ell phones, X-box, internet, cable TV, etc, etc.


Try to stay on point, pete. I'm not debating the possessions these folks have in their homes. TJ is saying (I believe) that poor folk aren't in favor of socialized medicine. I'm saying I disagree. I have no idea whether they have cell phones.

KCWolfman
09-30-2009, 10:25 PM
:)
I am sure pet meant that tongue in cheek, kinda like "republicans want you to die"
Posted via Mobile Device

Taco John
09-30-2009, 10:28 PM
TJ, I'm not trying to argue with you, but what the hell does that mean?

All I'm saying is that most poor people wouldn't be against socialized medicine. Hell, the majority of them are already on it. Do you think many poor people have their own health coverage?


You should get caught up with the debate before entering the discussion. The "what the hell does that mean" part of this is the current democrat plan on the table.

petegz28
09-30-2009, 10:28 PM
Try to stay on point, pete. I'm not debating the possessions these folks have in their homes. TJ is saying (I believe) that poor folk aren't in favor of socialized medicine. I'm saying I disagree. I have no idea whether they have cell phones.

Yes, but to be on point you have to understand WHY they would be in favor of such.

Taco John
09-30-2009, 10:28 PM
ooh censure!

Well, that's a hell of a revolt you got going on there. What's next? A letter to the government's parents?

ROFL

I don't think you're prepared to make a bet about a real revolt, just a semantic one.


I take it that you're backing down from your bet then?

petegz28
09-30-2009, 10:29 PM
I am sure pet meant that tongue in cheek, kinda like "republicans want you to die"
Posted via Mobile Device

Orange is a fugtard...who gives a fuck what he things of what I said. Obviously people who aren't so angry in their biased beliefs understand what I meant.

banyon
09-30-2009, 10:30 PM
I take it that you're backing down from your bet then?

No, you altered it to water down 100 proof whiskey into children's cough medicine. So, you are the one "backing down". Pretending, laughably, that censure is somehow the equivalent of a revolution.

Taco John
09-30-2009, 10:33 PM
No, you altered it to water down 100 proof whiskey into children's cough medicine. So, you are the one "backing down". Pretending, laughably, that censure is somehow the equivalent of a revolution.

I never altered anything. More evidence that you read what you want to read into these discussions.

banyon
09-30-2009, 10:35 PM
I never altered anything. More evidence that you read what you want to read into these discussions.

Sure you did, you tried to lower the bar of "revolt" all the way down to a nasty letter.

RJ
09-30-2009, 10:37 PM
You should get caught up with the debate before entering the discussion. The "what the hell does that mean" part of this is the current democrat plan on the table.

Ok, I get it.

I didn't think most people really believed that stuff.

Perhaps I was wrong. Or perhaps I am naive.

I suppose only time will tell.

Taco John
09-30-2009, 10:40 PM
Sure you did, you tried to lower the bar of "revolt" all the way down to a nasty letter.


I never lowered the bar of anything. You're the one who is defining revolt the way you want to define it. We still live in a civilized society, and I believe a states revolt will look civilized. It would start with censure, and as support grows it could look like secession.

I don't think any governers are going to put a bullet in anyone's head on national television to satisfy your definition of revolt.

Taco John
09-30-2009, 10:42 PM
Ok, I get it.

I didn't think most people really believed that stuff.

Perhaps I was wrong. Or perhaps I am naive.

I suppose only time will tell.


The current plan mandates that everybody buys health insurance - rich or poor. If you do not buy that insurance, the IRS will come after you. If you are prosecuted, you face jail time as well as increased fines.

Power to the people.

banyon
09-30-2009, 10:49 PM
The current plan mandates that everybody buys health insurance - rich or poor. If you do not buy that insurance, the IRS will come after you. If you are prosecuted, you face jail time as well as increased fines.

Power to the people.

That's for not filing a tax return or tax evasion, not for not buying insurance.

banyon
09-30-2009, 10:50 PM
I never lowered the bar of anything. You're the one who is defining revolt the way you want to define it. We still live in a civilized society, and I believe a states revolt will look civilized. It would start with censure, and as support grows it could look like secession.

I don't think any governers are going to put a bullet in anyone's head on national television to satisfy your definition of revolt.

Okay then, could you increase the stakes beyond a nasty letter? Because I actually think nasty letters are pretty likely, but don't constitute a revolt of any kind.

alanm
09-30-2009, 11:02 PM
No chit. You can say he sucks, his polices are worst evah but he was legitamately elected. You don't like it? Organize and vote him out and those that agree with him.I believe that's already underway.

Taco John
09-30-2009, 11:18 PM
That's for not filing a tax return or tax evasion, not for not buying insurance.

Wrong, as usual. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704471504574439243760133458.html)

Taco John
09-30-2009, 11:19 PM
Okay then, could you increase the stakes beyond a nasty letter? Because I actually think nasty letters are pretty likely, but don't constitute a revolt of any kind.

Who said anything about a nasty letter?

Oh, that's right. You did.

BucEyedPea
09-30-2009, 11:22 PM
RON PAUL: I think we're going to have a de facto Tenth Amendment, secession. People are just going to ignore the federal government because they won't -- and there's, you know, a total loss of credibility. You know, this idea that Obama says that we're going to have all this new medical care, we're going to take care of everybody and it's not going to cost us anything and we're going to balance the budget and actually cut the deficit by giving people more services, all that does is build, you know, the lack of credibility and people just say that's not believable. But no, it will continue that way. And the checks will keep coming. People will get their Social Security checks. But like this year, even though there's been a lot of inflation that they don't admit to, there's no cost of living increases in the Social Security check. So the people who are dependent on fixed incomes or Social Security, their standard of living is going down right now and it will continue to go down. It will go down rapidly in the midst of a dollar crisis.

GLENN: John -- I mean, Congressman Paul, the media and even Patrick Kennedy said this, we heard this from two people, Muammar Gaddafi and I believe the other one was Ahmadinejad that both spoke last week and they -- we're hearing it all the time that there's going to be violence here in America, that people are targeting. Basically everyone is going to blame this on the right, any kind of violence. They are setting up any violence on those who are from the right or, you know, from the tea party movement. Are you concerned about this and what is happening in Washington where Nancy Pelosi comes out and says -- you know, she starts to cry and, you know, says that she's seen it before and we're going to see it again?

RON PAUL: I think that there will be violence. I hope we don't have to go through, you know, a very violent period of time, but that's what happens too often when the government runs out of money and runs out of wealth, the people argue over, you know, a shrinking pie and, of course, the people who have to produce are sick and tired of producing.

GLENN: But I think what they're saying is there would be -- violence would come first.

RON PAUL: I think it will come after a dollar crisis. I think you are always going to have some violence but, you know, I lived through the Sixties and I was in the military during that time, and I know the Sixties were very rough and there was a lot of violence there. I don't think next month we're going to have anything like the violence we had in the Sixties, but potentially if we do have a dollar crisis and the whole system comes unglued, then I think there's going to be a lot more violence, especially in the inner cities.

alanm
09-30-2009, 11:24 PM
That's for not filing a tax return or tax evasion, not for not buying insurance.How'd that work out for Geitner and Rangel? I don't think either of them even got a slap on the wrist.

banyon
09-30-2009, 11:28 PM
Wrong, as usual. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704471504574439243760133458.html)

No, not wrong, but unsurprising you would shoot off at the mouth without understanding the first article you googled.

Under questioning last week, Tom Barthold, the chief of staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation, admitted that the individual mandate would become a part of the Internal Revenue Code and that failing to comply "could be criminal, yes, if it were considered an attempt to defraud." Mr. Barthold noted in a follow-up letter that the willful failure to file would be a simple misdemeanor, punishable by the $25,000 fine or jail time under Section 7203

:hmmm:

I wonder what section 7203 is?

§ 7203. Willful failure to file return, supply information, or pay tax
How Current is This? Any person required under this title to pay any estimated tax or tax, or required by this title or by regulations made under authority thereof to make a return, keep any records, or supply any information, who willfully fails to pay such estimated tax or tax, make such return, keep such records, or supply such information, at the time or times required by law or regulations, shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than $25,000 ($100,000 in the case of a corporation), or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both, together with the costs of prosecution. In the case of any person with respect to whom there is a failure to pay any estimated tax, this section shall not apply to such person with respect to such failure if there is no addition to tax under section 6654 or 6655 with respect to such failure. In the case of a willful violation of any provision of section 6050I, the first sentence of this section shall be applied by substituting “felony” for “misdemeanor” and “5 years” for “1 year”.

:hmmm: now what was it banyon said again?

That's for not filing a tax return or tax evasion, not for not buying insurance.

Oh.

BucEyedPea
09-30-2009, 11:28 PM
Who said anything about a nasty letter?

Oh, that's right. You did.

He's looking for someone to spar with tonight. So it's you and KillerClown for targets. ;) When you're not here, it's me; if I indulge.

banyon
09-30-2009, 11:30 PM
Who said anything about a nasty letter?

Oh, that's right. You did.

That's clearly what I was referring to "censure" as. You want to act like it's something grandiose and historic, when in fact it's pretty common for legislatures to issue resolutions of censure.

So, your desire not to want to use the term "revolt" like normal people do, is, well, very much in keeping with your need to redefine all manner of words to suit your goals. Words mean what you want them to mean, it's all very convenient.

banyon
09-30-2009, 11:30 PM
He's looking for someone to spar with tonight. So it's you and KillerClown for targets. ;) When you're not here, it's me; if I indulge.

It's never you. You don't have the mettle.

Taco John
09-30-2009, 11:33 PM
No, not wrong, but unsurprising you would shoot off at the mouth without understanding the first article you googled.



:hmmm:

I wonder what section 7203 is?



:hmmm: now what was it banyon said again?



Oh.



I"m aware that you're one of the "it is whatever we want to call it" crowd. I'm also aware that a week ago, you didn't want to call it a tax. I see that you've changed that position though. I wonder what you'll want to call it next week.

Mr. Kotter
09-30-2009, 11:36 PM
Friggin' loony birds...don't, obviously, understand the American military....moonbat-dipshits....

:rolleyes:


Grow-up....Jeez. :shake:

Taco John
09-30-2009, 11:36 PM
That's clearly what I was referring to "censure" as. You want to act like it's something grandiose and historic, when in fact it's pretty common for legislatures to issue resolutions of censure.

It is? Silly me. Can you point out the last time a group of states censured the federal government for encroaching on their turf? I must be behind on the news.


So, your desire not to want to use the term "revolt" like normal people do, is, well, very much in keeping with your need to redefine all manner of words to suit your goals. Words mean what you want them to mean, it's all very convenient.

I'm having a hard time keeping up with your weekly need to redefine terms. I used the word "revolt" like you might expect when talking about legislative bodies. I didn't think that state senators were going to march with guns on Washington. I expected that they'd use the tools of their offices for said revolt.

T-post Tom
09-30-2009, 11:39 PM
Complete and utter horseshit. Typical Newsmax right-wing propaganda.

KCTitus
09-30-2009, 11:39 PM
We are currently 13 months from election day 2010...it's clear at this point that even the borderline sane realize just how F'ed up this situation is.

Im starting to wonder if the elections will be held by November 2010...

If not 2010...this will happen within a decade. The quest for power is too great. The progressives have gotten too close to unfettered power to ever give it up.

Mr. Kotter
09-30-2009, 11:41 PM
Complete and utter horseshit. Typical Newsmax right-wing propaganda.

Yep. Except some Obamaniacs are all too willing to believe this drivel....

banyon
09-30-2009, 11:43 PM
It is? Silly me. Can you point out the last time a group of states censured the federal government for encroaching on their turf? I must be behind on the news.


I'm having a hard time keeping up with your weekly need to redefine terms. I used the word "revolt" like you might expect when talking about legislative bodies. I didn't think that state senators were going to march with guns on Washington. I expected that they'd use the tools of their offices for said revolt.

You don't want to bet on a real revolt, like I said earlier, I didn't expect you to.

alanm
09-30-2009, 11:49 PM
We are currently 13 months from election day 2010...it's clear at this point that even the borderline sane realize just how F'ed up this situation is.

Im starting to wonder if the elections will be held by November 2010...

If not 2010...this will happen within a decade. The quest for power is too great. The progressives have gotten too close to unfettered power to ever give it up.Are you implying that the 2010 elections will be suspended? There would be open revolt as a result if that were to happen.

KCTitus
09-30-2009, 11:53 PM
Are you implying that the 2010 elections will be suspended? There would be open revolt as a result if that were to happen.

an open revolt...actually any armed conflict would be in the favor of the progressives. they know this. I put nothing past them...since both parties are driven by the progressives, it wouldnt surprise me. There is only one direction for this country and it is down.

JohnnyV13
09-30-2009, 11:55 PM
This coup is going to happen. It's inevitable.

I mean, I don't know about the rest of you, but the government forced me to spend way more than a 1/2 hour filling out tax forms last year!

ITS FASCISM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's only a matter of time before our military decides to end the OPPRESSION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

banyon
10-01-2009, 12:03 AM
an open revolt...actually any armed conflict would be in the favor of the progressives. they know this. I put nothing past them...since both parties are driven by the progressives, it wouldnt surprise me. There is only one direction for this country and it is down.

Do you know how long people have been saying that?

KCTitus
10-01-2009, 12:05 AM
Do you know how long people have been saying that?

Yes...but how long has this country been monetizing their own debt?

edit: Interesting you seem to ignore my first two sentences. Probably because I was right.

banyon
10-01-2009, 12:06 AM
I"m aware that you're one of the "it is whatever we want to call it" crowd. I'm also aware that a week ago, you didn't want to call it a tax. I see that you've changed that position though. I wonder what you'll want to call it next week.

I didn't change my view on that at all. Not filing a return, however, has been a crime for quite a while.

Good to see you're clear now though (with no admission of being incorrect, as is the neo-libertarian oath I think, but obvious from your abandoment of your earlier argument) that in fact there is no provision in the health care bill that makes it a criminal offense to not obtain health insurance.

Jenson71
10-01-2009, 12:07 AM
Revolution is a strong word. I said States Rights Revolt.

Those are great odds.

Sure. I'll put $100 on those odds that if health care reform passes that has a public option that looks to force private companies out of business, no less than 5 states pass resolutions to censure the federal government and will begin a power struggle between the state and federal level.

There's been a power struggle between the state and federal level for -- well, since we've had this system. Does your great revolt throw out Supreme Court cases? Or is it simply a change in the attitude in the system? You want more cases like United States v. Lopez and United States v. Morrison? You want less New Deal attitudes? You're in the right time -- the court leans fairly conservative at the moment.

How do you make a significant change in the government? Keep gathering a bunch of drooling morons together and having a picnic. We'll see how it works out for you. Make sure your governor declares "State sovereignty day" as well. That is the sound of music in the cafes at night and revolution in the air.

banyon
10-01-2009, 12:07 AM
Yes...but how long has this country been monetizing their own debt?

1789? Wait, I guess we really have to go back to the Articles of Confederation, so after the Treaty of Paris.

Jenson71
10-01-2009, 12:09 AM
an open revolt...actually any armed conflict would be in the favor of the progressives. they know this. I put nothing past them...since both parties are driven by the progressives, it wouldnt surprise me. There is only one direction for this country and it is down.

Oh God, if we only had Reagan to save us again!

KCTitus
10-01-2009, 12:10 AM
1789? Wait, I guess we really have to go back to the Articles of Confederation, so after the Treaty of Paris.

Yep...you're right!!! no worries. We spent multiple trillions and got some foreign country to buy it since 1789. Move along, nothing to see here.

Taco John
10-01-2009, 12:11 AM
I didn't change my view on that at all. Not filing a return, however, has been a crime for quite a while.

Good to see you're clear now though (with no admission of being incorrect, as is the neo-libertarian oath I think, but obvious from your abandoment of your earlier argument) that in fact there is no provision in the health care bill that makes it a criminal offense to not obtain health insurance.


I haven't abandoned, nor was incorrect on anything. I understand that they're hiding that provision in legalese and the magic of defining words to mean whatever you need them to mean at the moment. But the essence of it is still there.

KCTitus
10-01-2009, 12:11 AM
Oh God, if we only had Reagan to save us again!

At the very least Bill Clinton...anyone but a Marxist

Jenson71
10-01-2009, 12:19 AM
At the very least Bill Clinton...anyone but a Marxist

See anyone who really has any significance in shaping public domestic policy understands that Obama, Bernanke, Geithner are not Marxists. But this conversation is been tried dozens of times here. It ends up being pretty useless.

Obama = Marxist.

Reagan = Fascist.

Fascist = Marxist.

Obama = Reagan.

I think that covers all the bases.

banyon
10-01-2009, 12:19 AM
I haven't abandoned, nor was incorrect on anything. I understand that they're hiding that provision in legalese and the magic of defining words to mean whatever you need them to mean at the moment. But the essence of it is still there.

No, not filing a return has been a crime a pretty long time. They didn't need to hide or conceal that, and in fact did nothing to change or alter it.

Since the insurance bill has tax implications, you need to make sure you accurately file your taxes, just like employers can't make fraudulent health care deductions right now.

Like I said, it's pretty obvious you overreached and are pretty much incapable these days of admitting a mistake.

KCTitus
10-01-2009, 12:23 AM
See anyone who really has any significance in shaping public domestic policy understands that Obama, Bernanke, Geithner are not Marxists. But this conversation is been tried dozens of times here. It ends up being pretty useless.

Obama = Marxist.

Reagan = Fascist.

Fascist = Marxist.

Obama = Reagan.

I think that covers all the bases.

Oh, I thought you were serious...

That's ridiculous. I'll remember, next time, not to waste my time with your posts

Jenson71
10-01-2009, 12:25 AM
Oh, I thought you were serious...

That's ridiculous. I'll remember, next time, not to waste my time with your posts

Yeah, I'm not a great big fan of Howdy Doody, er, I mean Reagan the Great.

Taco John
10-01-2009, 12:26 AM
No, not filing a return has been a crime a pretty long time. They didn't need to hide or conceal that, and in fact did nothing to change or alter it.

Since the insurance bill has tax implications, you need to make sure you accurately file your taxes, just like employers can't make fraudulent health care deductions right now.

Like I said, it's pretty obvious you overreached and are pretty much incapable these days of admitting a mistake.


So then it's a tax?

Banyon: (backpedaling) No no no... It's not a tax.

Me: Then what the hell are you talking about.

Banyon: I'll have to check with HuffKos and get back to you on that.

banyon
10-01-2009, 12:26 AM
So then it's a tax?

Not the fine, which is what the other thread was about. Fines aren't taxes.

KCTitus
10-01-2009, 12:28 AM
Yeah, I'm not a great big fan of Howdy Doody, er, I mean Reagan the Great.

Yeah, I get that...or a fan of the Republic of the United States. That's Ok...I understand what I'm up against

banyon
10-01-2009, 12:30 AM
So then it's a tax?

Banyon: (backpedaling) No no no... It's not a tax.

Me: Then what the hell are you talking about.

Banyon: I'll have to check with HuffKos and get back to you on that.

:rolleyes:

Who are you, SHTSPRAYER?

When was the last time I liked to Daily Kos?

Just show me one thread.

Hell, how many times have I linked to the Huff post? Maybe a couple of times in a couple of years.

OTOH, many times have you linked to LewRockwell or WND?

You're pretty dense on this one, not being able to differentiate fines and taxes, and not knowing when someone is referring to the health bill and someone is referring to the tax code. You may want to spend some more time researching this stuff from objective sources before you try to sound like you know very much about it and then throw up your hands saying "oh, wel it's all legalese, excuse me!".

Taco John
10-01-2009, 12:32 AM
:rolleyes:

Who are you, SHTSPRAYER?

When was the last time I liked to Daily Kos?

Just show me one thread.

Hell, how many times have I linked to the Huff post? Maybe a couple of times in a couple of years.

OTOH, many times have you linked to LewRockwell or WND?

You're pretty dense on this one, not being able to differentiate fines and taxes, and not knowing when someone is referring to the health bill and someone is referring to the tax code. You may want to spend some more time researching this stuff from objective sources before you try to sound like you know very much about it and then throw up your hands saying "oh, wel it's all legalese, excuse me!".


I don't recall linking to WND. I most proudly link to LewRockwell.

So there is a differentation between "fines" and "taxes" collected by the IRS? Do tell! What is that differentiation?

banyon
10-01-2009, 12:38 AM
I don't recall linking to WND. I most proudly link to LewRockwell.

So there is a differentation between "fines" and "taxes" collected by the IRS? Do tell! What is that differentiation?

Let's be clear, you understand you were incorrect about the health care bill making not obtaining insurance a criminal offense now.

On this tangent you now wish to shift to, fines are a penalty for violating criminal statutes. They are prescribed by statute in definite amounts and bear no relationship to your income. Taxes are revenues collected by government on income made with the purpose of funding government to carry on its functions. They typically bear some connection to the amount of income or profits earned.

When you receive a speeding ticket, you aren't taxed because of the income you make, you are fined because you made a decision to violate a statute or city ordinance.

Jenson71
10-01-2009, 12:44 AM
Yeah, I get that...or a fan of the Republic of the United States. That's Ok...I understand what I'm up against

Oh, I'm a fan of the United States. Well, I'm a fan of the people of the United States. I think we're pretty good people. That's why I don't think we're going down. You're a big fan of the United States too, I take it. That's probably why you think we're going down and need a revolution or something.

banyon
10-01-2009, 12:46 AM
BTW, here's some threads where you linked to WND:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=169704&page=2

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=175766

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=157670

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=166581

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=119808

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=180283

Taco John
10-01-2009, 12:51 AM
Let's be clear, you understand you were incorrect about the health care bill making not obtaining insurance a criminal offense now.

Not at all. I think that's a lie of language that your types are trying to pull over on the people. The Baucus bill has what they call an "individual mandate" and what you call a "fine" but Baucus calls "an excise tax" if an individual doesn't buy health insurance. If you try to opt out in any way, the IRS will come after you with as much as a $25,000 fine, or up to a year's worth of jail time - or both.

I am not incorrect about any of these facts. I understand that you want to wrap these facts with pretty bows, and draw lines of definition here and there to make things look "reasonable" and that the government is not putting people in jail or fining them for not having insurance - but instead fining them for not paying the Baucus "excise tax" (I know that you prefer the word "fine" but let's go with what the bill says, huh? For accuracy.)

So no. I refuse the notion that I'm wrong here. It's understandable that you're a lawyer, and your trade is to get cute with the language, so I can't fault you for that.


On this tangent you now wish to shift to, fines are a penalty for violating criminal statutes. They are prescribed by statute in definite amounts and bear no relationship to your income. Taxes are revenues collected by government on income made with the purpose of funding government to carry on its functions. They typically bear some connection to the amount of income or profits earned.

Where does Baucus's "excise tax" fall into this equation. Dear oh me it's all so confusing...

When you receive a speeding ticket, you aren't taxed because of the income you make, you are fined because you made a decision to violate a statute or city ordinance.

You're comparing a local speeding ticket to federally forced insurance mandates. Cute, in that lawyer way.

If I get a speeding ticket, it's because I made a choice to speed. What did I do wrong in order to get the federal government to penalize me with a forced insurance mandate?

Taco John
10-01-2009, 12:53 AM
BTW, here's some threads where you linked to WND:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=169704&page=2

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=175766

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=157670

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=166581

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=119808

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=180283


Congratulations. You found 5 articles spanning four years. No wonder "I don't recall linking to WND."

Taco John
10-01-2009, 12:58 AM
Banyon, honest question...

Does it irritate you that Baucus has called it an "excise tax" instead of using the "fine" language that you want?

I would think that would irritate you.

InChiefsHell
10-01-2009, 07:07 AM
Oh, so banyon is a lawyer? That clears up a whole lot! Only a lawyer could read that shit and not understand that if you don't pay the mandatory fine for not buying insurance, you are being forced to buy insurance or pay the piper, which could result in a fine levied by the IRS (the guys who collect taxes) of up to 25k. So it's not a tax, it's a fine, even though the bill actually calls it an exise TAX. Because a citizen didn't purchase the MANDATORY thing that the Federal Government says he must purchase.

This shit is so un-American I can't believe it. Thankfully it seems the rest of the country is waking up.

banyon
10-01-2009, 11:13 AM
Congratulations. You found 5 articles spanning four years. No wonder "I don't recall linking to WND."

I don't think you can count.

And it's not like they are all from 4 years back.

It's certainly more than you could find with me linking to the Daily Kos, which was Zero.

banyon
10-01-2009, 11:14 AM
Banyon, honest question...

Does it irritate you that Baucus has called it an "excise tax" instead of using the "fine" language that you want?

I would think that would irritate you.

Now you're not referring to the tax fines and conflating the two topics again.

banyon
10-01-2009, 11:15 AM
Not at all. I think that's a lie of language that your types are trying to pull over on the people. The Baucus bill has what they call an "individual mandate" and what you call a "fine" but Baucus calls "an excise tax" if an individual doesn't buy health insurance. If you try to opt out in any way, the IRS will come after you with as much as a $25,000 fine, or up to a year's worth of jail time - or both.

I am not incorrect about any of these facts. I understand that you want to wrap these facts with pretty bows, and draw lines of definition here and there to make things look "reasonable" and that the government is not putting people in jail or fining them for not having insurance - but instead fining them for not paying the Baucus "excise tax" (I know that you prefer the word "fine" but let's go with what the bill says, huh? For accuracy.)

So no. I refuse the notion that I'm wrong here. It's understandable that you're a lawyer, and your trade is to get cute with the language, so I can't fault you for that.




Where does Baucus's "excise tax" fall into this equation. Dear oh me it's all so confusing...



You're comparing a local speeding ticket to federally forced insurance mandates. Cute, in that lawyer way.

If I get a speeding ticket, it's because I made a choice to speed. What did I do wrong in order to get the federal government to penalize me with a forced insurance mandate?

Where is this supposed Baucus "excise tax" comment?

To answer the last question, you made a conscious choice not to file a return, or not to accurately report taxes owed. You can't be jailed for owing the money.

banyon
10-01-2009, 11:18 AM
Oh, so banyon is a lawyer? That clears up a whole lot! Only a lawyer could read that shit and not understand that if you don't pay the mandatory fine for not buying insurance, you are being forced to buy insurance or pay the piper, which could result in a fine levied by the IRS (the guys who collect taxes) of up to 25k. So it's not a tax, it's a fine, even though the bill actually calls it an exise TAX. Because a citizen didn't purchase the MANDATORY thing that the Federal Government says he must purchase.

This shit is so un-American I can't believe it. Thankfully it seems the rest of the country is waking up.

Well, I don't understand that, because it's completely inaccurate, as I have already explained. You cannot be jailed for owing a debt. Debtors prisons went out with the civil war. You can be jailed, however, for not filing returns or fraudulently reporting tax information.

ROYC75
10-01-2009, 11:27 AM
This country is just chaos anymore,we have loons, lunatics,freaks and idiots running a muck .

This is getting Very Sad!

patteeu
10-01-2009, 04:05 PM
This country is just chaos anymore,we have loons, lunatics,freaks and idiots running a muck .

This is getting Very Sad!

You left out lawyers and naively inept community organizers!

|Zach|
10-01-2009, 04:33 PM
This country is just chaos anymore,we have loons, lunatics,freaks and idiots running a muck .

This is getting Very Sad!

Is it? I enjoy my world day to day. I have the freedom to do what I like and open up my own business.

I guess my point is...I read these words you write. But I am looking out my window and don't see it. I do see a father playing with his kids in the front yard across the street. I am glad they are rising above the "chaos" as well.

Bush didn't wreck this country and Obama won't either. Your world view is what you make of it.

|Zach|
10-01-2009, 05:09 PM
Chaos!

http://evident-ly.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/firebarrelweb.jpg.w300h410.jpg

ILChief
10-01-2009, 08:17 PM
RON PAUL: I think we're going to have a de facto Tenth Amendment, secession. People are just going to ignore the federal government because they won't -- and there's, you know, a total loss of credibility. You know, this idea that Obama says that we're going to have all this new medical care, we're going to take care of everybody and it's not going to cost us anything and we're going to balance the budget and actually cut the deficit by giving people more services, all that does is build, you know, the lack of credibility and people just say that's not believable. But no, it will continue that way. And the checks will keep coming. People will get their Social Security checks. But like this year, even though there's been a lot of inflation that they don't admit to, there's no cost of living increases in the Social Security check. So the people who are dependent on fixed incomes or Social Security, their standard of living is going down right now and it will continue to go down. It will go down rapidly in the midst of a dollar crisis.

GLENN: John -- I mean, Congressman Paul, the media and even Patrick Kennedy said this, we heard this from two people, Muammar Gaddafi and I believe the other one was Ahmadinejad that both spoke last week and they -- we're hearing it all the time that there's going to be violence here in America, that people are targeting. Basically everyone is going to blame this on the right, any kind of violence. They are setting up any violence on those who are from the right or, you know, from the tea party movement. Are you concerned about this and what is happening in Washington where Nancy Pelosi comes out and says -- you know, she starts to cry and, you know, says that she's seen it before and we're going to see it again?

RON PAUL: I think that there will be violence. I hope we don't have to go through, you know, a very violent period of time, but that's what happens too often when the government runs out of money and runs out of wealth, the people argue over, you know, a shrinking pie and, of course, the people who have to produce are sick and tired of producing.

GLENN: But I think what they're saying is there would be -- violence would come first.

RON PAUL: I think it will come after a dollar crisis. I think you are always going to have some violence but, you know, I lived through the Sixties and I was in the military during that time, and I know the Sixties were very rough and there was a lot of violence there. I don't think next month we're going to have anything like the violence we had in the Sixties, but potentially if we do have a dollar crisis and the whole system comes unglued, then I think there's going to be a lot more violence, especially in the inner cities.

ha ha ha. a conversation between Glen Beck and Ron Paul. THE SKY IS FALLING!!! THERE WILL BE VIOLENCE!!!!!

|Zach|
10-02-2009, 03:10 AM
http://www.netweed.com/prohiphop/graf/totalchaos.jpg

Taco John
10-02-2009, 03:21 AM
Where is this supposed Baucus "excise tax" comment?


In the bill.

|Zach|
10-02-2009, 12:17 PM
Sidenote. I brushed aside the wacky chaos this morning to set up a photo shoot with an advertising company. Didn't even have to use my pitchfork.

blaise
10-02-2009, 12:21 PM
Is it? I enjoy my world day to day. I have the freedom to do what I like and open up my own business.

I guess my point is...I read these words you write. But I am looking out my window and don't see it. I do see a father playing with his kids in the front yard across the street. I am glad they are rising above the "chaos" as well.

Bush didn't wreck this country and Obama won't either. Your world view is what you make of it.

No, it is chaos. The protestors at healthcare meetings, Glenn Beck, other right wing talk show hosts and politicians are tearing at the very fabric of our society. Haven't you heard? It's the single greatest danger to our nation today.

BucEyedPea
10-02-2009, 12:30 PM
ha ha ha. a conversation between Glen Beck and Ron Paul. THE SKY IS FALLING!!! THERE WILL BE VIOLENCE!!!!!
Ron Paul Warns of Violence from Pending Dollar Crisis; Says Israel Strike on Iran the Trigger (http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul588.html)

The libertarian Paul maintained China would become the world’s financial heavyweight and they were already making preparations to be the world’s top dog.

“I think the Chinese take over,” Paul said. “If there’s a real panic and oil shoots up to a couple of hundred bucks, the Chinese will dump their dollars. Chinese are maneuvering for this. The more we threaten Iran, the stronger the Chinese influence gets because they're using the dollars that they have earned from us and saved, they have a trillion, and they are starting to buy up assets in Iran and build plants and get involved in their energy. So the whole thing is backfiring on us. We’re getting ready to put tougher sanctions on the Iranians and that will make things that much worse. It won't help the dissidents in Iran. It's going to cost us a lot of money, and there will be a bombing and that will be a big, big event. I think it will crash the dollar is what I think it would do.”

And what does the country look like after the dollar crashes? Not good the Texas congressman said.

<object width="518" height="419"><param name="movie" value="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=GdkUqGZu2G" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed src="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=GdkUqGZu2G" allowfullscreen="true" width="518" height="419" /></object>



This is where folks like Donger, patteeu, pikesome and some other NCs will put us after they put us in our current situation.

patteeu
10-02-2009, 12:50 PM
Ron Paul Warns of Violence from Pending Dollar Crisis; Says Israel Strike on Iran the Trigger (http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul588.html)

The libertarian Paul maintained China would become the world’s financial heavyweight and they were already making preparations to be the world’s top dog.

“I think the Chinese take over,” Paul said. “If there’s a real panic and oil shoots up to a couple of hundred bucks, the Chinese will dump their dollars. Chinese are maneuvering for this. The more we threaten Iran, the stronger the Chinese influence gets because they're using the dollars that they have earned from us and saved, they have a trillion, and they are starting to buy up assets in Iran and build plants and get involved in their energy. So the whole thing is backfiring on us. We’re getting ready to put tougher sanctions on the Iranians and that will make things that much worse. It won't help the dissidents in Iran. It's going to cost us a lot of money, and there will be a bombing and that will be a big, big event. I think it will crash the dollar is what I think it would do.”

And what does the country look like after the dollar crashes? Not good the Texas congressman said.



This is where folks like Donger, patteeu, pikesome and some other NCs will put us after they put us in our current situation.

If we have a confrontation brewing with the Chinese, it's better to get it over with sooner rather than later. Of course, I don't believe that's the case.

RJ
10-02-2009, 01:49 PM
You vitriolic, patriotic, slam, fight, bright light, feeling pretty psyched!!