|The Great Hippo |
Holy fucking shit, this guy kicked their fucking asses. He laid them the fuck *out*.
Who the hell are you, Anthony Weiner, and why the fuck are you not my representative?
I emailed my Rep today and told her to back the Weiner plan, and while I wrote a cogent letter, I giggled to myself through the process. How can anyone not want to back a Weiner that has some balls?
When you have the word "weiner" in your name you have two options, be hardcore or be an idiot.
Definitive proof no rational, thinking person actually agrees with anything 'Fox and Friends' actually say.
my god, i love a progressive with a pair of balls
weiner for president
There's history and people looking at Cash for Clunkers and seeing it DOESN'T WORK????
Excuse me, but didn't GM just rehire 1300 workers? Aren't there newer, more fuel efficient cars on the road? Isn't that good for the economy?
the fact that some dealers in minnesota had problems with the state's title laws (that the fed gov quickly handled) and that the bureaucracy didn't expedite their payments as soon as they'd like (read: now) on a massively popular weeks-old program is enough to condemn the idea that anything should be run by the government, ever
|Louis Armstrong |
His word jitsu almost rivals Richard Dawkins.....or he is a master of another form of intellectual combat.
But who will think of the poor poor money!
Every debate or interview or whatever that this guy is in (that I have seen), he completely wrecks.
Even if you don't speak English, you can tell who out of those four people you should side with.
|Tuan Jim |
|Michael Houser |
WEINER. Let us erect a monument.
|Jet Bin Fever |
"Interesting debate" = getting your ass kicked and not wanting to admit it.
Wait, I thought private industry was more efficient than government as a rule, so shouldn't private insurers be able to thrive even in the presence of a government option?
Private insurers can't price dump (purposely make less money than they spend), because it's both illegal and would cause them to run out of money eventually. When you're backed by the full faith and credit of the US government, you don't have to turn a profit. The post office would've gone bankrupt several times by now if they hadn't gotten extra support from the government.
The argument that a public option would be "free market" and would add competition is disingenuous. The reason to argue for more government health care is because you believe it would help people or you think everyone should have medical care; anything else is just rhetoric to trick fence sitters... who aren't in congress and won't be voting on the bill anyway, so they don't matter.
cognitivedissonance, I'd like you to explain the morality of your statement that more money should necessarily equal faster access to health care. I agree that more money should mean more of an ability to buy nonessential items, etc., however, I think health is an essential part of existence, the way food is. As a society, we should (value judgment) promote/enable people to be healthy because one's health is a necessary condition to success in other fields. Certainly there are those who are "sick" that make particular successes, but I would counter by saying quite often a sickness severely limits, or retards one's ability to succeed a majority of other areas, particularly when health care takes necessary money from non-health related ventures.
I understand this point, however, CD said those with more money than patience should get an e-ticket, which I read as meaning faster access to care. This sentence implies that, regardless of urgency of one's medical condition, the one with the most money shall have the priority. At least that is what instigated my initial reply.
BUT THE RICH WOULD THEN THEREFORE BE PAYING MORE MONEY, WHICH IS SOMETHING THEY ARE PERFECTLY CAPABLE OF DOING.
If they're going to throw an adolescent hissy fit every time there's the slightest tax increase, let them make up for it in other regards.
I was playing to the "THE MARKET IS OUR CHRIST AND SAVIOR NOW" mentality of Smellvin.
This guy might actually be invincible in a debate. He dangles the Weiner out there, daring you to bite it, making you giggle, then slams you hard in the side of the head. 90% of your brain power would be consumed with trying not to resort to saying "lolweiner".
There will never be a President Weiner though.
|Foolish Motorcycle Accident |
This guy's body language from the very beginning is great. He's like a cobra ready to strike.
2:16 FTW !!!!!
|Lauritz Melchior |
That felt good.
Balls of steel.
This. This is what I've been missing.
|Dan Druff |
We have a weiner*.
Why is Fox arguing so strongly against the idea of private corporations saving money and improving their bottom line by using the public option? Isn't the issue with benefits and healthcare the thing that's killing the auto companies? And don't wal-mart and other corporations do that already by having employees with NO insurance?
If you actually look at public healthcare in terms of anyone else besides insurance companies, it's GREAT for corporate america.
*I am so, so sorry.
I love Weiner...
Wait, that came out wrong.
This Weiner's a winner!
| Register or login To Post a Comment|